Friday Update, February 10, 2012

[icarus]

Originally Posted by Chivas

Wow, sometimes I don't know what the hell your talking about. I don't know how you figure its going to take another ten years for COD to evolve, I'm taking about the whole new series. Your not going to waste anymore of my time.

Oh, sorry dude, I thought you meant CoD only. Because that would be crazy.

Ten years for a series is reasonable, however the kind of thing that Il-2 did over the last ten years is getting harder and harder to do. Series are becoming more and more separate games now because technology is evolving so fast. The days of running the same graphics engine etc. for ten years are over.

[Feathered_IV]

Chivas, I wasn't thinking about the NG thing at all, more about trying to represent the entire pacific conflict from Pearl to the Home islands without fleshing out any particular area. Jumping later to the questionable content of 1946, then trying to give the Pacific Fighters treatment to Korea, before being reigned in to assume control of Cliffs, then zooming off on a tangent with the Moscow expansion. I just don't reckon that following through is one of his strengths. Maybe you feel that it is though.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV

Chivas, I wasn't thinking about the NG thing at all, more about trying to represent the entire pacific conflict from Pearl to the Home islands without fleshing out any particular area. Jumping later to the questionable content of 1946, then trying to give the Pacific Fighters treatment to Korea, before being reigned in to assume control of Cliffs, then zooming off on a tangent with the Moscow expansion. I just don't reckon that following through is one of his strengths. Maybe you feel that it is though.

I agree in some respects, but you have to draw a line at some point. It would have been almost impossible to complete a major portion of Pacific Theater, at some point you start losing money as the return won't cover the cost. The same happened to COD, and they are now trying to finish the game engine, finish COD, and build BOM. They're barely holding their heads above water atleast until the game engine is finished. I also agree that the development won't completely flesh out COD, but they will be providing the SDK, so we should see COD evolve in every imaginable way by talented people in the community, and third party groups.

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV

Chivas, I wasn't thinking about the NG thing at all, more about trying to represent the entire pacific conflict from Pearl to the Home islands without fleshing out any particular area. Jumping later to the questionable content of 1946, then trying to give the Pacific Fighters treatment to Korea, before being reigned in to assume control of Cliffs, then zooming off on a tangent with the Moscow expansion. I just don't reckon that following through is one of his strengths. Maybe you feel that it is though.

I agree. Project management, or lack thereof, was the real issue of this series along the last 7 or 8 years.

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV

Chivas, I wasn't thinking about the NG thing at all, more about trying to represent the entire pacific conflict from Pearl to the Home islands without fleshing out any particular area. Jumping later to the questionable content of 1946, then trying to give the Pacific Fighters treatment to Korea, before being reigned in to assume control of Cliffs, then zooming off on a tangent with the Moscow expansion. I just don't reckon that following through is one of his strengths. Maybe you feel that it is though.

There may be factors for 1c that we have little information about. I read that Russia has funding and tax breaks available. For game developers who design games that can teach the population about Russian history. We all recall the photo of Dmitry Medvedev on the control stick...so bom, who knows what's at play here.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by icarus

Oh, sorry dude, I thought you meant CoD only. Because that would be crazy.

Ten years for a series is reasonable, however the kind of thing that Il-2 did over the last ten years is getting harder and harder to do. Series are becoming more and more separate games now because technology is evolving so fast. The days of running the same graphics engine etc. for ten years are over.

Ok, no problem, although I don't think that running the same game/graphics engine is a problem if its easily expandable. Oleg talked about making the new game engine future proof, by making it modular. As in the graphic engine module could be rewritten to incorporate new tech, without overly effecting all the other game engine modules. In Olegs first IL-2 game engine everything was mixed together so much that changing one thing caused major bugs, and problems in other code, features etc. Although it made it much harder for modders to hack the code. That isn't applicable this time as the developer is releasing the SDK.

Regarding CLOD as I predicted some time ago the game is effectively dead, with no plans to add any more aircraft, no dynamic campaign or weather all we can hope for is a fix to finally make the game work without crashing. Maybe if the devs are feeling generous the FM and DM's will get a makeover but other than that the game is finished, to me Luthier as made it quite clear the future is BOM. CLOD was just a way to finance BOM.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

Regarding CLOD as I predicted some time ago the game is effectively dead, with no plans to add any more aircraft, no dynamic campaign or weather all we can hope for is a fix to finally make the game work without crashing. Maybe if the devs are feeling generous the FM and DM's will get a makeover but other than that the game is finished, to me Luthier as made it quite clear the future is BOM. CLOD was just a way to finance BOM.

I fear you are right, but hope you are wrong. This update left me feeling they have moved on. Hope I'm wrong. If you are right they've lost me as a customer for good. There is no way I would trust a company that takes your money and doesn't finish their work (especially as unfinished as CoD is). Not in my home or online.

Only a sucker would buy BoM if CoD doesn't get fixed.

Originally Posted by icarus

I fear you are right, but hope you are wrong. This update left me feeling they have moved on. Hope I'm wrong. If you are right they've lost me as a customer for good. There is no way I would trust a company that takes your money and doesn't finish their work (especially as unfinished as CoD is). Not in my home or online.

Only a sucker would buy BoM if CoD doesn't get fixed.

Their decisions, their mistakes, their (possibile) bankrupt (although, russian sim "market" is big, *wink* *wink*)....btw, BOB theatre is well covered now with most (important) planes available (who participated in the BOB battle)...as onliner I dont care about offline campaigns but I feel your bitter....I hope they will optmise the graphics and to fine tune the FM and DM.

[mazex]

Originally Posted by icarus

Only a sucker would buy BoM if CoD doesn't get fixed.

Wait - your'e calling me a sucker? What!

Seriously - let's face the fact that the project got too long, they restarted it too many times and then the people funding it forced it out on the market a year before the developers where ready... So what do we as the small simulation community earn by "punishing" the team for that? Sure, they have probably made a lot of bad decisions to end up with a half finished product when the publisher pulled the blanket - but really, I spent $50 yesterday buying iRacing just to try it. That kind of money is not the end of the world, it it? It would be another thing if my new Audi would just break down and Audi said: "Sorry, we where forced to release it before it was done...". In this case let's be a bit forgiving with the poor sods over there in Russia working their asses of to continue delivering WWII simulators. How many others are there?