Where are the game elements in this sim?
 

It's so frustrating having such a high fidelity sim as CloD but having to build every single mission if you want to play. I like making my own missions but two things makes it unsustainable to create new ones all the time:

1. It's time consuming to make a good mission.
2. No surprises during mission, you know what will happen.

After finally having smooth performance in CloD, it hit me, where's the game in this sim? What exactly did luthier and Co expect people to use this game for? Playing quick mission builder skirmishes over and over again? The campaigns aren't horrible but once they are finished they don't offer much more in replay value. I don't care so much for multiplayer (broken at the moment anyway) because I'm an offliner. I've played 3 self-made missions the last two weeks in CloD, that's it. I'd never thought I'd say it but I miss Dgen LOL!

I read in luthiers latest update that they're hiring a lot of new staff, I hope they hire some kind of game producer and not just 3D modellers and programmers because this game is in desperate need of game elements. They'd better come up with some kind of campaign generator for their next game because they can't rely on the community to do everything for them.

Don't hate on me for this post because I really love IL-2, CloD and the team at MG I just want to play and enjoy this game but it's very hard when you have to spend just as long creating a good mission as it takes to fly it.

I must agree. Remember the "Holy Sh*t" thread that Luthier himself started asking for gameplay elements? Tons of suggestions in there and not one was acted upon. Instead they went for the Spitgirl...

The only people who seemed to benefit from that thread was the Rise of Flight team. I notice that a very great many of the features suggested in that topic are already announced for the new single player dynamic campaign announced for release this month. :rolleyes:

Yeah, read some of that thread. I've never been so torn about an IL-2 release before, so many good things in the game but so little to play. No wonder people rather hang out on the forums and complain then play the game because there's nothing to play! Yet I log in here everyday in the hope of some fantastic bit of news about a patch/update that will end all patches/updates.:(

Yeah, they've lurked...

Anyways you should know that it's not a game, it's the ultimate FLIGHT SIM.
If you want a game and can't enjoy tiger moth trips from one airfield to another, then go play Call of Duty with other 16-years old ;-);-);-)

Oh sorry, yes. Being a "sim" automatically excuses CloD from being enjoyable.;) Seriously though, I guess some people are satisfied flying around and just looking at trees for all eternity, I on the other hand appreciate a good campaign with medals/promotions/squadron management that makes me feel a part of a conflict. I guess that's not "simmy" enough though.

I saw that and assumed they were making some effort in ‘getting back’ players who may have migrated to CoD – they made an oblique reference to CoD a short while ago, thanking their loyal fans for remaining knowing that a new sim had been released. They don’t need to know that we’ll play both of them anyway, but if some competition could be encouraged between them, won’t all of us benefit? ;)

If there's a competition, RoF is winning it atm.

Well as Luthier as already stated the game was released only half finished in performance and content, i guess over the next year or so they may be able to get it operating well enough for simmers to start making a few missions and or campaigns. I can run the game well with my rig, but in truth its an effort to want to play it there are way too many annoyances and multiplay is still broken. Its kind of killed my enthusiasm for all things flight sim at the moment, but im sure that will return.

tbh I would rather donate 45 bucks I spent for CLOD - to ROF team, than to fill the whiny failures pockets (1C)...that simple...I dont even play CLOD because its not performing good on my (powerfull enough) rig, with all the optimisations and tweaks, and I dont like the ugly bright vivid cartoonish landscape, dont like the lack of proper AA....etc etc....etc..funny thing is that I cant even sell the damn failure since its connected with crap like Steam.....

I hope I will get over it soon as 45 bucks for central european guy is alot of money spent on crap..otherwise I would not bother and consider this as thank you for il2 orig and goodbye

I guess we would have more "whiners" (more angry customers in fact) that everybody knows the truth...which is - they knew right before the release that the game wasnt finished and optimised well....so they lied in our faces...hey spit in my face...what they can expect from me in return more than my money? probably to be a hypnotised die hard fun like some on this board....

Maybe they're relying on a well established community. :)

See link here;

http://airwarfare.com/sow/index.php

If that's not "simmy" enough, I might have to reorient myself, too, as I enjoy the same aspects. Awards, promotions and management are an integral part of a modern flightsim (or "flying game", YMMV). Heck, even Falcon AT, the very first flightsim I played, had it...

