Ouch! It's official, no dynamic campaign.

[Feathered_IV]

Originally Posted by machoo

Are you really surprised that they have no dynamic campaign? They have said all along that playing the Germans is unwinnable....

People have been saying that for 70 years.
But a dynamic campaign doesn't have to end in victory. You could be posted to NG1, withdrawn for refit, listed as wounded or any one of a dozen things.

[kendo65]

Originally Posted by addman

That's what I thought as well but then I thought "this game has been in development for a long time and there are no dynamic campaign at release".

That MIGHT mean:

1. They haven't even started work on one.
2. If they will release a dynamic campaign in an update, it might not be much to write home about since it's not something you do over a short period of time.
3. This time they have put A LOT of emphasise on the multiplayer.

As long as one of the components kicks *ss, I'm on!

It seems very obvious that the devs finally reached the conclusion that the full-featured game was just going to take too long to complete. Oleg stated last year that the game had to be released in 2010 (!) for financial reasons. They need to get some return on their investment.

Given that reality, decisions on what could be left out of the initial release had to be made. With limited time to devote to finishing and polishing a sub-set of features to release standard it seems that quite a few non-essential elements have been postponed - DX11 and the dynamic campaign being the two we know of so far.

The approach is entirely logical. I don't think there's any doubt that in time we'll get these features.

Originally Posted by addman

That MIGHT mean:

1. They haven't even started work on one.
2. If they will release a dynamic campaign in an update, it might not be much to write home about since it's not something you do over a short period of time.

1. Possibly not
2. I'd say it's the reverse - we would be much more likely to get a poor quality version if they'd tried rushing it for the March release.

Their strategy is to focus on the essentials for a releasable game - bug-fixing, flight models, AI, terrain , etc, etc.

Would I prefer DX11 and full dynamic campaign at launch? Of course. But not at the expense of flaws and bugs elsewhere. I think we'll get a solid game initially, with a lot of upgrades to look forward to in the future.

[addman]

Originally Posted by kendo65

It seems very obvious that the devs finally reached the conclusion that the full-featured game was just going to take too long to complete. Oleg stated last year that the game had to be released in 2010 (!) for financial reasons. They need to get some return on their investment.

Given that reality, decisions on what could be left out of the initial release had to be made. With limited time to devote to finishing and polishing a sub-set of features to release standard it seems that quite a few non-essential elements have been postponed - DX11 and the dynamic campaign being the two we know of so far.

The approach is entirely logical. I don't think there's any doubt that in time we'll get these features.



1. Possibly not
2. Quite the reverse - we would be much more likely to get a poor quality version if they'd tried rushing it for the March release.

Their strategy is to focus on the essentials for a releasable game - bug-fixing, flight models, AI, terrain , etc, etc.

Would I prefer DX11 and full dynamic campaign at launch? Of course. But not at the expense of flaws and bugs elsewhere. I think we'll get a solid game initially, with a lot of upgrades to look forward to in the future.

I agree that removal of bugs and polishing is more important than releasing something half-arsed that's why I couldn't give a rats *ss about things like DX11 for example. Also, better to have super singleplayer component and a less then stellar multiplayer component -or the other way around- than two mediocre components.

[addman]

Originally Posted by TheSwede

No I think it was implemented when Forgotten Battles arrived.

Stock Il2 just had scripted campaigns.

That's correct. I just had high hopes that the "game element" of CoD would be better than the previous titles. I know of course that Luthier and Co will stun us with a superbly scripted campaign with some new elements incorporated but still....it bugs me.

I wish there would be some kind of happy medium where dynamic and scripted would blended together and offer the best of two worlds. For example, everything is played out historically day by day BUT you have control over your squadron, loadouts, type of mission to be conducted and maybe some superficial management overall. Maybe one day...

[whatnot]

Originally Posted by addman

I wish there would be some kind of happy medium where dynamic and scripted would blended together and offer the best of two worlds. For example, everything is played out historically day by day BUT you have control over your squadron, loadouts, type of mission to be conducted and maybe some superficial management overall. Maybe one day...

Did a squadron commander have control over mission types? I recon those orders come from above, like "Bomb factory X in Y at 09:30." And then you'd pick up how you'd conduct that in terms of routes, altitudes etc, but dunno.

I would love the concept of a pilot roster to get affected to and career development of some sort. But I'm quite ok with scripted stuff too, just want my CoD and I want it now!

But I haven't seen much dynamic action in the IL-2 campaigns I've played.. I wonder if I've missed all the fun by not clicking the right buttons!? I get an order/briefing, I select layouts and off I go with a pre-determined mission plans etc. I haven't detected dynamic nature in a sense of x-amount of troops & squadrons in the theater that move & perish according to the success of missions around. That's dynamic in my books.