Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-12-2011, 08:56 AM
Feuerfalke Feuerfalke is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shado View Post
I bet It all went wrong when Ubi got involved...
Are you saying, it went wrong when the original IL2 was produced? UBI got involved in IL2-development over 12 years ago, so that's exactly what you just said.

Well, anyway, I wonder how people can still delude themselves thinking UBI is the big-bad-devilish-dark-evil company wrecking this release, so they can cheer fanatically and celebrate their unholy orgies over loosing a *lot* of money......
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-12-2011, 09:27 AM
HamishUK HamishUK is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 65
Default

It amazes me that the blame is apportioned to Ubisoft.

I also get the feeling 1C had a major hand in the reelase too. After all they also need the cash!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-12-2011, 09:57 AM
Foo'bar Foo'bar is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Niedersachsen, Deutschland
Posts: 662
Default

This time UBI are the good guys. Why things went to what we have today is resposibility of 1C:Softclub.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-12-2011, 11:08 AM
Feathered_IV's Avatar
Feathered_IV Feathered_IV is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,471
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo'bar View Post
This time UBI are the good guys. Why things went to what we have today is resposibility of 1C:Softclub.
How so?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-12-2011, 11:13 AM
csThor csThor is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: somewhere in Germany
Posts: 1,213
Default

"Corporate restructuring" I believe was the phrase used. Translation: too many suits, too many beancounters, too little creative freedom. That's what the grapevine said.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-12-2011, 11:17 AM
RocketDog RocketDog is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 134
Default

It's pretty clear that the project was mishandled from within the CloD dev team. They seem to have greatly underestimated the amount of work involved in completing all the game elements they wanted and eventually just exhausted 1C/Ubisoft's patience, resulting in them being told to get some sort of bare-bones product out the door and try and deliver at least some income - even if a lot of things were unfinished. That would explain how we ended up with highly-detailed tanks, but a lime-green England and broken or poor FSAA/campaign/weather/sounds etc.

My guess is that Maddox just wasn't equal to the task of managing development and was asked to leave so someone else could take over. I suppose the buck ultimately stops with 1C, who should have removed him from the project earlier, or at least got someone with project management expertise put in the team to take charge of development.

All speculation, of course, but I think it's a likely explanation.

Last edited by RocketDog; 06-12-2011 at 11:19 AM. Reason: Reason? I need a reason?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-12-2011, 11:25 AM
Baron Baron is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 705
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RocketDog View Post
It's pretty clear that the project was mishandled from within the CloD dev team. They seem to have greatly underestimated the amount of work involved in completing all the game elements THEY wanted and eventually just exhausted 1C/Ubisoft's patience, resulting in them being told to get some sort of bare-bones product out the door and try and deliver at least some income - even if a lot of things were unfinished. That would explain how we ended up with highly-detailed tanks, but a lime-green England and broken or poor FSAA/campaign/weather/sounds etc.

My guess is that Maddox just wasn't equal to the task of managing development and was asked to leave so someone else could take over. I suppose the buck ultimately stops with 1C, who should have removed him from the project earlier, or at least got someone with project management expertise put in the team to take charge of development.

All speculation, of course, but I think it's a likely explanation.
They? They? You are joking, right?

Theese freeking forums wouldnt back of from ANYTHING until Oleg and team bend t over and did as they where told regarding every little FREEKING detail, and i do mean EVERY detail. Changing colour of grass (witch, needless to say, came out wrong all the same, naturally, according to those who "knows") doesnt take any time what so ever, does it? Markings, correct size, font and colour of course, on all planes, at the EXACT right spot, dont worry, done in a jiffy. Correct crop marks, no sweat. Clickable cockpit? Sure why not, i`ll do it during my coffee break. Pilot headsize, colour of engine flames, dhu, of course WE know best. Antennas 1 m to far to the front? Do it again and do it right.Dynamic weather? sure, give me, but if i cant run it on my P4 i want my money back or ill report it as a fail/bug/broken to everyone and anyone who will listen, even to those who have better things to do (afaik the dynamic weather isnt broken). Dynamic lighting, why, everyone else is using it so it can take any time, can it? etc. etc. etc ad nauseum. Doesnt matter, what time spent on it, it still comes out wrong according to all the experts. (Honestly, i dont even understand why they bother). Never ever could the team reveal a new feature without it beeing followed by sh*t storm of expert opinions that wouldnt take no for an answer. And it still continuous to this day with the patches. (not talking about adult bug reporting, im talking whining and bitching "i want my money back" mentality) Because u do know, that if it doesnt work on MY pc the game is broken/buggy and needs to be set on fire and forgotten by EVERYONE, right? Doesnt matter if i cant get it to work on lap top (jesus) its still a bust i tell u.

