Thursday Update, April 19, 2012

[jimson8]

Ok, then, still tuning my revamped system that is fairly minimal for this game and I know won't be able to handle it right now.

I'll buy when the new patch comes online.

[HeavyDelta]

It feels like I put 50 bucks in a "future game savings account". Now I'm just waiting for the day I can withdraw the game and play.

Oh well, at least the company didn't just pull up stakes and leave town in the middle of the night.

[=FI=Scott]

Originally Posted by Fjordmonkey

It's one of those cases where Murphy intervenes, excrement hits the rotary atmosphere agitator and such things.

Aka sh*t happens

Well aquainted with that theory but on the subject of sh*t happens, a flight sim with constipation, thats a new one on me. It's in obvious pain and then every so often it goes red in the face, its seems reasonable (and likely) to expect a performance and then....PFFFFT.......ahem.

Somebody, somewhere must be in overall charge of this, and I mean above Luthier? They must be having a meltdown that makes the forum ranters look like baby bunnies.

[Robert]

Thanks B6. It's tough being the messenger. I appreciate the update. Thanks to the development team for trying to get this out the door with few or no errors.

Like everyone else I'm frustrated, but hey. What'cha gonna do?

[pstyle]

Originally Posted by Jatta Raso

B6 please can't you get us a Spit 1a graph? i only fly Spits, the blues have their graphs and reds are left to wonder..

I too would like to see such graphs.

Although i fear they would just be Copies of the 109E3 with minus 5% in all criteria

Hayward, for God's sake belt up.

Tree's comments at least have their roots in reality.

Yours are merely Haywire rent-a-reaction stuff. Plus ca change, as is seldom said in Russia.

[15.Span_Valalo]

jjajajajajj.... more bla bla bla.....

I think that, I will go to buy Ferrary car and.... I will go to run to desert... but, in the desert, have roads to enzo ferrary???? jajaja... CLoD is the same... U will have more news and all great... but dont play him... oooooooooooooooooooooooo...

As for that old canard about 'write your own game or be quiet'...

Buyer: I bought a faulty car/stale loaf of bread/fridge that doesn't work

Seller: Well make your own, or we wont listen to your complaint, ner ner ner ner ner.

What utter piffleydom. As for the rheotrical drivel about code being posted, and looked at, well, piffle puffle....

[Jughead Jones]

Originally Posted by Drum_tastic

I know the team are doing all they can to try and get this working and I believe eventually they will, but Christ on a bike this is boring.

I bought the collector’s edition over a year ago and paid 50 quid for it. Since then I have used it for only a few hours as it is so bad in its current state.

You see these fancy videos that people have made with the engine yet when you play the game it is nothing like that in my opinion. I don’t want a film making tool.

I really, really would just like to know what is wrong with this game and why it is still in such a state a year after it was released. I check the forum regularly but cannot explain why. Hanging on, I guess!

It’s just a stream of constant problems. Sorry to sound negative but that’s the way I feel.

I feel the same way. I especially agree with the lack of playing time due to a very poorly created multiplayer both in R.O.F. and C.O.D. There are just other games in my list that are so much more entertaining no matter how passionate I am about WW2 Aviation.

Do not get me wrong the ATAG server is not to shabby at all but remember the previews for this game promising giant scripted multiplayer missions with gobs of planes. then we get the game and it is here yah go, now make all the content yourself while we catch up on basics that should have been done already. I would rather wait another year or two for a game that is developed and contains a fleshed out 1C created multiplayer campaign that can run for months like in the trailer. Still this is the best we have at the moment and I try to be patient, but I can totally sympathize with your frustration and negativity.

Hayward said:

>>Yes, his comments that the devs should fill him in on the details of the problem are totally realistic.<<

Of course not, he is merely continuing down your rhetorical path with a hop,skip, and a jump. As you well know.

It may not the sanest suggestion, but it's a fair dinkum to link several supposedly minor errors, and ask what's up. As you well know.

>>That's why I'm supporting his demand to see the code. After all, you can't get more detailed than that. I'm sure we'll see a fix right after Tree_UK evaluates the code. <<

Well let me evaluate your code: Fails at run-time. Stack overflow.