IL-2 Sturmovik 1946 Vs Cliffs of Dover.

[Blackdog_kt]

I suppose you don't have it then? Nothing wrong with it, but since i own a copy let me just say that my experience is far from that.

The sound and graphics engine is due for replacement by the end of August. Getting rid of these big tasks it will then be easier for them time-wise to focus on individual bugs. As for the AI, it's also being redone. I agree it was released early but that's exactly what a lot of the community was asking, eg "please give us an early version so we can fool around with it while you patch it to completion". I think it will be fine within 3-6 months and an adequately completed sim.

For the FM and DM now, the FM is better than IL2 but not entirely accurate: it has more parameters to take care of, but some of them need tweaking.

As for the DM, it's not problematic at all and it's the best i've ever seen in any flight sim.

Along with the new features like improved CEM, this makes it impossible for me to go back to IL2. I've been flying IL2 since the demo and the very first release version back in 2001, i switched to a AAA mods installation, then switched over to Ultrapack 2.01 version.

I too thought i'll be splitting my time between CoD and IL2 but i was wrong. After flying CoD, IL2 feels like a toy to me and that's saying something when the "toy" was not really a toy but a highly realistic combat sim. It's not that IL2 was bad, it was excellent, it's just that CoD feels so much better in some aspects that i just can't go back. I haven't even started IL2 ever since i got CoD, not once, and i stopped following its progress altogether: i still pop in the forum here regularly to check on what's new but i don't install new patches or mod packs anymore.

I might take a look at radars and night fighters when TD releases that, but the added complexities of CoD in terms of each aircraft's systems are so beyond the IL2 engine that after experiencing them IL2 feels artificial and "gamey".

As for development, IL2 was 4-5 years in development before any announcements were made in 1999 (Oleg's words, not mine).

[MaxGunz]

That's what I mean by bumper cars vs go karts. I've seen the same step-up process many times before with occasional big steps. Dinnerman's F/A-18 for the Amiga, the Dynamix Aces series, Red Baron 2/3 and then IL-2 being a few of those for me. And every one required better hardware than the ones they made look arcade.

[secretone]

I am looking forward to getting an insider's opinion one day as to what really happened with the CLIFFS release. Perhaps we will have the opportunity to read interviews with Oleg Maddox and others in the know.

The developers were ambitious and I admire that. I would prefer to bite off more than I can chew every now and then rather than to live a life of mediocrity.

[monsterZERO]

Originally Posted by jermin

...In my humble opinion, in order to achieve the similar success of FB+AEP, CoD still needs 1 year's development for the least. If it goes that far, I will consider buying the game. For now IL2 (stock) is far enough for me to ignore CoD...

Wait. So after going on a rant about how CoD is a "failure", you admit that you don't even own the game? Dude. Come on... What can you possibly be basing your opinion on?

I've been lurking on these forums for ages, and this is the first thread where I was like, "I gotta say something", lol. Sorry to call you out like this, and I'm certainly not bashing you or anything, but I see tons of people talking like this about the game and it just irks the crap out of me.

You really need to play the game and sink a few hours into it before you can develop an opinion on whether or not it is a failure, man. The game is incredible, albeit with some pretty big issues for right now.

I most certainly do not consider CoD a "failure". Not even remotely. Yes it needs work, which it will definitely receive, going off the team's previous track record.

I don't understand some people's over the top reactions to this game's current state. It is absolutely, 100% playable, right now at this very moment, and will only get better with time. What is the issue? Is it that the game costs $49.99? If that is the reason, then I just don't understand. That is a BARGAIN! Going out to a movie here in the US costs over 10 dollars now. Hell new DVDs are in the 20s. Those entertain you for an hour or two, tops. Hell I'm pretty certain you spent more than that on your flight stick alone, unless you're using a cheapy .

I've bought FSX payware that costs as much as this game, and those are 1 aircraft. This is a WHOLE game...


This wasn't all directed at you, man, just people in general who have the same attitude about this game. Give it a go, an I think you'll be singing a different tune. If you even remotely enjoy WWII flight swimming, and I'm pretty sure you do, I don't see how you could NOT enjoy the hell out of it, and isn't that what this is really all about? Enjoying these incredible flight sims for what they are, and becoming utterly immersed in the experience?