What many of u fail to understand is that this criticism of CoD has been going on for years, literally, and the buggy, like most completely new releases (No, its not warmed over IL2 Sturmovik and if u think that i cant be bothered with "u") was only the straw that broke the camels back. It would have been a lot less buggy, if the community would have been kept out of the loop like in most game developments. Alot less "essential" features = more time to what really counts, "eye candy" can be added/tweaked later.

Iv come to realize that a lot of people here and at other CoD forums isnt happy unless there is something to give "constructive criticism" about, ABOUT EVERYTHING.

Oleg`s/dev teams problem, more than anything, is listening way to much to the community. AFTER the game was released, that would be fine, but not during critical development.

But you are right, Oleg and team promised/wanted to much because they wanted to please the IL2 community. The thing is, that u and everyone thinking the same, actually hold this against them when it didnt turn out as everyone hoped, and that, in my book, is the lowest of low. (sry if it comes across as an insult, really isnt directed at u personally)

So, please, get back to reality. (not just u) The more "real" we want it the more buggy/complicated its gonna be and the more time it takes. Is that something that needs to be said, or is hard to understand? (if u or anyone respond with anything even remotly tuching the subject of AA or FSAA for ex., ill scream. Try looking at the big picture and how everything is connected before responding with something thats been said a gazillion times allredy)

Just for once i wich people would look at what we DO have but something tells me that alot of it is way over their heads in term of complexity so its completely missed or seen as a "given" (comparing BF3 or god knows what else with CoD kind of reinforces that feeling). Instead, look at what we have compared to what we had before, IL2 (not counting bugs thats not really a suprise they are there this early to begin with and lets face it, IL2 is far from perfect or bug free) and not what "you`r" head thought/wished it would be after all these years of fantasising. RoF for ex, was faaaar from perfect on release. its taken them 2, count them, 2 years getting a descent campaign working.

At this point it doesnt matter one bit that u people think u have been "cheated" into buying a beta, cold hard truth i know, but if it really pains u that much to have this game on your pc, remove it and pretend it hasnt been released yet and let those who at least appreciate getting to see the game first hand instead of through friday updates (witch, in all honesty, only gave us headaches) after waiting 5 years, instead of having to hear endless complaints about not being released yet, do thire "thing" so we can get somewhere, anywhere but at this point in time = a Cod we all want.

It takes time, doesnt really matter what "U" (not u in particular) think it SHOULD take, it doesnt make it go any faster, deal with it or move on.


Holy moley, rants off.

Last edited by Baron; 06-12-2011 at 01:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-12-2011, 11:26 AM
TeeJay82 TeeJay82 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Siljan, Norway
Posts: 233
Default

And all of this agony could have been avoided if they had sold it as beta and not a final product
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-12-2011, 01:36 PM
Baron Baron is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 705
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TeeJay82 View Post
And all of this agony could have been avoided if they had sold it as beta and not a final product

Final product? there is no such thing in Flight sims. Never have never will.

Like i said, that doesnt matter now and thats just the way it is.

People can keep on harping on it (to what end i do not know) but it wont change anything.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-12-2011, 10:44 PM
ElAurens's Avatar
ElAurens ElAurens is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Great Black Swamp of Ohio
Posts: 2,185
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HamishUK View Post
It amazes me that the blame is apportioned to Ubisoft.

I also get the feeling 1C had a major hand in the reelase too. After all they also need the cash!
Exactly, all you lot blaming the boys in Paris need to aim your poisoned pens about 2500km to the North East...

Be Very Sure.
__________________


Personally speaking, the P-40 could contend on an equal footing with all the types of Messerschmitts, almost to the end of 1943.
~Nikolay Gerasimovitch Golodnikov
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.