Patch update 22/06 - general discussion (ask questions in official update thread)

[beepee]

Originally Posted by Viking

Get a life!

Viking

troll!!

I fear that some dedicated fans of IL-2 series will die sooner than MG will release their patch, having in my how old some of the members are...

Guys, this is same story all the time... It started with evil Ubisoft, epilepcy filter, engine, DX9 support - you name it...

I just dont understand how some of you can still say to other to wait and be patient. All of us waited like 7 years, now some of the former community wait for one year and half and ... nothing... it is together 8,5 years... and what do you have ? buggy simulator with no game content in it at all... no SDK, no NOTHING.

Ok, let me be more constructive - here is my idea for the name of next sequel:

Il-2 Sturmovik - World of Russian Warplanes MMO - Storm of War series - Cliffs of Dover 2 without Cliffs of Dover - Su-26 exclusive package.

Here is first screenshot:

[slick118]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

This makes too much sense and we don't roll that way around here

On a serious note, that's my take on things as well:

Engine is common -> fix the engine

3d models are different and done by different people -> give them something to work on while the programmers fix the engine, so that it doesn't take another 7 years for the sequel.

The point is this. 1C should not be teasing a new product in order to placate the masses, like it's not going to inherit all the same problems that the old one suffers with. It is insulting to the intelligence of a "mostly loyal" customer base and smacks of head in the sand mentality. Imagine if you took your new(ish) car back to the dealership for the umpteenth time so that you could have it fixed, only to discover the manufacturer was already promising a shiny new version, showing off the newly moulded bodywork and so on, with rank disregard for all the current imcumbent's inherent issues.

I just think it is plain rude.

[Fjordmonkey]

Originally Posted by slick118

Imagine if you took your new(ish) car back to the dealership for the umpteenth time so that you could have it fixed, only to discover the manufacturer was already promising a shiny new version, showing off the newly moulded bodywork and so on, with rank disregard for all the current imcumbent's inherent issues.

I just think it is plain rude.

There's a few thousand differences between a computer-game and a car. While I agree that it's somewhat iffy to showcase a new product while we're waiting on The Patch™ for CLoD, car-analogies are getting severely old. If I dished out as much for CLoD as I did a new car, you can be sure I'd be crucifying whoever sold me the car. But since a new car here in Norway is at least three digits (we're talking 250 000 NOK compared to.....what, 250 to 300 NOK?) away from the cost of a computergame....meh.

[slick118]

Originally Posted by Fjordmonkey

There's a few thousand differences between a computer-game and a car. While I agree that it's somewhat iffy to showcase a new product while we're waiting on The Patch™ for CLoD, car-analogies are getting severely old. If I dished out as much for CLoD as I did a new car, you can be sure I'd be crucifying whoever sold me the car. But since a new car here in Norway is at least three digits (we're talking 250 000 NOK compared to.....what, 250 to 300 NOK?) away from the cost of a computergame....meh.

I did say earlier that I didn't spend much time writing or reading on these boards so apologies for the car comparison.

But you've got to admit the tactic of releasing screenshots from a sequel which will inherit the very same engine is wearing quite thin.

[flyingblind]

Originally Posted by slick118

The point is this. 1C should not be teasing a new product in order to placate the masses, like it's not going to inherit all the same problems that the old one suffers with. It is insulting to the intelligence of a "mostly loyal" customer base and smacks of head in the sand mentality. Imagine if you took your new(ish) car back to the dealership for the umpteenth time so that you could have it fixed, only to discover the manufacturer was already promising a shiny new version, showing off the newly moulded bodywork and so on, with rank disregard for all the current imcumbent's inherent issues.

I just think it is plain rude.

Ok, to use the car analogy. CloD is like a new car you have bought with a distinctly underwhelming engine. You hear the car maker is bringing out the next model with a super powerful engine. You are rightly niffed. But then the car maker tells you that as soon as the new engine is ready they will fit one in your old car completely free of charge as a matter of policy. And of course you can also buy their new version with the newly molded bodywork etc. and still have the new engine fitted to your old one.

[Topo]

It's fun; this thread changes every half hour ...

[Volksieg]

Originally Posted by Fjordmonkey

There's a few thousand differences between a computer-game and a car. While I agree that it's somewhat iffy to showcase a new product while we're waiting on The Patch™ for CLoD, car-analogies are getting severely old.

It's all well and good saying that, Fjordmonkey! Now imagine if you had a car analogy that was getting old and other people on the forum started hawking their new and improved car analogies! How would you feel then? eh? EH?

[TheEditor]

MG should have worked on a expansion pack for CloD with new planes, content, SDK... Not be skipping to the Russian front. That's what happens when the devs are mostly Russian.

[Plt Off JRB Meaker]

+1
Totally agree with you Editor,there was so much more to develop with COD too,the Battle of Britain had so much going for it in terms of expansion,I could'nt believe the day they announced that they would'nt be creating anything more for it