|
|
|||||||
| IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
10-25-2010, 11:26 AM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I totally believe in your capabilities so i don't have many worries about SoW features, but i'm worried a lot about landscape (textures). I still don't have understood if France landscape will be different from England. I think that for the Battle of Britain immersion, would be great if we could see the landscape transition from England to France and viceversa, crossing the Channel. You say SoW landscape will be better than the pics posted above. Ok, but what we have seen untill now is not in this direction, not for me at least. The first SoW ( above), alpha or prealpha, was really amazing. Cockpits are a work of art! Last edited by 150GCT_Veltro; 10-25-2010 at 11:31 AM. 
|
|
#2
10-25-2010, 11:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
i know that a developpement is a concession between rentability and fun feature,
and i'm not a real pilot, and turn on the radio before taking off is not interesting for me, i just don't want to see a BoP/WoP 2 with no taking off, no landing, the fast-paced game terrify me... (i bought IL2-46 and WoP, and WoP takes the dust,) so ok WoP be sold in millions copies but i dont thing a WoP 2 and WoP 3 reach the same sold, sure -1 for me  so it's that why I say i'm trust in you, we can already see that SOW is not BoP 2
|
|
#3
10-25-2010, 09:55 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
It can easily be taken that something isn't going to be implemented because it is too costly and won't pay off, however, sometimes those 98% (or those 2%) like to teach each other what is fun and what is not, and this ends with too extreme and biased reasoning (like "no one will like it" and so on) or even attempts to convince opponent that he does not know what is fun for him. 
|
|
#4
10-25-2010, 11:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
and me i'm the 1% that would like see a briefing map in a hangar with an human avatar, ang go like GTA to my plane, and after the landing getting out my plane, to walk the hangar taking other plane those want quick action generaly just bought a game... the true real passionate player ' the simmer' are the 2% and are willing to invest for your game.... but, i trust in you Oleg, i'm sure SOW will be the new reference to the sim flight
|
|
#5
10-25-2010, 11:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#6
10-26-2010, 07:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
As I've mentioned in my previous posts atleast I am 100% ok not having these functionalities in the initial release or even coming from you. IL-2 has been fantastic without having startup procedures is still fun after years and years. For me it's quite ok to pay extra for this functionality from a 3rd party developer and keep you focused on the essencial parts for making SOW a commercial success for the masses. What I am a bit concerned about however is that if there would be a 3rd party development like for example this startup procedure feature, clickable cockpits and extra aircraft or whatever does that mean that it would be usable in online servers running vanilla SOW? Or will I be isolated running it locally or maybe with mates that have bought the same bits and pieces? Last edited by whatnot; 10-26-2010 at 08:15 AM.
|
|
#7
10-26-2010, 08:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I think what Oleg was implying yesterday is that he'd limit third party's ability to introduce features that would give unfair advantage and ruin online play while giving free rein in other less critical areas. If I was in his position I'd be insisting that third parties use the standard flight model and gunnery model and I'd be verifying the flight characteristics of the new aircraft before release. On the other hand, I'd let them implement as many knobs and switches as they like since these are unlikely to affect the competitive nature of the game.....I believe any engine management features that are going to affect performance have already been provided by Oleg.
|
|
#8
10-26-2010, 09:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think I found a mistake, if it hasn't been mentioned yet.
The landing gear handle on the Bf109 should be in a horizontal position (Ruhe). It should only be in the up position when raising the gear. It is then returned to the horizontal position when not in use. If you don't know which handle I'm talking about it is the same one that Hecke is talking about when talking of circular abrasions. See below: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...ion#post192504
|
|
#9
10-26-2010, 11:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
bailout procedure
Is the bailout procedure the same as in il2? I think that there are a lot of new possibilities with the clickable cockpits.
It would make a big difference if we could click the emergency handle of the canopy. If the plane is in a smooth glide downwards it shouldn't be that hard, but in case your wing was shot off... When the plane would be spiraling down towards the ground, it would be good to experience heavy headshakes. Then it will be a lot more difficult to direct your mouse to the handle. I don't know in how far that could be done for the bombercrew as well... being trashed around in the aircrafts hull, trying to click the escape hatch, could be a terrifying experience. I've read a lot of horror stories that occurred during the bail out. In the chaos sometimes people not only opened their seatbelt, but also the belts of their parachute... The real horror of those aspects can never be put into a combat simulator, but every measure to make a player feel a little bit more powerless in the situation of a bailout is a good one, I think. If I just have to push a button like it was in il2, I feel more like detaching from the pilot than only detaching from the airplane. It contributes to the immersion of a crash, without the need for complex animations of the pilot.
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
