BoM should have playable demo

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by Kongo-Otto

Oh my God such an tragedy.
In every other business on this planet people are fired for less than releasing a such a crap Game. So what?
They would really deserve it and i couldn't really care less about it!

And I'm sure they won't give a crap if you are angry about COD. Either they fix it and we're all happy, or they don't and they lose their jobs. The constant complaining from the likes of you will not change anything.

[hiro]

I'd agree with the OP, but the main issue with the game is the core of it needs to be fixed.

FM needs work, frame rate / crashing needs to be fixed, sounds, gunnery, some physics . . .

games that have kick arse demos (like COD) already have a working core code for the game . . .


If the core isn't working, the demo will have the same issues as the full release.


But if the core was working fine, it would be a great idea to have 1 fighter from each side, 1 bomber from each side, and showcasing ground attack, fighter, bomber vs fighter and fighter vs bomber etc as a demo.



---


Also lots want ROF's pay per plane policy. IMO, thats just incomplete. ONe plane is fun, but releasing a whole theater with a several planes, vehicles, ground stuff, ships, maps . . . is better.

You get more to play with and it takes alot longer to really explore.

I'd rather have the devs use that style as they are used to it (from 1946) as opposed to ROF's style.

Both methods sell well, its like a 30 min TV shows that are great, and 2 hour epic movies. Its just the methods, story, plot, presentation, are vastly different if you are sipping 30 mins at a time vs gulping 2 hours at a time . . .

If devs took a ROF style, they'd have sit down and set il-2 releases like that . .. but its better for them to have less on their plate.

That said, besides Moscow sequel is going along with the 1946 formula anyways . . .