better clouds and trees in next patch ?

[Blackdog_kt]

The vast majority of the legion of people complaining about massive game breaking bugs usually complain about the surface of it all.

Collidable trees is not a cosmetic issue, but i can't help but laugh when things like FSAA and sound quality (not the lack of sound in MP, that is a valid issue, just the sound quality) are labelled game breaking bugs. They are immersion enhancing features that need to be corrected, but they are far from game breaking as they don't prevent me from flying and getting the necessary sensory feedback to do what needs to be done in a flight sim. Let's call a spade a spade for once, shall we?

Wanna talk game breaking? Let's talk about inconsistent control logic in some aircraft, the fact that you can't manually release bombs from the bombardier's seat unless you zoom out of the bombsight and click on the switch in the virtual cockpit, or how you can't use the level bombing autopilot in the Ju88 because it's tied to the gyrocompass which is bugged and doesn't work.

Of course, things like that which do classify as breaking certain features/aircraft because they can't be used the way they were meant to be, usually fly with a loud wooshing sound over the heads of the majority of people who focus all their irritation on a jaggy looking radio mast, because they are so busy picking faults with what is readily visible that they haven't even scratched the surface of what's included and needs to be fixed a bit more urgently than their pet peeve so that, you know, these planes can do what they're supposed to do

And let's not even mention that the sim went from a completely unplayable 15 FPS slideshow to a state where it's perfectly playable by a majority of people within two months. Doesn't look like they hit a wall to me, it's more like the community itself working against its own benefit by disregarding whatever progress has been made in their quest to find more things to complain about

There are loads of valid issues but they are not all of the same importance to everybody, because people have different priorities. As such, i don't think that the people who complain the loudest are speaking on behalf of the community (they are certainly not speaking on my behalf, that's for sure) when they usually fail to even touch upon the issues that do affect gameplay. Oh wait, the initial host of gameplay affecting bugs were fixed to a considerable degree with the first few patches and now the sim is now playable for a wide range of people.

Long story short, have your opinion and let others have theirs. The only wall i see is the one of a dwindling supply of things to complain about as issues get fixed so some people keep trying to bash it in with their own heads and find something else to pick fault with instead of actually flying the sim, but i don't go about hunting down forum members that don't enjoy the sim to try and change their mind by constant repetition of my "superior facts and knowledge".

I would really appreciate it if they stop trying to convince me and others who are having a good time that we're actually not, as if they know anything about what constitutes fun to us, or monopolizing the developer team's attention and trying to steer their efforts towards a selection of features that usually have a minimal impact on actually flying the sim.
Either that, or i'll keep replying with vaguely ironic posts to wind them up

I'm not discounting the validity of the issues they bring up, i just think there's loads of things that need to be fixed and development time should be divided appropriately. Lack of FSAA, external sounds or the tone of green in the fields are all valid issues of varying importance to each one of us, but neither one is the be all, end all, single game breaking feature for the majority of the community.

Sorry, but i care more about being able to connect to a server, select a bomber and place bombs on a target than how the adjacent field's color looks or if the bomb's tail fins are anti-aliased. I suspect there's many who share the same feeling because i see a lot who actually divide their time evenly between flying and posting here and it's apparent by the fact that they have something to show for it (whether it's making skins, FMB tutorials, missions and campaigns or compiling FAQs, bug reports and technical guides to help others), which is in stark contrast to those who only demand things, can't take 2 minutes to read the relevant section of the manual or experiment on their own and don't contribute anything.

Like i've said before, it looks like a lot are afraid they might actually learn something (which is pretty weird when you consider this is a hobby) and no matter if they deserve the developer's attention due to being customers, they don't seem to deserve all the help they get from the rest of the community and the time that certain people put in to make the sim enjoyable for all of us.

I'm not naming anyone here, each one is free to decide which demographic they want to place themselves in and if anyone is annoyed well then, sue me. It's an opinion and i'm sticking to it until i see them contributing something other than a one-liner post starting with an irate comment, carrying an aggressive undertone of "when?gimme gimme now!" and ends in a series of question/exclamation marks. If i ever won the lottery i'd be tempted to offer to buy their copies and save them from all this self-inflicted anguish but i don't think many would take me up on it, some are obviously enjoying the lamentation way too much

[Walshy]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

The vast majority of the legion of people complaining about massive game breaking bugs usually complain about the surface of it all.

