Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - Stable Patch or Features/Content Poll

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=189)

- - Stable Patch or Features/Content Poll (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=23279)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt (Post 288696)

4) Amended Documentation to teach people what to do with those gameplay features.
There's a bunch of stuff that people cry "bug/broken/etc" about, which are actually realistic limitations of the aircraft and intentional features.

True, people bring all their IL2:1946 gaming habits and expect the new thing to work the same, but we can't really blame them when documentation doesn't go a bit more in depth on the main points of interest that generate most of the confusion.

What we can blame them for is not searching the forum for previous answers and not ever testing anything for themselves, this is appropriate and acceptable :-P

I agree on that. While there probably should be an aircraft basics manual, as one was included in Il-2 1946 (there are only a few planes in CoD, though; maybe some wise member of the community could provide one, like Corsican Corsair did with 1946 :cool: ), I've given up hope on a mature community as well.
So, additional info would be a plus; one could imagine that half of the "bug!!!!!11" - threads would be gone with plane specialities/limitations being explained somewhere.
On the other hand, it seems that maybe half of the community isn't willing/unable to read those things up, even when consolidated in such a manner, and head straight for the forums->create new thread - route. :twisted:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wutz (Post 288580)

Well what use are new features if essentials of the game are not working yet properly? Just more fuel for complaints?
New features is like saddeling a horse from the rear.

+ 100%
and make the sound stable please or is this a new feature ? :-)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redroach (Post 288829)

On the other hand, it seems that maybe half of the community isn't willing/unable to read those things up, even when consolidated in such a manner, and head straight for the forums->create new thread - route. :twisted:

Well, that's certainly part of the problem, but improved documentation will solve it: if the information is provided (heck, even put a link to it on the main menu in the game interface, or have something like an in-game "encyclopedia") we can all start replying with "RTFM" :grin:

Game runs great for me and I have NEVER had the sound issue so many complain about. I vote for extra content since I'm a selfish person who only wants a p-47 or 51 in multiplayer.:cool:

The patch is already stable. PEBKAC.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dano (Post 288628)

What does overclocking have to do with the 20% performance drop that the last beta and retail patch caused?

Because if you go from 120 fps to 95 fps its not really that big a concern if stability and content were added..

I love the people who think that IL2 1946 frame rates are what the Devs should be aiming for.. Really? Really? I get 360 fps at 1920X1200 in IL2 1946 now.. "Its NOT the same game engine.. get over it.."

Depends what you mean by stable. For me this includes getting features which are not yet functioning working properly (i.e. loadouts).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redroach (Post 288675)

I can't vote because the option that should receive at least 95% of the votes is not there: "both."

Not really. Based on previous polls, 90% of the people are getting stability, and performance. 10% of the people are having issues but are obviously the vocal minority. Its not abnormal, if I don't have problems I'm less inclined to log in to say what ISN'T happening while if I have an issue I look for the solution online. The people who have had performance AND stability all along want to see content and FM work done.

Yes really. By now, I'm somehow fed up with beta-testing and, judging by the current pace of fixing things, then fixing the two things the fix caused, then....; it'll be at least another year, emphasis on "at least", that all the major bugs and flaws in the FMs are sorted out - and I won't even talk about minor things like the MIDI(!) menu music playing its single(!) MIDI(!) track at random.
So imo, if the sinking ship is to be re-floated, they should kick out their developers who can't code/confuse left vs. right A-S-A-P, hire new guys wo CAN code, work up the botched codebase and get things going ffs!
So, if the game isn't gonna be awesome in record time, both in terms of bugfixing/FM fixing AND content, they can play big-scale domino with their shiny Battle of Moscow Add-on packagings, as far as I am concerned.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JG14_Jagr (Post 289074)

Because if you go from 120 fps to 95 fps its not really that big a concern if stability and content were added..

Assume much? I went from 53fps average to 44fps average and gained a load of stutter, again, what will overclocking do to help that? More to the point how will overclocking help Luthier and his team know that the patch caused a significant drop in performance for some people?

Quote:

I love the people who think that IL2 1946 frame rates are what the Devs should be aiming for.. Really? Really? I get 360 fps at 1920X1200 in IL2 1946 now.. "Its NOT the same game engine.. get over it.."

I love people who assume incorrectly and then spout off as if they've been offended.

The fact of the matter is that the last beta and retail patch crippled performance on my system, I'd like that resolved before additional content, overclocking is something that should not be needed to return my system back to pre-patch performace levels.