![]() |
|
IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator. |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Comparing quality btw a RTS, a 3rd person shooter and a WWII flight sim is silly in itself too. No one is delusional voting for SOW. The track record of the developer delivering one of the greatest flight sims of all time is reason enough for SOW to be a voting option. You also fail considering another sim that came out right after IL2 with far more money and resources completely failed to deliver a sim anywhere close to IL2's quality. Also, the developers behind Starcraft II and Mass Effect 2 couldn't deliver a sim as good as the nearly 10 year old IL2 if they decided to develop one. They don't have the knowledge and resources needed to make an accurate WWII simulator. They could make a WWII GAME, but not a simulator that could compete with the detail, accuracy, and realism that Maddox games will achieve. It's already proven by other developers trying to compete with far more money and resources and failing big time. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'll probably play a few of the games on this list including ME2 and Deus Ex 3, but I don't think I've anticipated a game as much as SOW, waiting so long for this thing to be done.
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Anyway, why do you care? We're not 'patting ourselves on the back' for 'subverting' a poll. We're just supporting this game, demonstrating our appreciation. Maybe if it comes 3rd in the poll, a bunch of people will want to know what the hell this SoW:BoB thing is anyway, and who knows, perhaps a few of them will even buy it. Does that offend you so much? Last edited by TheGrunch; 12-21-2009 at 05:53 AM. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Tanner,
You are right, we flight simmers are idealists who still believe that better ideas and passion can beat the brute force of big budgets … but as you know this is delusory, and it did never happen in the real world … Regards, Insuber |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Voted & it was in 3rd place....
![]() |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Voted, still No.3:
Star Wars: The Old Republic - 1697 23.94% Star Trek Online - 1394 19.66% Storm of War: Battle of Britain - 894 12.61% Red Orchestra 2: Heroes of Stalingrad - 469 6.62% World of Warcraft: Cataclysm - 357 5.04% ARMA 2: Operation Arrowhead - 283 3.99% Battlefield: Bad Company 2 - 260 3.67% StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty - 243 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
C'mon guys, VOTE for heaven's sake!
We already have DCS: Black Shark on top of the 2009 Games, now we only need Storm of War: Battle of Britain in the Most Expected position (by the way, I think they forgot DCS: A-10C on that list...) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
![]() http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?t...c&official=all Its safe to assume that this generates some interest in Sow:BoB too... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
When it comes to what money can do for a flightsim, I think the biggest impact has to be on marketing.
One should think that Microsoft had enough financial resources to create the best WWII flightsim ever, especially considering their experienced staff with a lot of flightsims behind them. But they didn't, and IL-2 is still considered to be the best WWII-sim. If you walk into a gaming store, the IL-2 titles are almost not promoted, and allways in the bargain-bin. Not very surprising for a game this old, perhaps, but nevertheless strange, considering it's strong position within the combat flightsim community. But that community is, as it has been pointed out, quite small. And big companies like MS is probably not able to make money on it. A small company like Maddox Games are more likely to be able to earn a profit. And create a new benchmark simulator in the process. Skarphol |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
S!
Voted. SOW was on 3rd place.. |
![]() |
|
|