|
|
|||||||
| IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
10-11-2010, 01:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Many people (including you) have fun having a much realism as possible. For you, anything less than "full realistic" is just a waste of time. Because of you, many realistic features are implemented in game, which makes flying in games more or less comparable to flying in real life. You enjoy the game, the game developers do their best to make you enjoy their game and buy it. Excellent, a typical "win-win" situation. Some people (including me) just don't have time, don't have motivation or simply aren't interested enough to "learn" the game. Sometimes, we enjoy realistic features, sometimes they irritate us: got bounced from nowhere and killed immediately, firing the whole magazine without effect... We don't want to sit 8 hours a day to "learn", we want to be Ben Affleck in our short weekend. We don't want to get shot down 10 times for each kill, we want to see enemy's wing falling off every 5 minutes. Therefore, we need "arcadish" features to make the game easier. Call us "noobie" of whatever you like, being a better gamer doesn't make you a better person. As long as we enjoy the game, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. And as we buy this game, with the same price as you, our opinions are as important as yours. 
|
|
#2
10-11-2010, 01:29 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The "problem" is that easy gained success is worth less.
To "beat the system" (or here to master the 60 year old systems of those obsolete planes) is worth the work put into it. There is also NO border between simulation and game, the switch is fluent, and simulation is definitively not only for training but also for entertainment.
__________________
Win 7/64 Ult.; Phenom II X6 1100T; ASUS Crosshair IV; 16 GB DDR3/1600 Corsair; ASUS EAH6950/2GB; Logitech G940 & the usual suspects 
|
|
#3
10-11-2010, 03:03 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
If you sell a sim with a default full real setting and that's all it will not have no selling power. Many of the newbs who buy it will simply not have the patients to learn. After the 100th ground loop and firery crash into the fuel depot they'll give up and take it back to the store and get a Microsoft product.
|
|
#4
10-11-2010, 01:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Surely it takes longer to learn how all this other stuff works and then have to spend more time understanding what it's trying to tell you, than it would doing it in a realistic way. If you're too lazy/have no time(I sympathise!) to learn, I can't really help.
I hope there will be a MANDATORY training course so you will have to learn the right way to fly and shoot before you're allowed to play this 'game'. You'll only have to learn it once, like riding a bike, and then there'll be no need for statistics, arrows or whatever.
|
|
#6
10-11-2010, 02:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
For training purposes, not online combat, it would be educational to see instantly where the bullets hit the target or how close you are of hitting it. There is also a limit to the situational awareness one can achieve by looking at a 24" (if even) screen. Not everyone has the Track IR or multiple screens setup. Small arrows that gives you clues of where the enemy is is therefore not cheating. They just compensate for the simple fact that you are not in the real airplane where you can twist your head in any direction you want and that your periferal vision (close to 180 degrees in real life) is very limited when looking at a screen, or even three screens. SOW BOB should be made so as many as possible will enjoy it. If it's a game or a sim should be up to the player / pilot. We have also only seen pictures of SOW BOB. Sound and most importantly how realistic the airplanes fly is yet to be known. If the AI pilots have their googles on or not is of miniscule importance to me.
|
|
#7
10-11-2010, 02:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Everyone likes games with explosions, so why aren't more people into flight simming? Well, what many of them don't like is getting smacked across the forehead with a 500 pager that details just the basics for theory of flight, formation tactics, gunnery principles and so on, not to mention that most of the times today the manual doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of what's in the simulator. It's not just getting smacked across the head with that 500 pager, back in the day it was at least provided in the packaging, now you have to print part of it yourself from a pdf file and then scour the internet for the missing parts before flogging with the manuals can commence. That's the extra masochism that we long timers appreciate and crave, but it's easy to see it doesn't work any miracles for bringing new faces into the hobby  Just because the arrows are there doesn't make this a not realistic simulator, as long as we have the option to turn them off. Effectively, having a wide array of difficulty options to choose from enables us to have more games in a single title: from ultra realistic (PCs of the time permitting) to ultra arcade. I don't use arcadish gameplay options but don't diss arcade mode, it's what can bring the new guys in and new guys help pay for our expansions and implementation of realistic features.  If i scoff at something , for me it will be the lack of personal chalenge in arcadish gameplay, not the people who use the options. For them, the challenge is there and when they reach a certain skill level when it's not enough the answer is simple: they either put the game down or up the ante by starting to fly with more realistic settings. Frankly, as long as a person who flies with all the realistic FM options turned off doesn't try to play know-it-all on the realistic-flying guy about the physics of flight or claim expertise in how things should be, i have no problem whatsoever how he uses his simulator. In a similar fashion, i don't think people who fly full switch are snobs just because of flying full switch. They have a more varied and accurate experience and as a result their knowledge pertains more to what is closer to reality, if people want to challenge them then they need to do their homework first and that's not snobbish, it's reasonable. Being a snob is telling people to "stfu n00b, i fly full real", it's perfectly ok however to say "i fly full switch and so i think that your opinions only apply to your preffered difficulty settings and not the entire simulator environment". I think we all have to keep in mind that we didn't arrive at the point we are overnight. The reason i want ultra realism is because i've been using flight sims for 18 years and i've seen pretty much every trick in the book, so i'm looking forward to something a bit more challenging and maybe surprising. However, there are other people who are just starting now. It would be stupid of me to expect them to acculumate in a few weeks the same amount of knowledge i have managed to collect over the past 18 years and then proceed to degrade them when they try to learn gradually. It doesn't do good to anybody behaving this way, neither the new guy who will be discouraged, nor the veteran who is looking for some "fresh meat" or maybe the challenge of training an up-start wingman and finally, not for the genre on the whole which will suffer reduced sales. The question is simple. We either try to accomodate the up-start guys and ease them into the hobby gradually, or the hobby gradually dies as we get older and start suffering from poor eyesight, hand eye coordination or worse
|
|
#8
10-11-2010, 03:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
To Blackdog and others who have posted similar: Yep.
I want to get my son (17) into SoW as one of those things we can do together. No way is he going to be able to know what I know (since I have been flying flight sims for almost 25 years off and on) or compete with me on settings that are more ""realistic". But we could "dumb it down" and have some fun together right from the start. More realistic settings could be introduced to him as we go along. Eventually, we may go from playing "his" game to playing "mine"....and he'll probably kick my backside by that time lol. Other people have friends and family they would like to get into "flight simming". 16 year olds are going to see the product on the shelves and pick it up. The wider the audience, the more copies that will sell. That helps all of us. Why limit the audience? Just understand that people will be playing different games. Having the option to make it more "arcadish" would not take away from the "simulation" crowd at all. Look at the Total War series. There are a dozen different way to play that game. Some people automatically resolve all battles. Some people control every little aspect of each battle. Some use diplomacy, others ignore diplomacy. The list and combinations go on. If the developers of those games said "Everyone will use diplomacy and fight all their battles" the over all market (and popularity) of the games would be severely limited. As long as the "realistic" options are there, I am happy. If people can turn them off, how does that effect me? Splitter
|
|
#9
10-11-2010, 03:23 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
N.1 we return 60 years behind.
N.2 an airplane of the second world war does not have computer. N.3 comprises the difference between arcade game and simulation game. N.4 to read to learn to study handbook in order to fly with an airplane of the second world war. N.5 to study a takeoff procedure and to study the air navigation through manual maps and instrumentation for navigation type rules or protractor. N.6 SoW classified whit a simulator not is a game. elimination any help whit computer interface in the simulator. No arrows no auto loock enemy no gps map no gps electronic instrumentation no night vision no ammo infinite no fuel infinite. this is a simulation not a stupid ARCADE for little cildren.
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