Collidable trees is not a cosmetic issue, but i can't help but laugh when things like FSAA and sound quality (not the lack of sound in MP, that is a valid issue, just the sound quality) are labelled game breaking bugs. They are immersion enhancing features that need to be corrected, but they are far from game breaking as they don't prevent me from flying and getting the necessary sensory feedback to do what needs to be done in a flight sim. Let's call a spade a spade for once, shall we?

Wanna talk game breaking? Let's talk about inconsistent control logic in some aircraft, the fact that you can't manually release bombs from the bombardier's seat unless you zoom out of the bombsight and click on the switch in the virtual cockpit, or how you can't use the level bombing autopilot in the Ju88 because it's tied to the gyrocompass which is bugged and doesn't work.

Of course, things like that which do classify as breaking certain features/aircraft because they can't be used the way they were meant to be, usually fly with a loud wooshing sound over the heads of the majority of people who focus all their irritation on a jaggy looking radio mast, because they are so busy picking faults with what is readily visible that they haven't even scratched the surface of what's included and needs to be fixed a bit more urgently than their pet peeve so that, you know, these planes can do what they're supposed to do

And let's not even mention that the sim went from a completely unplayable 15 FPS slideshow to a state where it's perfectly playable by a majority of people within two months. Doesn't look like they hit a wall to me, it's more like the community itself working against its own benefit by disregarding whatever progress has been made in their quest to find more things to complain about

There are loads of valid issues but they are not all of the same importance to everybody, because people have different priorities. As such, i don't think that the people who complain the loudest are speaking on behalf of the community (they are certainly not speaking on my behalf, that's for sure) when they usually fail to even touch upon the issues that do affect gameplay. Oh wait, the initial host of gameplay affecting bugs were fixed to a considerable degree with the first few patches and now the sim is now playable for a wide range of people.

Long story short, have your opinion and let others have theirs. The only wall i see is the one of a dwindling supply of things to complain about as issues get fixed so some people keep trying to bash it in with their own heads and find something else to pick fault with instead of actually flying the sim, but i don't go about hunting down forum members that don't enjoy the sim to try and change their mind by constant repetition of my "superior facts and knowledge".

I would really appreciate it if they stop trying to convince me and others who are having a good time that we're actually not, as if they know anything about what constitutes fun to us, or monopolizing the developer team's attention and trying to steer their efforts towards a selection of features that usually have a minimal impact on actually flying the sim.
Either that, or i'll keep replying with vaguely ironic posts to wind them up

I'm not discounting the validity of the issues they bring up, i just think there's loads of things that need to be fixed and development time should be divided appropriately. Lack of FSAA, external sounds or the tone of green in the fields are all valid issues of varying importance to each one of us, but neither one is the be all, end all, single game breaking feature for the majority of the community.

Sorry, but i care more about being able to connect to a server, select a bomber and place bombs on a target than how the adjacent field's color looks or if the bomb's tail fins are anti-aliased. I suspect there's many who share the same feeling because i see a lot who actually divide their time evenly between flying and posting here and it's apparent by the fact that they have something to show for it (whether it's making skins, FMB tutorials, missions and campaigns or compiling FAQs, bug reports and technical guides to help others), which is in stark contrast to those who only demand things, can't take 2 minutes to read the relevant section of the manual or experiment on their own and don't contribute anything.

Like i've said before, it looks like a lot are afraid they might actually learn something (which is pretty weird when you consider this is a hobby) and no matter if they deserve the developer's attention due to being customers, they don't seem to deserve all the help they get from the rest of the community and the time that certain people put in to make the sim enjoyable for all of us.

I'm not naming anyone here, each one is free to decide which demographic they want to place themselves in and if anyone is annoyed well then, sue me. It's an opinion and i'm sticking to it until i see them contributing something other than a one-liner post starting with an irate comment, carrying an aggressive undertone of "when?gimme gimme now!" and ends in a series of question/exclamation marks. If i ever won the lottery i'd be tempted to offer to buy their copies and save them from all this self-inflicted anguish but i don't think many would take me up on it, some are obviously enjoying the lamentation way too much

Couldn't have put that better myself +1!!! What some people here fail to realise and remember was that the constant whining of certain forum users in the early days of IL-2 drove Oleg away from frequenting the UBI forums I certainly don't want that scenario repeated with Luthier. We would ALL lose if that turned out to be the case, constantly whinging about a development update or the lack of one will in all fairness drive the man away. Some people on the forums need to sit back and relax he'll post when ready and has something to tell us. Patience is a virtue after all.

[furbs]

How long is too long? 4 months, 8 months, a year?
How many patches or beta patches does it take before the menus work?