[monsterZERO]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

Along with the new features like improved CEM, this makes it impossible for me to go back to IL2. I've been flying IL2 since the demo and the very first release version back in 2001, i switched to a AAA mods installation, then switched over to Ultrapack 2.01 version.

I too thought i'll be splitting my time between CoD and IL2 but i was wrong. After flying CoD, IL2 feels like a toy to me and that's saying something when the "toy" was not really a toy but a highly realistic combat sim. It's not that IL2 was bad, it was excellent, it's just that CoD feels so much better in some aspects that i just can't go back. I haven't even started IL2 ever since i got CoD, not once, and i stopped following its progress altogether: i still pop in the forum here regularly to check on what's new but i don't install new patches or mod packs anymore.

I might take a look at radars and night fighters when TD releases that, but the added complexities of CoD in terms of each aircraft's systems are so beyond the IL2 engine that after experiencing them IL2 feels artificial and "gamey".

I feel absolutely, 100% the exact same way.

IL2 is still incredible, but after the tasting the depth of CoD, I can't go back. I just can't do it... The fidelity of the aircraft (and the environment) is an order of magnitude above the original. It's not just a little better, it's like night and day. It is the next evolution of IL2, and is the sim I will be dedicating my free time to from here on out.

[Jonesyy]

Originally Posted by monsterZERO

Wait. So after going on a rant about how CoD is a "failure", you admit that you don't even own the game? Dude. Come on... What can you possibly be basing your opinion on?

I've been lurking on these forums for ages, and this is the first thread where I was like, "I gotta say something", lol. Sorry to call you out like this, and I'm certainly not bashing you or anything, but I see tons of people talking like this about the game and it just irks the crap out of me.

You really need to play the game and sink a few hours into it before you can develop an opinion on whether or not it is a failure, man. The game is incredible, albeit with some pretty big issues for right now.

I most certainly do not consider CoD a "failure". Not even remotely. Yes it needs work, which it will definitely receive, going off the team's previous track record.

I don't understand some people's over the top reactions to this game's current state. It is absolutely, 100% playable, right now at this very moment, and will only get better with time. What is the issue? Is it that the game costs $49.99? If that is the reason, then I just don't understand. That is a BARGAIN! Going out to a movie here in the US costs over 10 dollars now. Hell new DVDs are in the 20s. Those entertain you for an hour or two, tops. Hell I'm pretty certain you spent more than that on your flight stick alone, unless you're using a cheapy .

I've bought FSX payware that costs as much as this game, and those are 1 aircraft. This is a WHOLE game...


This wasn't all directed at you, man, just people in general who have the same attitude about this game. Give it a go, an I think you'll be singing a different tune. If you even remotely enjoy WWII flight swimming, and I'm pretty sure you do, I don't see how you could NOT enjoy the hell out of it, and isn't that what this is really all about? Enjoying these incredible flight sims for what they are, and becoming utterly immersed in the experience?

^^ This. Perfect response to everybody who has decided to flame the game because it was released early. Just think of it as getting an extended BETA access, and thank God that there is so much love and support behind the game to make it as special as 1946 became.

As for me, I am just going to be playing RoF and 1946 until it is finished, but I certainly won't bash it in the meantime.

Also I do know that when I go to CloD I will probably not be able to stomach 1946 anymore. It will just feel a bit too dated.

[CWMV]

I'm not quite sure where everyone is seeing this supposed "depth" in CoD.
If anything playing CoD has made me appreciate UP3 and DBW much, much more than I did before.

[monsterZERO]

Originally Posted by CWMV

I'm not quite sure where everyone is seeing this supposed "depth" in CoD.

Right here:

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

...but the added complexities of CoD in terms of each aircraft's systems are so beyond the IL2 engine that after experiencing them IL2 feels artificial and "gamey".

It's the depth of the actual aircraft (the most important thing, imho). The engine management is LIGHT years ahead of vanilla IL2. Just getting my Spitfire started and off the ground is immensely satisfying to me. I can spend hours just doing pattern work in CloD and end my session with an ear to ear grin and a huge sense of accomplishment. Add to that the ability to actually fight with these aircraft (unlike FSX, etc...) and I'm sold