let he who is without sin cast the first stone

[doraemil]

Seriously people. Even though they (devs + ubi) committed the cardinal sin of gaming:

releasing a bugged product / beta as an actual game.

I mean, sure UBI was scared at the Microsoft Flight Simulator revival and Rise of Flight becoming pretty uber. And since fear and $ really puts a dent in men's courage . . .

Any of us under that pressure would have caved too.

Some of you going about, trashing this game and devs. Be thankful. Patient.

Tell the devs you care. I dunno, someone like the president of these forums or whatever or class king / queen make a 90 page post just saying thanks. Not asking for a handout. Just throw down your thanks.

Seriously these guys and gals have worked hard and long, and things aren't going right at the automatic teller machine in making this momentous game, so they need to have people supporting them.

Don't be like the cynical Americans who complain once their convenience bubble is burst by reality. Just kidding (I'm US so I can get away with it)

Anyways, stop stoning the devs virtually. We are the community. The other places like gamespot are doing that. We shouldn't. The devs need our thanks.


Thank you dev team. Seriously. Thanks.

It's not so bad. It will get better. I know it.

[louisv]

Totally agree.

[Bakelit]

While I'm not for primitive bashing I still think that the idea of a forum is having different opinions.

And to be honest, as long as there are people's rants and grumblings someone still cares!

The day that you only see applause without any critic will be the last day for this product. That means that the rest of the gamers don't care anymore...

Have a look at TOW tactical RTS series. After many years of development a not quite good product came to the disappointment of many tactical gamers. There were some patches and then the developers made part 2 and now part 3 etc. Fundamental weaknesses were never dealt with and users are getting less and less and less ...

[JG53Frankyboy]

i already thanked by buying a standard and CE version of CoD , thats +100€ . And i have to ad the software is not worth this money in its actualy status IMHO (<- !!!!)

the rest is in the darkness of the future that nobody knows....

i am even more bored about all NEW whiner and whorshipper topics than from the game itself
use the old ones, there are enough.

[JG14_Jagr]

Originally Posted by doraemil

I mean, sure UBI was scared at the Microsoft Flight Simulator revival and Rise of Flight becoming pretty uber. And since fear and $ really puts a dent in men's courage . . .

I don't think that is the reason they were forced into a release date, but I agree 100% with your overall opinion..this is going to be one hell of a game platform to build off of..

My opinion on the "why" is that they were working on this on and off for so long, building various components, then shelving it for other work that eventually they needed to fish or cut bait and start actually making money from it or drop production. The ubi issues put a late rinkle into it that they are working to overcome.. 3-4 months trying to get it "Epilepsy" compliant when they should have been fully using that time doing what they have been doin for the last month..

I may be totally off on that, but thats my guess and I'm sticking to it

[Rattlehead]

Originally Posted by doraemil

Tell the devs you care. I dunno, someone like the president of these forums or whatever or class king / queen make a 90 page post just saying thanks. Not asking for a handout. Just throw down your thanks.

Some members here consider that a cardinal sin.

PS-I liked your post and I agree.

[jimbop]

Could have been very different tone if there was more openness before release. A lot of people feel screwed over after years of constructive support. Having said that surely everyone wants the sim to improve, even if for their own enjoyment rather than the team's success so I guess I have to agree with OP in general.

[HFC_Dolphin]

Boring...

[Derinahon]

More pointless dribble or valid interesting and relevant? Let's see what everyone else thinks about this previously undiscussed topic. I can't imagine there's been a thread like this before.

It's not so much that this sim was/is buggy, but that pretty much every decision that was made up until this point was the wrong one! I’m talking 1C, Ubisoft, and ESPECIALLY Maddox Games! I wanted this game to do well, but it looks like the above mentioned have successfully managed to shoot themselves in the foot repeatedly. Maybe if they read this they will avoid this same situation in the future. If you diagree with a point, feel free to mention it.

1. Years ago Oleg and Co. were showcasing tank and double decker bus models made with incredible detail, for a sim that depicts a battle pretty much devoid of any ground vehicle having any impact whatsoever. We're missing the E4, but at least we have a Churchill tank. Great priorities.