As for contributing to this sim...i spent quite a few weekends of my own time talking about 200 pictures of pre war houses for this sim a long time ago.

So yes i feel i can vent about it.

Anyway were just talking amongst ourselves, Luthier isn't reading these sub forums.

[philip.ed]

These topics are bound to surface when the areas of the sim in question are not functioning as they should. To some they can be game-breaking, to others they can't. Each to his own.
One can't help buy see that CloD has a long way to go before it effectively does what it says on the tin. Aesthetically it needs to at least equal RoF in all areas, and in terms of gameplay, one would have thought that it could at least equal BoB2. Yes, the A/C may model beatuifully, and the CEM may be something brilliant, but as a game simulating the BoB, the team need to make sure that the game does actually simulate this portion of history to an outstanding degree. Spitgirl? What?

All of this can be achieved, but-as Luthier has said before-the community is integral to being construvtively critical, and providing ideas for fixes or information for future expansion.

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by =FI=Scott

I am inclined to defer to someone who actually knows what they are talking about so far as technical and coding issues are concerned and I am sure you are correct. Surely it is the game makers art in overcomming such issues ?

Part of the challenge of flying has always been avoiding the ground and those objects attached to it but what we have here is Harry Potter and the Magic Spitfire.

Ok, as a younger poster you probably dont know my older posts, but I have a good track record of predicting the problems and solutions. If I dont know I dont post (in general), but like said since I am not active much anymore (sadly because of the game/forums state) I wont spaz out and jump on you for that comment (some here will know what I am talking about).

It is safe to say that the devs took the wrong "path" while coding the game. It may be that they know a way to solve it, but they simply cannot because the code or engine is written in a way, or written poorly so that these changes cannot be easily implemented, or implemented at all without major re-writes. It could very likely be that the person who wrote the code for a "section" or the engine has left the team as we saw bickering between x-employes a few months back. In any case in this paragraph I am guessing, and I know very little about the coding process compared to graphics design and system hardware. The above seem likely possibilities, but for me they are just guesses; however my comments on how tree collisions should be/are normally implemented are not guesses. But like said it may no longer be an option without engine rewrites.

So when will dx11 be coming?

[Walshy]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

So when will dx11 be coming?

God knows if it ever will, when you you have the dinosaur that is DX9 still being utilised by the majority of game developers I can't see much of an uptake for it. It may be used by this game some time in the misty future but as a time frame for when ........ the man in the moon may have a better idea. It is quite likely that DX11 will die a quiet death the same way DX10 has/did. Personally I blame the consoles for the non-uptake of new technology and in my opinion the Xbox scenario was a huge mistake for Microsoft, I do hope that pc gaming will come back with a huge resurgence and flight siming as well on the back that said resurgence but I doubt it will. The consoles are effectively strangling the gaming industry in terms of technology in hardware and software.

[furbs]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

So when will dx11 be coming?

The same time as 64bit

[RE77ACTION]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

The vast majority of the legion of people complaining about massive game breaking bugs usually complain about the surface of it all.

Collidable trees is not a cosmetic issue, but i can't help but laugh when things like FSAA and sound quality (not the lack of sound in MP, that is a valid issue, just the sound quality) are labelled game breaking bugs. They are immersion enhancing features that need to be corrected, but they are far from game breaking as they don't prevent me from flying and getting the necessary sensory feedback to do what needs to be done in a flight sim. Let's call a spade a spade for once, shall we?

Wanna talk game breaking? Let's talk about inconsistent control logic in some aircraft, the fact that you can't manually release bombs from the bombardier's seat unless you zoom out of the bombsight and click on the switch in the virtual cockpit, or how you can't use the level bombing autopilot in the Ju88 because it's tied to the gyrocompass which is bugged and doesn't work.

Of course, things like that which do classify as breaking certain features/aircraft because they can't be used the way they were meant to be, usually fly with a loud wooshing sound over the heads of the majority of people who focus all their irritation on a jaggy looking radio mast, because they are so busy picking faults with what is readily visible that they haven't even scratched the surface of what's included and needs to be fixed a bit more urgently than their pet peeve so that, you know, these planes can do what they're supposed to do

And let's not even mention that the sim went from a completely unplayable 15 FPS slideshow to a state where it's perfectly playable by a majority of people within two months. Doesn't look like they hit a wall to me, it's more like the community itself working against its own benefit by disregarding whatever progress has been made in their quest to find more things to complain about

There are loads of valid issues but they are not all of the same importance to everybody, because people have different priorities. As such, i don't think that the people who complain the loudest are speaking on behalf of the community (they are certainly not speaking on my behalf, that's for sure) when they usually fail to even touch upon the issues that do affect gameplay. Oh wait, the initial host of gameplay affecting bugs were fixed to a considerable degree with the first few patches and now the sim is now playable for a wide range of people.