The current state of "content" is just the same as other aspects in CoD... everytime I look at them/want to use/enjoy it, I die a little inside...
I mean, the current axis campaign (as well as the RAF one, excluding the girlie cockpit), could have been done by one guy familiar with the FMB in one afternoon. That's not content to be expected by the makers of the sim, even in a wider sense.
If there only were a dynamic campaign generator, at least!

nobody would say anything if they were honest from the begining "Guys, sim is unfinished, we need to release demo for beta testing....price is 20 bucks" or something simmilar....this way for full price we got....unoptimised and unfinished game which we all betatest..the problem is that we are not betatesters and the game WAS released as FULL product....we are CUSTOMERS....then somebody acuses us for whining...its the easiest way sure...If I buy a full price for horse I didnt want a mule needing few yrs of nursing to become more or less - a true horse....

for offliners the best missions/campaigns came from 3.party people in classic IL2.

the same will be for CoD (even its scenario is much more limited.......). BUT, with the lack of ducumentation and the more complex possibilites (espacially this scripting part) - it will take some time till the people get familiar with the CoD FMB.

one should not expect something from the official development team in that case !

and for onlines its the same actually, missions and maps have to be build...Onlineevents have to organzed. It will take its time.

Yeah, whatever. If you think that 45$ is a lot of money than I don`t think you should have bought it. Maybe you should THINK before you buy a game. Because if 45$ is a lot for you then maybe you should CHECK before you buy? Hmm?

Sims cost money, nothing new here. You gotta be prepared for spending money. If you can`t afford to spend 45$ in a manner you wouldn`t care for it too much, then I don`t think you are financially fit to the genre.

Same here. Central Europe. Over 40€ spent on the CE. Am I complaining?

My prayers goes to Lowengrin that he will make a DCG for CloD soon because the game is just collecting virtual dust on my harddrive.

Gamewise and for an immersive experience i think a good dynamic campaign is needed. Luthier mentioned having drawn up a hefty design document for it, but like much else, it wasn't completed (or even started...:( )

Single missions let you experience the technical elements of the sim, but there is no real human edge to it. Scripted campaigns are better in that regard, but a really well done dynamic campaign can immerse you in something like the experience of a real pilot.

Don't know if we'll get it from the devs or whether it'll be 3rd party? Lowengrin maybe as you say...?

It sure would be great beeing able to take off for a dynamic evening patrol south of the cliffs not knowing beforehand if/what/when anything will hit you.

+1

RoF also has a 2 year head start mind you, and it was just as demotivating to play at release. I'd say even more useless than CloD at release because of the initial performance issues, useless multiplayer, poor-designed gui and quick mission system and few planes to fly. Now it's good, but to me it's more like flying in a painting with all the effects and artistic colours etc.

On the OP topic, I find the simulator more of a sandbox atm. You can set up stuff, test it out, fly, swap planes during missions, practice shooting down super AI rolling buggers. The lack of a dynamic campaign spoils it for my part. Broken multiplayer is testing my nerves though as I'm mostly an onliner. Can't wait to get into a server again and fly versus some human pilots with human behaviour :) That's where the sim really shines IMO! :)

I think we all understand now that what Oleg or Luthier said in the development stage held little water, thats why i take everything that is said now with more than a pinch of salt. We will see how much longevity the game as after the American release, Once that pile of cash as been counted we will then see if they are truly committed to fixing this game.

I mean, even Il-2 wasn't really a burner in terms of immersion between missions... no fancy rendered/acted sequences (at least SOMETHING when you were awarded medals/promotions; Battlehawks 1942 already had that with people gathering on your CV and your CO handing you the medals. The "Missing Man" formation in Falcon AT when you die is something else than just texting "Red has been shot down/killed", too.), very conservatively designed menus and simple .tga loading screens with nothing blinking, texting or anything like that. I figure that would take relatively little effort (excluding big-budget rendering/acting, of course), yet add greatly to non-flying immersion. Thus, Il-2 was very simplistic even in 2000 terms, yet CoD v.Alpha2 easily gets below that.
Meh, at least the drawn loading screens look reasonably well.

The more I think about it, the more it annoys me even with respect to Il-2 1946 >.<. Is RoF worth its money in that regard, as well as with respect to realism? :rolleyes:

A pinch of salt? how diplomatic of you Tree.:) I'll put it like this, I'm not buying anything associated with 1c/Maddox Games from now on without proper reviews and user input beforehand.

I also purchased RoF, oh about 9 months after release and shelved it. I finally started flying it weekly at the first of the year. I do support it by purchasing their addon material ac, etc. Its a fine sim now and getting better especially after the campaign is released in the next update.

These sims are now relics and it takes about two years of ongoing support to bring them to the point where one can say wow!

