Friday 2010-07-16 Dev. update and Discussions about the update ONLY!

[philip.ed]

I disagree slightly, if a product is future-proofed and has an excellent market like the Il-2 market the company should make the best looking product available. It may not be highly playable on full-settings this year, but give a year or two it will grow into something astounding.

[Splitter]

Well, whichever side you come down on for graphics, I think we can all agree that we won't buy the game if they put time limits on missions lol.

From what I have seen on graphics and such so far, the only things that would stop me from buying this game would be poor missions, poor campaigns, poor flight models, or a total lack of a career mode (and I am flexible on that last I guess). I don't want to be thrown into a different airplane for every mission and I would really prefer some strategic control over targets, mission assignments, and tactics.

But, as for those game play elements beyond graphics, I guess we will have to wait and see. It's just that I would hate to wait for "better trees" and fire when a game with solid game play could be released sooner rather than later.

Splitter

[David603]

Originally Posted by Splitter

Well, whichever side you come down on for graphics, I think we can all agree that we won't buy the game if they put time limits on missions lol.

From what I have seen on graphics and such so far, the only things that would stop me from buying this game would be poor missions, poor campaigns, poor flight models, or a total lack of a career mode (and I am flexible on that last I guess). I don't want to be thrown into a different airplane for every mission and I would really prefer some strategic control over targets, mission assignments, and tactics.

But, as for those game play elements beyond graphics, I guess we will have to wait and see. It's just that I would hate to wait for "better trees" and fire when a game with solid game play could be released sooner rather than later.

Splitter

I'm going to assume you have played the console game Il2 Birds of Prey but not any of the PC Il2 Sturmovik games. None of the problems you have mentioned such as time limits on missions, changing between aircraft every other mission etc have ever been in the the PC games, they were all introduced by the development team that produced Birds of Prey.

As far as the quality of missions, the team at Maddox games have always produced good missions and campaigns, and there are literally thousands of player created missions and campaigns out there for Sturmovik.

[Splitter]

I see why you would say that, but I have not played the Birds of Prey console game although I am aware of the complaints from end users. I have played other games in the past that had time limits on missions so I can sympathize. The same goes for switching planes every mission (Janes ATF, grrrr...).

The fact that the design team has produced good missions and campaigns in the past is promising. I hope and trust that they will stick to that strategy. My "want" in a similar area is for a good career mode.

So thanks and good to know!

Splitter

[nearmiss]

Originally Posted by Splitter

Well, whichever side you come down on for graphics, I think we can all agree that we won't buy the game if they put time limits on missions lol.

From what I have seen on graphics and such so far, the only things that would stop me from buying this game would be poor missions, poor campaigns, poor flight models, or a total lack of a career mode (and I am flexible on that last I guess). I don't want to be thrown into a different airplane for every mission and I would really prefer some strategic control over targets, mission assignments, and tactics.

But, as for those game play elements beyond graphics, I guess we will have to wait and see. It's just that I would hate to wait for "better trees" and fire when a game with solid game play could be released sooner rather than later.

Splitter

The BOB SOW is a different genre of game. It is an advanced air combat simulation more than a game. If you have a propensity for detail and have the patience to take weeks or months to learn to fly one aircraft it might be for you. You'll also have to have a very competent computer, joystick, and some other hardware that will cost you a great deal more than the game.

Technologically advanced products are often cheap so most people can afford them, but are never going to make the required effort to get the most from it. Most people never think about how much they are willing to learn, cell phones, tv sets, etc. to properly enjoy the value of advanced technology.

You can buy a copy of the IL2 1946 very cheap right now. I would suggest you buy a copy and then see if you are into it. Regardless, the BOB SOW won't be that expensive. You can always Ebay it, and get most of your money back if it's too much for you.

[Chill31]

the first picture with the blenheim on fire looks fake due to the amount of damage it has sustained. it looks see through...a little over done in my opinion

[DK-nme]

Originally Posted by Chill31

the first picture with the blenheim on fire looks fake due to the amount of damage it has sustained. it looks see through...a little over done in my opinion

I believe U mean the Wellington? Well, if it is the Wellington U're refering to, Barnes Wallis' geodetic design made the Wellington very strong. The screenshots are therefor very plausible. The Wellington was built in an advanced metallic structure, with fabric covering all the plane - thus flames burn through the fabric the way U see on the screenies...


DK-nme