2. Trying to appease the rivet counters who were complaining about the colour of Big Ben and pointing out that the handrails on Tower Bridge were not 1940 appropriate instead of working on content that affects the gameplay. Fixing a landmark’s shade or hand railing is a job for patches, priorities again! I have no problem with making sure the Pitot tube is in the right place, or that there were spelling mistakes in the cockpit since they are things you see every day, but if you're actually devoting time to changing the shade of grey used on a landmark you'll probably fly past twice at an altitude to notice. . . well really!

3. Putting too much priority on Dynamic weather when it was obvious you would need a separate computer just to run it. Get the game running first (like sometime in 2009 or 2010) and worry about the weather later. Once the game is running close to 100% optimized, then you throw more processor intensive stuff at it. I’m sure that 99% of the gamers here would have been happy to just have clouds a step up from IL-2 instead of trying to get "Weather Simulator 2011" added as well.

4. The SP campaign. That was embarrassing! The mission briefings, and debriefings were laughable, and honestly, I have never seen anything that poorly done, and I’ve been playing PC games since . . . 1992 or so. The campaigns themselves were horribly done as well. The battle of Britain was about massed bomber formations attacking airfields and later cities, not piecemeal packets of bite-sized bomber groups being intercepted by a handful of fighters.

5. DirectX9 compliancy. . . why? Firstly DX9 cards are woefully inadequate to play this game, and people using XP are a slim minority of simmers. Plus DX9 is a nightmare to code for and a huge waste of time. The number of people we would have lost by not supporting DX9 would have been tiny compared to the number of people we lots because this game is a bugfest and doesn’t have DX11 support which would do wonders for optimizing and getting faster frame rates.

6. Textures. We’ve got 20mb textures of a pilot’s trousers. . . do I need to say more?

7. The Name change! Been done to death, it’s a problem that’s too late to fix. How many people have looked at IL-2 Cliffs of Dover and thought the following two things. “Hmm, what happened to storm of war” or “What the hell is an IL-2?”. Oleg had a great name, “Storm Of War: Battle of Britain”. The SOW part would work for any conflict, and the BOB straight up told you what you could expect to be doing. Cliffs of Dover doesn’t carry the same context or weight for a lot of people. All that word of mouth being built up for SOW, and three months before the game was released, change it?

8. Speak of the Launch, what the hell! There are hundreds of people Seeding this game on dozens of Torrent Sites. They have been doing this for the better part of a month, and stats say this has been downloaded a lot. A synchronized release date can help combat this by not making gamers who want to play it now, wait for a month. “Luckily” (using that ironically) the game is so buggy that the people pirating it think it’s some manner of brilliant DRM/Copy Protection.

9. Speaking of a Buggy Launch. . . What would have been better wait until it was playable, or get it out of the gate ASAP so that people can play it and then badmouth it. Every review out there says that it’s a bugfest that should be avoided. When it’s fully patched do you think that anyone is going to bother reinstalling it to change their year old review of a niche title? Probably not. The only reviews out there for probably the next few years will be ones that say, “Avoid this Product”. If they wanted to get the game out early, make some money and avoid all the bad press they could have taken a page from DSC A-10, World of Tanks, Minecraft etc. Say the release is an open beta that entitles you to the full game once it’s released. That way you start making money for people who want to play it now, they give you valuable input as to gameplay and bugs, and reviewers are stopped in their tracks when it comes to bugs/poor content because “It’s still in Beta stages”.

10. Speaking of getting it out there. What kind of advertising campaign was this? A single event in Moscow, a few interviews with Sim HQ, and a web site that looks like a 12 year old made it then got bored and never finished it. What are these publishers being paid for? Everyone downloads the game now, and they can’t even be bothered to make a real website for it or spend a dime to put out an ad? Youtube and Steam are good to get the word out there, but actually spending money on advertising is much better to move a product. Or does Ubi want this to fail?

11. Oleg and Luthier taking the time to post on these forums to appease the rivet counters, but when things go to hell give no manner of info to the community, just "here's a patch, everything fixed!" Meanwhile over half the people that install it find one issue resolved and 10 more created.

Well, that's the end of my rant, hopefully the continued work on this game and the follow up title (crossed fingers) avoid some of these issued.