Yeah, no disrespect to Luthier and the Clod team, I have no doubt that these teething troubles will pass, but I went over to RoF , luckily for me, it's had it's teething problems for the most part fixed, and already has a great career mode, which is being biult upon by the team.
RoF is always in development, and thats how I see CoD, I fully support the development of CoD and paid my 30 quid to the devs.

I would love to see a simple career mode introduced to CoD based upon the plane you fly, ie a Spit,Hurri,ju87,109 etc, and also a dynamic campaign feature (in the future of course) and i would pay extra for it.

Pity I cant enjoy CoD to its fullest, my rig is medium standard, but has no problems with RoF and i wanted a sim to PLAY, RoF provided it, and i am a ww1 convert.

Keep popping in to see the progress, good luck to Luthier and the team.

Unfortunatly the OP has a good point. The QMB that I ALWAYS played in 1946 just isnt there, and what is here is not working to make a complete flight playable.

In a Year this game will rock! Right now, I think I will go back to 1946 for my combat flight fix. If I remember, the same thing happened with 1946.

I too have gone back to 1946, couldn't install it from original DVD, so bought it again from GOG. It doesn't look that different, graphics-wise, to CoD - in fact, the latest review from Custom PC magazine states the same (35 out of 100, BTW, final sentance saying it is borderline unplayable). I stopped playing it a week after launch, and may get back to it in a few month's time - in the meantime, there are better games for me to waste my time on....

I personally can't go back to IL2:1946, it's been way too easy to operate the aircraft for a long time and after trying out the new CEM i can't go back.

In all fairness, it took RoF two long years to get there. I think the big surge in regards to CoD content will come with the release of the SDK or at the very least, some scripting documentation.

If we can customize the interface (which they said is possible) to run a campaign generator in-game and track relevant data in the form of mission event logs, parsing them to the generator (which is possible through scripting), then the campaign generator can act on that information and create the next mission in a dynamic campaign.

As for many of your suggestions in that thread (which i really liked a lot), i expect they too will be possible through scripts, after all it's a C type language they are using: it needs some coding experience but it's much more powerful.

I think that whatever the devs do, once the community come to grips with scripting they will always be one step ahead, simply because we are so numerous and ideas keep bouncing around all the time.

Off the top of my head, things i would do if i knew how to work with scripts:

1) Navigator interface: From a simple "i click on the map and you tell me how to get there" to a full fledged SH3 type of deal with markers, rulers and protractors so i can draw up my own flight plans mid-flight, the have the script play "AI navigator" for me and guide me there. It would only work in aircraft that had a navigator crewman, for single seaters it would just give you the mapping tools to work with yourself.

2) Celestial navigation with a sextant for night missions (since the nice sky has accurate positions of constellations).

3) Script calling out contacts when they are in the field of view of AI crewmen.

4) Bombadier guidance script: Jump to the bomb-aimer's station, engage the script and guide the pilot through the bomb run (like level stabilizer but so much better and more realistic).

If i can come up with 3-4 useful ideas in the time span required to post a forum message imagine what the rest of the community can come up with, especially people who can actually code it, dedicated modders, etc. There's no way a developer team of 25 people will be able to compete with a few hundred or even thousand modding community members, so they focus on getting the basics done and providing a framework to do more. Of course, the basics are not there yet and i'm not denying that. I just don't expect the dev team to be able to "race" the community in terms of new features once we are up to speed with scripting, it's not realistic to think so.

I expected CoD to be a sort of "operating system/framework for simulation gaming" type of thing and that's exactly what it is, which is a big reason i maintain mostly positive attitudes about it (that is, it turned out to be what i expected it to be).

Well, it's playable even on my modest rig, that's not the problem. Problem is there's nothing to play, have to create everything myself and that grows boring and predictable rather fast.:(

1+

Agree u know we only get " 4 missions" for the 109 its like " GROUND HOG DAY "

+1

I'm watching Game of Thrones. Excellent series.

I love ROF, but lets not forget , that they have had a two year head start, there was less meat in that sim on release than in CoD, IMO.

They will never finish this it was designed that way. You will be fed a steady diet of new and interesting things as you progress. Sit back and have a soda. Everything is going to be just fine.

You and a hand full of people say the same thing. What are you worried about? Worried about your investment in time and effort going to waste possibly with ROF'ers testing the waters here and hanging around?? I think that's the majority of the angst people are venting with comparisons to other sims.

Those improvements were paid for by the community over the last two years. I have personally paid them enough to buy any 4 flight sims on the market. Rof is turning out to be a good sim only because the community has given generously.
The problem with this is that there is no support for modification. Any improvement to the game you want to see, you have to pay for, and maybe it will be implemented at some later date.
I would rather support an open for modification flight sim. I am hoping that COD will deliver on that end.

