Friday Update, January 27, 2012

[335th_GRAthos]

Originally Posted by hiro

In fact if they gave us the blow by blow, it'd be an insult to our intelligence and it'd be like watching grass grow:
01-30 6 AM: it's not sprouted yet.
01-30 7 PM Yes we've watered the grass seed.
01-31 BIG UPDATE: Oh shiz, a bird just took one of the seeds. Will replace missing seed in 2weeks.
01-31 still waiting on seed order.
02-01 post office tracking isn't working, no update.

ROFL, excellent one Hiro, thanks, I needed that bit of laugh!

Gents, I have a problem wih "sit tight and wait", not because I am impatient but because I do not have the feeling that the internal processes at 1c are working towards the right solution.
Obviously, "Who am I to judge on 1c's internal processes, I have no idea what is going on there": I am just a paying customer!
Before getting this discussion to new levels of flaming hell, the only point I want to make is that we are giving feedback on the various bugs for over three months now (since 17.Oct.2011; http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=27168 v1.05.15950 PATCH BUG THREAD ) and I have hardly seen anything coming back from 1c!
Neither on the level of completion (of the bugs) nor on the level of bugs worked upon.
The only reason I buy this sim is because:
a) it is WWII (otherwise I would be flying DCS A-10 which I own but, do not fly)
b) it is difficult (complex)
c) it is precise (as near to the "real thing")
d) (needless to mention, but I do) multiplayer
While the overall result is worthwhile seeing, the "precision" part still needs work. And 1c's defiance to put in place a transparent process of how they are progressing fixing the technical and flight model bugs is a "mortal sin" for me (as a "paying customer").

It is nice to see "colorful pictures" of an I-16, last time we were shown a preety picture of an IL2 (surprised we did not see anything new about that one this time), a nice 3D screenshot of the game and last a boy playing the "balalaika" but, looking at the future is one thing; I am more interested to see what is done to fix the existing!

As said before, I will buy the sequels anyway, I always buy one or two of them so, no need to worry about me This is the only way to ensure that 1c has a constant stream of revenue, I respect it (as said, I am a paying customer) and I see nothing bad in it.
The only thing that makes me sad is that on average I invest 1000-1500 USD every year on PC hardware but only 40-50 USD on 1c. So 1c gets the most of the "heat" but in reality the guys who profit most from 1c's work is the hardware PC industry...

To those who may want to jump in on the moto "I paid for a working game" I will say, we got more than that, we got a unique simulation, probably too unique for the existing hardware generation. Anyway 1c does not charge us again for fixing the current game.

~S~

[Sutts]

Originally Posted by 335th_GRAthos

The only thing that makes me sad is that on average I invest 1000-1500 USD every year on PC hardware but only 40-50 USD on 1c. So 1c gets the most of the "heat" but in reality the guys who profit most from 1c's work is the hardware PC industry...
~S~

I agree, it's crazy how little we have to pay for the software in comparison.

In terms of progress....I'm also looking forward to them tweaking the FM, CEM etc. as that is my thing. I know they are working on FM fixes but my guess is that the massive graphics rewrite is absorbing much of the effort and they are wanting to nail that one before focussing more on the things that matter to me.

I hope after this next patch we can start seeing a lot of loose ends being tied up by the team, making a more polished product.

Originally Posted by Sutts

I know they are working on FM fixes but my guess is that the massive graphics rewrite is absorbing much of the effort and they are wanting to nail that one before focussing more on the things that matter to me.

Try to think for others too, for a change. Most ppl have various performance issues (usually when effects are near, more planes in dogfight etc.). Including me. You have very powerfull rig and not all of us can afford that (latest quad cores and SLI systems with latest GPUs). OK my rig is pretty decent (i7920 OC to 3.5Ghz, GTX470 TF2 OC to 800 Mhz on core, 6GB DDR3 working at app. 1333Mhz.) but stil have very noticable fps drops (slowdowns) when effects are near (dust, explosions, fire from my engine etc.). Yes, Ive been a beta tester, have a long history dealing with games and software optimisations and I did everything I could to optimise and speed up my PC. I gained smoother game after that but like I said its still very slow on some occasions. And I dont want to play this sim on low to med video settings (just to gain more speed) because then its not CLOD but some outdated sim. I suppose most folks ("ofliners" and "onliners") have even less powerful rigs than mine. Im not saying I cant play this sim but the optimisation of the core engine should be their main task. For now. Later they can deal with FM fixes. Im all for that. With time ppl will upgrade their rigs and with upcoming optimisation of the core we all should be able to play this without (big) issues.