Long story short, have your opinion and let others have theirs. The only wall i see is the one of a dwindling supply of things to complain about as issues get fixed so some people keep trying to bash it in with their own heads and find something else to pick fault with instead of actually flying the sim, but i don't go about hunting down forum members that don't enjoy the sim to try and change their mind by constant repetition of my "superior facts and knowledge".

I would really appreciate it if they stop trying to convince me and others who are having a good time that we're actually not, as if they know anything about what constitutes fun to us, or monopolizing the developer team's attention and trying to steer their efforts towards a selection of features that usually have a minimal impact on actually flying the sim.
Either that, or i'll keep replying with vaguely ironic posts to wind them up

I'm not discounting the validity of the issues they bring up, i just think there's loads of things that need to be fixed and development time should be divided appropriately. Lack of FSAA, external sounds or the tone of green in the fields are all valid issues of varying importance to each one of us, but neither one is the be all, end all, single game breaking feature for the majority of the community.

Sorry, but i care more about being able to connect to a server, select a bomber and place bombs on a target than how the adjacent field's color looks or if the bomb's tail fins are anti-aliased. I suspect there's many who share the same feeling because i see a lot who actually divide their time evenly between flying and posting here and it's apparent by the fact that they have something to show for it (whether it's making skins, FMB tutorials, missions and campaigns or compiling FAQs, bug reports and technical guides to help others), which is in stark contrast to those who only demand things, can't take 2 minutes to read the relevant section of the manual or experiment on their own and don't contribute anything.

Like i've said before, it looks like a lot are afraid they might actually learn something (which is pretty weird when you consider this is a hobby) and no matter if they deserve the developer's attention due to being customers, they don't seem to deserve all the help they get from the rest of the community and the time that certain people put in to make the sim enjoyable for all of us.

I'm not naming anyone here, each one is free to decide which demographic they want to place themselves in and if anyone is annoyed well then, sue me. It's an opinion and i'm sticking to it until i see them contributing something other than a one-liner post starting with an irate comment, carrying an aggressive undertone of "when?gimme gimme now!" and ends in a series of question/exclamation marks. If i ever won the lottery i'd be tempted to offer to buy their copies and save them from all this self-inflicted anguish but i don't think many would take me up on it, some are obviously enjoying the lamentation way too much

+1

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by Walshy

God knows if it ever will, when you you have the dinosaur that is DX9 still being utilised by the majority of game developers I can't see much of an uptake for it. It may be used by this game some time in the misty future but as a time frame for when ........ the man in the moon may have a better idea. It is quite likely that DX11 will die a quiet death the same way DX10 has/did. Personally I blame the consoles for the non-uptake of new technology and in my opinion the Xbox scenario was a huge mistake for Microsoft, I do hope that pc gaming will come back with a huge resurgence and flight siming as well on the back that said resurgence but I doubt it will. The consoles are effectively strangling the gaming industry in terms of technology in hardware and software.

No, go look back at my mid 2010 posting history and you will understand the joke

Also DX11 offers tangible visual benefits to the gamer where DX10 did not, DX11 wont die out because in a years time new games wont support dx9 (it is too expensive to do DX9+dx10/11 or DX10+DX11, only thing that is holding dx9 around is consoles but now I believe we are moving away from the current paradigm of lowest common denominator in dx9.)

Edit- today BF3 specs just came out: http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/07/08/ba...ents-revealed/
Edit/Add 2 - Crysis dx11 patch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSGYb...layer_embedded

[SQB]

Originally Posted by AMVI_Superblu

i think that the real problem with tree's hit boxes is that we all have different trees setting..
let's make an example..
i am flying in a 1v1 dogfight.. i have trees set to High (lot of trees) and my opponent has them set to low (just some trees here and there).. guess what.. he could collide with trees he can see but not with the ones i see (obviously he doesn't because of lower trees setting).. pretty tricky to explain but if it sees less trees than me, he could collide with less trees than me.. that's the real deal..

I understand completely, but there is a very simple solution to this if you think about it.

What if the high and low options for trees made the render DISTANCE of the trees change, this way while one with a very high tree option enabled can see more trees than one with very low enabled, they both see the same trees around them (you can only hit a tree if you are near it anyway)