So everyone who plays Call of Duty is 16? Whats wrong with being 16 anyways? I play Call of Duty (since the original) and I'm 32, I have no problem getting along with players of all ages usually. The way you said that just makes you look about as immature as the 16 year olds you are trying to say are immature. The tiger moth sucks, and if I wanted to fly from one airfield to another I have a much better sim for that, FSX. (Theres alot of 16 year olds using that too, I bet most can navigate and fly better than you).

Also, CloD is not the ultimate flight sim as I believe that honor goes to FSX at the moment. If you dont believe that just go search for some flight sim stores and see all the people getting rich off of FSX add-ons. CloD isnt the ultimate anything at the moment except maybe the ultimate "look my cockpit shadows/details PWN yours" exercise.

As for the original post, I completely agree with the lack of content. My main gripe though is with the lack of flyable planes. Yeah yeah I know, its the BoB so theres only so many planes blah blah blah. Nuts to that, no matter the setting there should be more than 3 different fighter planes (basically, the g.50 is garbage and doesnt count) to choose from in multiplayer. Especially given this game took so many years to develop... I guess those awesome cockpit shadows were harder to make than we could imagine.:rolleyes:

My new rig is in the mail together with a new stick and when I get em I'll probably try out RoF campaign and practice Spitfire procedures in FSX with A2A's Spitfire for a while till CloD is a bit more mature and I can hold my own in the mp servers.

The wait is friggin killing me.

You sound like you never played IL2 before 1946. Let me tell you - there wasn`t much of a "game" to the first IL2 titles either. Just maybe 4 static campaigns and that was it. It really took some time for the offilne content to build up. Also the IL2 title quickly gravitated towards online play. Even the free planes that came with updated were aimed at online wars half the time (many slightly different Yak types for example) to balance the plane pool. Soon after the game flourished, the multiplayer scene took over most of it. Many people like me flew offline QMB 5-10%, and online 80-90% of the time. I`m pretty sure that Luthier and Oleg meant the same pattern of development for Storm of War. To be honest, the game as of now doesn`t present much of content in any field, be that online multiplayer or offline.


Don`t worry. This game just has to straighten up and gain some speed. You will probably get loads of user made single missions after that happens, maybe even some campaign generator. Remember that this game is supposed to be opened to modding, well, another version of it. This feature needs to be finished and up you go.

I feel much the same.
We have been given a pretty cool FMB that allows us to create missions that can be as in-depth as anything the devs can, provided one can code a bit. (And even if you can't, like myself, there is still a plethora of options available to create interesting missions.)
To me sims have always relied on user generated content for sustained enjoyment, and CoD imo is no different.

I do understand what Addman is saying and I agree things have been a bit neglected in that regard, but it's really up to the community to create that content.
Now, if we could have a proper campaign editor I would be over the moon.

Well I bought CLOD the because I trusted them (IL2 experience), and they released misleading vids and pics like the game is finished and smooth as silk....also they included anti epilepsy filter just before release not telling us anything..one patch brings performance increase for some and for some drop in performance...next patch other way around...we are in a never ending circle here....

You obviously didn't get those ;-);-);-)

I said rof is winning ATM
-yes, rof was released some time ago, but who cares? 1c spends 6 years making a game, so yeah, they're late
-no, rof was not worse than clodo on release
-yes, rof looks like painting, but then clodo at noon is a cartoon
-no, I'm not a saboteur from rof
-yes, making comparsions to other sims is just ok
-yes, rof comunity paid for rof improvements, but... is it strange? you paid for clodo improvements buying an unfinished game for the price of a complete one

My post was a response to the previous one about competition between rof and clodo, nothing more.

double post, sorry

I have to agree that the game elements are distinctly lacking in the sim as it is now. I am jumping online as much as i can to make up for it.
However I find it extraordinary that when i jump back into Il2 it seems so shallow compared to CoD. There is so much potential with this new sim i can't imagine what i could achieve.

Oo...that doesn't really agree with me. If that's the case then maybe they should've advertised that as a feature "New revolutionary game engine where you create everything yourself!" and maybe the sim should've been titled "operating system/framework for simulation gaming". According to some, this seems to be the case. For myself, I expected a somewhat complete sim/game, guess I was wrong and I guess that's too much to ask for after 6 years of waiting.:(

The built in Mods-On mode allows users to modify their game as much as they can or want to. So far people seem happy enough with the stock game though that they don't really make use of the feature. Jason's hint of some something big coming this summer, something "community friendly" makes me think that the SDK is on it's way. Fingers crossed!

