Friday 2010-10-15 Dev. update and Discussion

Blackdog_kt · #1 10-16-2010, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox

I will soon tell it. We integrating interface now. But its not a time to anounce. We are doing by reqest of publisher.
Anyway there will be still the possibility to integrate to another systems by creative users and third party.

Current limit is 128 players.
It will be finally decided later to cut the amount for the beginning or keep 128. Will let you all later.

Interesting.

On one hand, it seems that the multiplayer interface is decided by the publisher. I'm just theorizing here but i guess it will probably be integrated with a copy protection method and to be honest, i dislike mandatory online requirements unless they are a "once in a lifetime" online activation, or i get something worthy in return that enhances the gameplay experience. I want to be able to play a game i paid for whenever i want, not whenever my ISP or some cables allow me to.
On the other hand, since it will be possible to add 3rd party tools for online server browsing, maybe i'm totally mistaken (hopefully) and things are not that hard-coded. Maybe it's not DRM and multiplayer rolled into one, but just an integrated lobby browser for multiplayer, which would be fine.

The most positive note of course in all the above is the player limit. Having 128 players with that level of detail will be an immense experience

Osprey · #2 10-16-2010, 11:39 PM

As long as Punkbuster aren't involved. Awful awful software and hideous support and help from the vendors. You can have a legal game etc and still get problems because of innocuous programs which are nothing to do with the game.

Ekar · #3 10-17-2010, 12:09 AM

Thanks Oleg/Winny for your comments #page 31.

Cheers,
Ekar

Skoshi Tiger · #4 10-17-2010, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

Interesting.

On one hand, it seems that the multiplayer interface is decided by the publisher. I'm just theorizing here but i guess it will probably be integrated with a copy protection method and to be honest, i dislike mandatory online requirements unless they are a "once in a lifetime" online activation, or i get something worthy in return that enhances the gameplay experience. I want to be able to play a game i paid for whenever i want, not whenever my ISP or some cables allow me to.
On the other hand, since it will be possible to add 3rd party tools for online server browsing, maybe i'm totally mistaken (hopefully) and things are not that hard-coded. Maybe it's not DRM and multiplayer rolled into one, but just an integrated lobby browser for multiplayer, which would be fine.

The most positive note of course in all the above is the player limit. Having 128 players with that level of detail will be an immense experience

In principle I think I agree with you, though to be honest the online activation etc that has been put into titles from DCS and Rise of Flight havent really been too bad IMHO.

Cheers!

Blackdog_kt · #5 10-17-2010, 05:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger

In principle I think I agree with you, though to be honest the online activation etc that has been put into titles from DCS and Rise of Flight havent really been too bad IMHO.

Cheers!

Actually, i don't have either one of those titles because of their activation methods and i haven't regretted it yet. If it takes 5 years of waiting before i can fly a sim the way i want to i'm perfectly content with it, assuming it hasn't been surpassed, i totally lose interest in it and end up not ever buying it by that point. I guess the effect on sales is obvious

There are a lot of arguments pro and con, but in the end when viewing entertainment software purely as a product and not something more (which is what the distributors do), i think we're entitled as users to apply the same criteria of judgement and kick up a storm if we're not getting value for money, added value to compensate for drawbacks of certain features or, as is more often the case, if the product's value is artificially diminished by features clumsily tacked on at the publisher's demand, long after the original coding work is done and usually with little thought on how it will affect the software's usability.

I think Oleg's mentality on the issue is pretty close to what most of the users agree with, as evidenced by one of his more recent interviews on SimHQ, but sadly these issues are usually a publisher decision. For now, i'm just being happy about the progress of SoW. If someone outside Oleg's team manages to screw things up for us it will really be a pity, both for us and for the developer team as sales do tend to suffer when the potential customer runs the risk of being locked out of a perfectly legally purchased piece of software.

I'd hate to turn a perfectly good thread into a DRM flamefest (not implying anything about you, it just tends to happen a lot when things like that are mentioned), so i'll stop here. However, it's an issue that should be discussed somewhat as we near the release to get a feeling of the community's thoughts on the matter and avoid being faced with a "done deal, take it or leave it" scenario we might not agree with. Maybe a separate thread in free-form discussion to give us the main trends on what people think, so that we could then compile them into a poll would be a good idea.

150GCT_Veltro · #6 10-17-2010, 09:16 AM

About landscape, we'll have the same textures for both France and England?

T}{OR · #7 10-17-2010, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger

In principle I think I agree with you, though to be honest the online activation etc that has been put into titles from DCS and Rise of Flight havent really been too bad IMHO.

Cheers!

God I hope Oleg doesn't mess it up and follows RoF path. This was a terrible mistake and besides myself, I know a lot of people that skipped that game until the DRM was brought down with one of the patches. Having to pay for additional planes is also a massive PITA.

DCS used irritating Starforce with limited activations, but if I have to choose between the two - I would go with DCS.

domian · #8 10-17-2010, 10:21 AM

I play RoF and the protection is no problem at all.

Since the update to 1.12 or 1.13. you can play offline without internet connection. So i don´t know why people have a problem, with software developers, which only try to protect their intellectual property.

wake up buddy!

the time without any protection is over!

Flanker35M · #9 10-17-2010, 10:24 AM

S!

Really can not dislike RoF protection, zero inconvenience for me and there is the offline option as well now. Best is I do not need the DVD to be in the drive while I play so can keep it safe on the shelf.

FG28_Kodiak · #10 10-17-2010, 10:35 AM

@Foo'Bar: Die Farben der durch die Eisenbahn geteilten Felder wurden geändert. Das Problem ist das sich die Textur neben den Gleisen nicht ändert, momentan könnte man meinen die Gleise befinden sich auf Stelzen so dass der Bauer ohne Probleme unter ihnen mit seinem landwirtschaftlichen Gerät durchkommt, dabei stellen Gleise normalerweise ein großes Hindernis dar.

(Habs mal auf Deutsch geschrieben, mein Englisch ist für solche Fälle einfach zu schlecht)