Battle for Moscow

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

The same is true of North Korea.......point is many institutions go through a change of leadership but the institutions remain the same.

Funny thing is this 'different team' excuse that some try to applied to CoD does not even apply to IL-2.!

In that the IL-2 team even changed over 10+ years of development.

What is the same is the 1C standards and way of doing things..

Which was clear to 'most' when Luither said CoD will follow in IL-2 foot steps wrt updates and sequels.

Sadly some still choose to ignore that statement by Luither.. Because it does not fit well into their agenda.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by Tvrdi

Dear friend, I was there in 2001. When IL2 came out. Its not the same team. Its not the same man in charge. Different times....all whats left is the name IL2 which they desecrated with this **** (in its former and current state).

CoD yet even in it's current state and all it's problems is miles and leages above IL2. The core is alive and kicking, just the stuff around it is rotten. But that is something I can live with. Besides, it is not as if Oleg sat down back in those days and programmed this Sim al by himself. There is a whole team behind him that is still active. If they do not know their stuff by now, then nobody does. The only point where I currently agree is the CTD issue, wished they'd release a hot fix for that, but that is not enough to break the whole sword over the guys.

You may be of different opinion, but that's it, your personal opinion. Don't make it out to be generally accepted when it is quite obviously not.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

CoD yet even in it's current state and all it's problems is miles and leages above IL2. The core is alive and kicking, just the stuff around it is rotten. But that is something I can live with. Besides, it is not as if Oleg sat down back in those days and programmed this Sim al by himself. There is a whole team behind him that is still active. If they do not know their stuff by now, then nobody does. The only point where I currently agree is the CTD issue, wished they'd release a hot fix for that, but that is not enough to break the whole sword over the guys.

You may be of different opinion, but that's it, your personal opinion. Don't make it out to be generally accepted when it is quite obviously not.

Thank you Bewolf, I was hoping someone inteligent would convey what I really wanted to say

Chivas, unfortunately that's an awful lot of the usual ifs and buts. One thing in particular:

>>The biggest problem is some in the community not understanding the difference between what the developer is trying to achieve and a promise in past updates<<

A daft side-swipe, if the truth be told. It could be put another way - the community understands only too well, having made huge allowances both prior to release, during, and since...but grows continually tired of fudged expectations, and partial delivery of results - at best.

It's quite simple - dont promise what you can't deliver. However good your intentions may be. Equally, dont bounce it back onto the users when you fail to deliver, or only partially deliver...and certainly dont go on about better user relations if an initial link is then slowly eroded to the point of nothingness. Best of all, be succinct and truthful with the problems you are encountering, and dont patronise your user base, many of whom are equally as bright and skilled as your own developers, and sometimes developers themselves.

I would have said these points were obvious and basic.

Ben/Falstaff

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by Ben Scammell

Chivas, unfortunately that's an awful lot of the usual ifs and buts. One thing in particular:

>>The biggest problem is some in the community not understanding the difference between what the developer is trying to achieve and a promise in past updates<<

A daft side-swipe, if the truth be told. It could be put another way - the community understands only to well, having made huge allowances both prioer to release, during, and since...but grows continually tired of fudged expectations, and partial delivery of results - at best.

It's quite simple - dont promise what you can't deliver. However good your intentions may be. Equally, dont bounce it back onto the users when you fail to deliver, or only partially deliver...and certainly dont go on about better user relations if an initial link is then slowly eroded to the point of nothingness. Best of all, be succinct and truthful with the problems you are encountering, and dont patronise your user base, many of whom are equally as bright and skilled as your own developers, and sometimes developers themselves.

I would have said these points were obvious and basic.

Ben/Falstaff

There are ALWAYS alot of IF's and BUT's in a development this complex. We were lucky to be involved in the development at all, its just unfortunate many don't have any experience with developing anything, or the knowledge that prototypes ALWAYS evolve until you have a working product.

There's that promise word again lol " Its simple , don't promise what you can't deliver" The developer continually stated there were no promises.

Its unfortunate the development had to be released before it was finished so there are going to be many problems before its done. These points are so obvious that if you can't see them there is no point my debating it with you.

[JG5_emil]

Originally Posted by Fansadox

A community manager is what they need. Lack of info and sporadic feedback is killing them right now.

I thought we had one?