Warning: This game is on the edge. Support it or watch it die.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by 609_Huetz

Sometimes I am amazed to see what people waste their time and thoughts on.

This game has received the bad reviews because it is/was in a bad state. Period.

It is up to developers to limit the damage that has already been done and they are on the way of getting that right as far as I could tell.

We have supported the devs already in buying a beta.

If however the game fails, it is not the communities fault - we are here to point out what needs fixing. In our own words that is and that is also support.

Do yourself a favor and stop the fanboism and worshiping for once - the only feedback that will help in a long term is bad feedback, as paradox as it may sound. That is how this market and any market works so live with it. If something is broken and nobody points it out, it will not get fixed.

If you feel the urge to defend a piece of software as if it was your home, I strongly advice to rethink your priorities in life.

Your right COD was release in an awful state, but fans of the sim know the history of the developer to support their product. Yes post all the constructive criticism necessary, but also try to acknowledge along the way that there is a good possibility that the sim will be fixed and features added. This could keep some potential customers interested instead of driving them away. Its in our best interest for the new IL-2 series to survive, so that it can evolve into something far greater than the original series.

[Volture]

hi "buzz"....

Iam tottaly agree with all of you.....

I am supporting the devs....
i believe that is the sim of the future....

developers keep the good job....WE ARE WITH YOU!!!!!!!!!

[Flanker35M]

S!

Buzzsaw, you got valid points there. Sure the community could be a bit more contructive but that does not cover the fact that CoD was released in a state that is a bit odd. Considering 5-6 years was used to create it.

I shelled out money for CoD and sure will in future. It has the promise becoming the greatest sim. Just needs a lot of work. So as Damixu pointed out we could use "News Friday" or whatever to get a word from the man himself. No speculations after that. Something like machoo mentioned iRacing does, keeping their customers up to date regarding the game.

Patches are coming and before US release CoD will be in a much different state than now. These 3 patches have cured a lot of issues so dev team is on the right track. Now they just need a solid roadmap to follow and stick to it.

[jermin]

This game still needs a few years of development to be on par with DCS series (despite its outdated engine) or even modded IL2 in my opinion. IL2 took ten years to be developed into a classic flight simulator (still with quite some bugs and engine limitation). And I personally think modded IL2 still surpasses the CoD described by Oleg in all those development updates.

I think the best solution to save current situation is not continuing the development of CoD, because it is way too alpha. To develop this alpha into the ideal CoD in Oleg's mind will take too much time and money. And that's the very things the development team lack most.

However, revamping IL2 1946 will take much less time and fund. 1946 has a still very robust engine. This has been proved by the modding comunity. And i believe most 1946 players will be more than happy to purchase a polished IL2 with all old bugs and engine limitation removed and added brand new features. Actually Team Daidalos has done a very good job. They have accumulated plenty of precious experience in fixing the old bugs and adding new features.

This will get you the most money in the least time. And the players will be satisfied. With the money you get, you can continue the development of CoD without hurry.

Just my 2 cents.

[BrassEm]

Originally Posted by jermin

Just my 2 cents.

You just keep on with your 1846, that will keep you mighty happy.

[{HVY-E}Jinxx]

Well my first impressions of CoD bring back flashbacks of Battle Cruiser 3000.

For those of you who don't remember it, and I'd understand if you didn't, it was a game on the cutting edge of the simulation realm. Hyped up to be the best, most immersive and most dynamic simulation of it's time.

When it hit the shelves, it was filled with bugs. It was due to the fact that the developer was told by the publisher to get it out or loose his funding. He obliged and released a game that was in all respects a "pre-beta". It was so full of bugs that the game was recalled from the shelves after only 3 or so weeks.

He spent the next few months reworking and repairing the game. It was then re-released about 6mos later as Battle Cruiser 3000AD. Unfortunately the damage had already been done and buyers that had flocked to the stores during it's initial release were no where to be seen. The game was a massive flop. Although it had and still has a rather well formed cult following, the game in general has fallen into obscurity.

With all the problems that CoD is having, it is very reminiscent of BC3000.
Just waiting for the fixes or the recall not to mention the actual release here in the states.........

[Capt Backasswards]

Bull Pies!!! This sim will be around for long while. The only reason they pushed it out the door in not yet ready condition was because someone said, 'now or never.' UBI no doubt.

I've bought two copies, one Russian and one English to support the developers. Heck! I might even buy the US release just to piss-off the nay-sayers.

[Gibbage]

If you release a bad game, why should you not suffer the consequances? IL2 CoD is a bad bad game. Released MONTHS before it was finished, and took way too long to develop. Why should jo-public pay to have it fixed?

The thing is, bad games are released all the time. Reviews can tank them, and should. Never reward a bad game, or it will encourage MORE bad games. Oleg and his team are NOT new to this flight sim gig. They have released 5? sims. Whats there excuse this time? Its not like they didnt know better. Its not like they didnt have enough time. So why was this game so amazingly bad at launch?

Also, your forgetting supply and demand. If IL2 CoD tanks, someone will move in to make a supply for the demand. Its happened over and over, and will happen again. SWOTL? Dynamix? Air Warrior? Janes? All have gone, with new comers to replace them. Im sure when the Air Warrior servers were shut down, similar cry's were heard of "support the team or we all dies!!!". But look what we have now? Someone saw a demand, and supplied it.

Just like any company, product, or whatever, I will buy it AFTER its finished, NOT before. If I buy a new car and its not working, I take it back. If I buy a new computer and its not working, I take it back. If I buy a new computer game, and its not working, why would I not take it back? If I know in advanced that something is not working as advertised, why should I buy it?

[David Hayward]

Gibbage, you should not buy the game. You also should not expect anyone in here to give a crap that you're not buying the game.

[mad mark]

This title has all the problems that beset the Sub-sim Silent Hunter V. Again the publisher Ubisoft forced that title out before a lot of functions were completed, and I am afraid to say in doing so has now destroyed any chance of what was a great series ever continuing in the future.
The moding community has done a great deal to fix that game but at its core it has a broken campaign that I fear will never be fixed. And without that it will never get to reach its full potential. Yes we now have most functions working and mods that completely change and improve the user interface but the overall gameplay remain a shadow of its former self and COD's campaign will in all probability also remain a very poor example of what could have been.