I suppose that's where I'm coming from; I have aways built my own missions rather than fly the ones provided. I never found them that interesting in all honesty.
Certainly, they were nothing I could not already do for myself, and I've had a blast creating missions for myself over the years.

I'm certainly not saying that there should be nothing provided by the developers...not saying that at all...but long-term I've always felt that it was user generated content in all it's forms which has kept me coming back to the game.

Speaking of user generated content, go have a look at the link Dutch posted on page 1 :)

I'm glad that works for you but let me give you an example of my situation. I'd like to play a quite long Stuka campaign with medals and promotions right now problem is there is none so I have to wait for someone to make one because I don't have the time and I also don't want to know every little detail about the mission that I'm about to fly. As I said before though, maybe I had the wrong expectations on this game. I'm not shelving the game, I'm just not playing it at the moment, hopefully the almighty community will produce some cool stuff within a year or so and I can actually start playing the game instead of just tweaking it.:)

I can't help but think you are - and probably should be - mostly mad at yourself for not waiting a week or two for reviews before parting with that small fortune you paid.

I have to agree completely with addman that even an optimist like myself is almost appalled at the complete lack of content to utilize what is an incredible amount of detail in the FM and DM.

The damage model alone has kept me interested - along with the fact I haven't been able to fire up the sim more than once every few days or so lately - and flying low and slow over the terrific landscape is an order of magnitude better than '46 even with mods.

Personally I didn't mind dropping $45 even at the alpha state it was released in, instead of waiting another year for a more complete product but it was not very smart of them to go about it the way they did. So much angst would have been allayed if they simply announced a full-priced paid open beta before US release. I would have still been first in line and those that wanted to save it for a more complete game could have waited.

Meantime I'm going to start looking for some user made missions.

Thanks for recognising that I'm not a "whiner", I've been around since IL-2 pre-release and I consider myself a fan and an optimist but this game is really pushing my patience.

Nothing wrong with your preference. I too have limited experience with mission building (i only got to grips with the FMB in IL2:1946 a few months ago, to build a practice coop that i could fly with a buddy i brought back into the hobby) and i value having some surprises during the course of a mission.

That being said, i remember the first IL2 back in 2001 and it was a very similar affair, completely scripted campaigns.
It took quite some time before a dynamic campaign was implemented (which was more of a random mission generator with no real link between the outcomes of a mission and the nature of the next one), the same for medals and promotions.

I think Charvel is also correct, they could have made this a "pre-order and get access to open beta" affair and nobody would complain. I mean, look at DCS A-10, a lot of people had all sorts of bugs and stability problems but the developers didn't get that much flak because people were told they were testing.

So yes, the PR for CoD should have been handled better but what's done is done, let's start looking forward.
Bad PR decisions don't mean that there's not a constant, underlying stroke of brilliance in the sim or that it won't mature into something good given some time. I'm not denying there are issues, i just don't think they'll remain unfixed for long. In the meantime, i'll download that new user-made Spitfire campaign (by DFlion i think? there's a separate topic for that in these forums) and fly it, this will keep me busy for a while more until extra patching is done.

What it all boils down to is "do i have enough to keep my busy while they fix the stuff that's not working?". I had enough and before i could exhaust them all new additions are coming and my playtime is somewhat limited currently. By the time i've flown through the two stock and the new user made campaign some issues with the bombers might have been fixed. Then, while i'm spending time learning how to level bomb something else will be fixed and i'll jump to that once i'm done with the bombers and so on ;)

I've got two missions pretty much ready for public consumption, although I'll have to replay them a few times to make sure they're solid before I'll feel comfortable to release them online. They won't be historically accurate though, simply because my knowledge of the BoB is a bit lacking.

One thing is deciding how much stuff to add to a mission...too many objects and planes, or too many clouds will kill performance for some users.
Too few objects and immersion takes a plummet.
Maybe do a 'high' and 'low' version of each mission?

One problem I have is that I cannot script mission objectives...looks like some basic coding knowledge is needed.

I'm probably one of the few here who can tell the difference and don't have to overreact to others overreactions. ;)

In fact, for the few times in a week I can dust off CloD I've been getting total screen lock-ups whenever I try to finish a campaign mission. This usually happens by the end of my take-off run or thereabouts.

So I either have to fly another SP mission or just say it's not worth it and move on to some other game. The only difference is I don't get all worked up about it like some here in bananaville and don't mind waiting until they sort it out.

cheers