Where are the game elements in this sim?

[ATAG_Doc]

They will never finish this it was designed that way. You will be fed a steady diet of new and interesting things as you progress. Sit back and have a soda. Everything is going to be just fine.

[Strike]

Originally Posted by GnigruH

If there's a competition, RoF is winning it atm.

RoF also has a 2 year head start mind you, and it was just as demotivating to play at release. I'd say even more useless than CloD at release because of the initial performance issues, useless multiplayer, poor-designed gui and quick mission system and few planes to fly. Now it's good, but to me it's more like flying in a painting with all the effects and artistic colours etc.

On the OP topic, I find the simulator more of a sandbox atm. You can set up stuff, test it out, fly, swap planes during missions, practice shooting down super AI rolling buggers. The lack of a dynamic campaign spoils it for my part. Broken multiplayer is testing my nerves though as I'm mostly an onliner. Can't wait to get into a server again and fly versus some human pilots with human behaviour That's where the sim really shines IMO!

[Redroach]

I mean, even Il-2 wasn't really a burner in terms of immersion between missions... no fancy rendered/acted sequences (at least SOMETHING when you were awarded medals/promotions; Battlehawks 1942 already had that with people gathering on your CV and your CO handing you the medals. The "Missing Man" formation in Falcon AT when you die is something else than just texting "Red has been shot down/killed", too.), very conservatively designed menus and simple .tga loading screens with nothing blinking, texting or anything like that. I figure that would take relatively little effort (excluding big-budget rendering/acting, of course), yet add greatly to non-flying immersion. Thus, Il-2 was very simplistic even in 2000 terms, yet CoD v.Alpha2 easily gets below that.
Meh, at least the drawn loading screens look reasonably well.

The more I think about it, the more it annoys me even with respect to Il-2 1946 >.<. Is RoF worth its money in that regard, as well as with respect to realism?

[Tiger27]

Originally Posted by GnigruH

If there's a competition, RoF is winning it atm.

I love ROF, but lets not forget , that they have had a two year head start, there was less meat in that sim on release than in CoD, IMO.

[Tempered]

Originally Posted by Tiger27

I love ROF, but lets not forget , that they have had a two year head start, there was less meat in that sim on release than in CoD, IMO.

Those improvements were paid for by the community over the last two years. I have personally paid them enough to buy any 4 flight sims on the market. Rof is turning out to be a good sim only because the community has given generously.
The problem with this is that there is no support for modification. Any improvement to the game you want to see, you have to pay for, and maybe it will be implemented at some later date.
I would rather support an open for modification flight sim. I am hoping that COD will deliver on that end.

[ATAG_Doc]

Originally Posted by GnigruH

If there's a competition, RoF is winning it atm.

You and a hand full of people say the same thing. What are you worried about? Worried about your investment in time and effort going to waste possibly with ROF'ers testing the waters here and hanging around?? I think that's the majority of the angst people are venting with comparisons to other sims.

[kendo65]

Gamewise and for an immersive experience i think a good dynamic campaign is needed. Luthier mentioned having drawn up a hefty design document for it, but like much else, it wasn't completed (or even started... )

Single missions let you experience the technical elements of the sim, but there is no real human edge to it. Scripted campaigns are better in that regard, but a really well done dynamic campaign can immerse you in something like the experience of a real pilot.

Don't know if we'll get it from the devs or whether it'll be 3rd party? Lowengrin maybe as you say...?

Originally Posted by kendo65

Gamewise and for an immersive experience i think a good dynamic campaign is needed. Luthier mentioned having drawn up a hefty design document for it, but like much else, it wasn't completed (or even started... )

Single missions let you experience the technical elements of the sim, but there is no real human edge to it. Scripted campaigns are better in that regard, but a really well done dynamic campaign can immerse you in something like the experience of a real pilot.

Don't know if we'll get it from the devs or whether it'll be 3rd party? Lowengrin maybe as you say...?

I think we all understand now that what Oleg or Luthier said in the development stage held little water, thats why i take everything that is said now with more than a pinch of salt. We will see how much longevity the game as after the American release, Once that pile of cash as been counted we will then see if they are truly committed to fixing this game.

[addman]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

I think we all understand now that what Oleg or Luthier said in the development stage held little water, thats why i take everything that is said now with more than a pinch of salt. We will see how much longevity the game as after the American release, Once that pile of cash as been counted we will then see if they are truly committed to fixing this game.

A pinch of salt? how diplomatic of you Tree. I'll put it like this, I'm not buying anything associated with 1c/Maddox Games from now on without proper reviews and user input beforehand.

[II./JG1_Wilcke]

I also purchased RoF, oh about 9 months after release and shelved it. I finally started flying it weekly at the first of the year. I do support it by purchasing their addon material ac, etc. Its a fine sim now and getting better especially after the campaign is released in the next update.

These sims are now relics and it takes about two years of ongoing support to bring them to the point where one can say wow!