[Sutts]

Originally Posted by Tvrdi

You have very powerfull rig and not all of us can afford that (latest quad cores and SLI systems with latest GPUs).

Nope, wish I did though. I'm in the same boat as you Tvrdi and have to run at 1280 (or something like that) on mainly low settings.

I have an i7 920 2.66Ghz but only 2GB memory and an ancient GeForce GTS 250 1GB card - and running XP too.

I think you misunderstand me....I definitely support them fixing the core performance issues with the graphics rewrite - it will benefit me a great deal I hope. I was just pointing out that the big list of outstanding issues that they appear to be ignoring is probably due to them wanting to get the core fixed first.

Originally Posted by Sutts

Nope, wish I did though. I'm in the same boat as you Tvrdi and have to run at 1280 (or something like that) on mainly low settings.

I have an i7 920 2.66Ghz but only 2GB memory and an ancient GeForce GTS 250 1GB card - and running XP too.

I think you misunderstand me....I definitely support them fixing the core performance issues with the graphics rewrite - it will benefit me a great deal I hope. I was just pointing out that the big list of outstanding issues that they appear to be ignoring is probably due to them wanting to get the core fixed first.

Man... it is just not possible, mkay? Nobody knows what really happened prior to Oleg farewell, but something HAPPENED, and since that time all screenshots look different and result is what you got. It looks like all new things were deleted and poor Luthier had to start over with empty table and unfeasible deadlines and incompetent workforce.

But... not my problem anymore. Reading it here just because of nostalgy, and just to see the SIGNS again, even here, how everything is going to hell...

One more thing to react...

Someone pointed out that WWI planes are so primitive that it is possible to simulate them better and quickly, and WW2 planes are so complicated with their CEM and other stuff, that it takes years...

What about DCS A-10? If your argument is correct, we should not be able to fly it, because it would be still in development... (MG spent already 7 years on WW2). Based on your argument, I would expect simulator of A-10 around 2035...

[Sutts]

Originally Posted by Opitz

Man... it is just not possible, mkay? Nobody knows what really happened prior to Oleg farewell, but something HAPPENED, and since that time all screenshots look different and result is what you got. It looks like all new things were deleted and poor Luthier had to start over with empty table and unfeasible deadlines and incompetent workforce.

But... not my problem anymore. Reading it here just because of nostalgy, and just to see the SIGNS again, even here, how everything is going to hell...

OK, see ya.

[lanling]

I am from Chinese

IL2 COD 下一个版本 battle of moscow

必须是64位

battle of moscow 必须与现在的IL2 COD的版本不兼容

现在版的IL2 COD的建模、损伤、弹道 可移到64位

的新版本中。

不应该有问题。

IL2 COD next version of the battle of moscow

Must be 64-bit

battle of moscow must now IL2 COD version is not compatible

Current version of the IL2 COD modeling, damage, trajectory can move to 64-bit

The new version.

There should be no problem.

Originally Posted by Sutts

Nope, wish I did though. I'm in the same boat as you Tvrdi and have to run at 1280 (or something like that) on mainly low settings.

I have an i7 920 2.66Ghz but only 2GB memory and an ancient GeForce GTS 250 1GB card - and running XP too.

I think you misunderstand me....I definitely support them fixing the core performance issues with the graphics rewrite - it will benefit me a great deal I hope. I was just pointing out that the big list of outstanding issues that they appear to be ignoring is probably due to them wanting to get the core fixed first.

Ahh I think I mistaken u with some other guy...TBH Im at 1920x1200 (was at 1680x1050 before)...Like I said game runs fine on my system as long as theres no effects near or sometimes when the more planes are in low level dogfight...or when memory "leaks"....

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Tvrdi

Ahh I think I mistaken u with some other guy...TBH Im at 1920x1200 (was at 1680x1050before)...Like I said game runs fine on my system as long as theres no effects near or sometimes when the more planes are in low level dogfight...or when memory "leaks"....

TBH particle effects have always had a hit on most systems for most games, my modest machine runs everything I have well on max but it will slow down when smoke effects and dust etc are there.