Announcement of the game "IL-2 Sturmovik: Battle of Stalingrad"

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by zapatista

looking at the feedback from the RoF-BS project flight-models, you can already conclude that simulation or realism of flightmodels wont be its strong point. as one early observer put it well recently "..... I've screwed up a couple of approaches (in RoF-BS) and still got her safely to the ground each time, the DCS-P-51 in comparison is a lot more finicky in such situations....."

I LOL'd when I read this. Landing an aircraft in CoD is laughably easy compared to BoS.

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

I LOL'd when I read this. Landing an aircraft in CoD is laughably easy compared to BoS.

you seem easily amused, and as such would be the perfect customer for RoF-BS projects. just start saving your pennies from now on however, because going by their past track record RoF-BS aims to extract around 500$ for the privilege of entertaining you with their fun (but fictitious) aircraft game over the next 2 years

remember, that is also something RoF's rep's let slip shortly after their new project announcement, their aim is not to make something better then the last il2 series sim (CoD), it is their intention to make a game that is more financially profitable to them and their backers (and by its very design the content and features of their new game will be inferior to CoD on most aspects). and as such, neither is it designed to match or compete with complex sims like the DCS series that focus on recreating in the most realistic possible way a ww2 pilot's combat experience.

ahh, and btw you completely missed the meaning of my previous comment, i was comparing aircraft flight behavior in RoF-BS current project to the currently already available information on the next "real il2-sturmovik" installment which is the DCS ww2 sim project (of which the p51 is a part). and in the same way that the previous il2-sturmovik series set the standard in ww2 aviation sim's for the last 10 years, there are all indications that it will continue to do so for many more years in their next project

or were you maybe confused by the use of the "il2 sturmovik" brand name in the RoF-BS current game being developed ? it has NOTHING to do with the old series (it doesnt have the technical information from it, none of the code, none of the designers or researchers etc), and the use of the brand name is simply used as a marketing strategy by the company that owns the brand name to promote sales, it is NOT an actual content description of the product or the creators of the game/program

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by zapatista

you seem easily amused, and as such would be the perfect customer for RoF-BS projects. just start saving your pennies from now on however, because going by their past track record RoF-BS aims to extract around 500$ for the privilege of entertaining you with their fun (but fictitious) aircraft game over the next 2 years

remember, that is also something RoF's rep's let slip shortly after their new project announcement, their aim is not to make something better then the last il2 series sim (CoD), it is their intention to make a game that is more financially profitable to them and their backers (and by its very design the content and features of their new game will be inferior to CoD on most aspects). and as such, neither is it designed to match or compete with complex sims like the DCS series that focus on recreating in the most realistic possible way a ww2 pilot's combat experience.

ahh, and btw you completely missed the meaning of my previous comment, i was comparing aircraft flight behavior in RoF-BS current project to the currently already available information on the next "real il2-sturmovik" installment which is the DCS ww2 sim project (of which the p51 is a part). and in the same way that the previous il2-sturmovik series set the standard in ww2 aviation sim's for the last 10 years, there are all indications that it will continue to do so for many more years in their next project

or were you maybe confused by the use of the "il2 sturmovik" brand name in the RoF-BS current game being developed ? it has NOTHING to do with the old series (it doesnt have the technical information from it, none of the code, none of the designers or researchers etc), and the use of the brand name is simply used as a marketing strategy by the company that owns the brand name to promote sales, it is NOT an actual content description of the product or the creators of the game/program

I'm not confused at all. You're comparing BoS against the best features of every game you can think of, because comparing each game in their entirety does not work so well for you. Landing the aircraft for CoD is too easy? OK, you compare it to DCS instead. DCS has a non-historical map and only a single WW2 aircraft? OK, you compare CoD's aircraft set and map. DCS WW2 doesn't exist yet? OK, you compare to CoD's modded version. And so on.

When DCS WW2 is released I'll buy it. Hopefully it does not have anything as idiotic as CoD's Spitfire Girl.

BTW, you are starting to sound like you are seriously unhinged.

[Les]

The first of the new sims (COD, BoS, DCS) to put out realistic Pacific Theater carrier ops, wins, lol.

But seriously, and going off on a bit of a tangent here, with all the work that goes into maintaining a post IL-2:46 standard of flight model and graphics nowadays, I just don't think there's enough man hours available to cover as much ground as there was in the past. Not while still making a profit anyway.

At the same time, there's still a demand for different theaters of operation and plane-sets. What this says to me is, both/all sims need to focus on at least one map and plane-set for as many different theaters, as soon as possible.

The days of IL-2:'46 and COD style depictions of a huge variety of obscure planes is over, for the time being anyway. In my opinion, BoS and DCS need to focus on creating a diverse base of more limited environments and plane-sets and keep building from there over time.

Regardless of their individual pro's and cons in regards to flight models and graphics and other features (like mission building and multi-player), I think they both/all need to take a 'sample sim' approach to their content in the beginning. With a slower pace of development due to the added complexity of modern sims, they need to give people with an interest in a particular theater, and those who prefer a variety of theaters, something to do while they wait for the overall amount of planes and maps to increase.

It could be argued that kind of diversified approach would diminish the depth of the experience one could have in any one theater, due to the lower number of elements developed for it (initially). But how long would it take to get ten or more different kinds of planes and several maps for one theater of operations anyway? Better to get the whole community, with all it's different preferences, into the sim even at a more superficial level (content wise), than have them wait years just to see their preferred theater at all.

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

Oh, and if anyone out there is waiting/hoping for someone to make the perfect combat flight sim, forget it. They all have and have had their failings and flaws. You'd actually be better off taking a more wholistic approach by playing them all and just focussing on and remembering the best parts of all of them, that way you'd have the best overall combat flight sim experience, it just wouldn't be within the one program.

[MB_Avro_UK]

A good post, Les. We do need to sit back and see the wider picture.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro

[SlipBall]

the ballistics seem to need some work, and the tracers need a serious downsizing they are massive...hey its alfa

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

I LOL'd when I read this. Landing an aircraft in CoD is laughably easy compared to BoS.

this may be true I don't have BOS...but remember this was not the case with the original game. It was the community that wanted more simplified, and so we have aircraft on rails today in clod

[arthursmedley]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

this may be true I don't have BOS...but remember this was not the case with the original game. It was the community that wanted more simplified, and so we have aircraft on rails today in clod

Eh? When did the community ask for this, lol? SlipBall, if you read Luthier's farewell you'll see no one on the dev team ever read any of this stuff let alone the bug tracker! Only Luthier and BlackSix ever dealt in the English language.

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by arthursmedley

Eh? When did the community ask for this, lol? SlipBall, if you read Luthier's farewell you'll see no one on the dev team ever read any of this stuff let alone the bug tracker! Only Luthier and BlackSix ever dealt in the English language.

Arthur I might be wrong and I have to admit I was guessing the why. But I remember the complaints about the shaking, so I assumed that was it when most of the shaking was gone. Anyway it was more exciting to me the way it was in the beginning, although more of a challenge with the landings and gunnery.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

this may be true I don't have BOS...but remember this was not the case with the original game. It was the community that wanted more simplified, and so we have aircraft on rails today in clod

I don't recall any of that, and I've been reading this forum since before the game was released.