But we can still live with it, I guess…

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by Majo

No of course is not, like someone said you have to look a little further.

This is about who is going to maintain this game alive long enough to emulate the il2, forgotten battle, aces, pacific,... path?

Who? The girl? The renegades?...

I do not think so. But like I said before is just my guess.

Salutes Majo.

Well, then let me extend my apologies for misunderstanding you

To be honest, i'm not worried. The game seems to have enough content for launch, certainly equal to the original IL2 version of 2001 but done with a lot more fidelity and complexity. Between learning all the new methods of controlling an aircraft, learning to apply them in combat and having a huge community of mission makers with a mission builder in their hands, we will be busy enough and probably not have the chance of getting bored before the missing stuff gets implemented.

The guys who will carry the new title forward are already here. If a couple of unorthodox happenings in the campaign have the potential to draw a few more people in without derailing what the game's scope is at large, i'm all for it. Some of these new people might not be cut out for flight sims, others might be able to continue onwards and gradually progress to full flight simmer status. I mean sure, i've been flying full switch for years, but i didn't start out that way...we all started somewhere

[Bullethead]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

The guys who will carry the new title forward are already here. If a couple of unorthodox happenings in the campaign have the potential to draw a few more people in without derailing what the game's scope is at large, i'm all for it. Some of these new people might not be cut out for flight sims, others might be able to continue onwards and gradually progress to full flight simmer status. I mean sure, i've been flying full switch for years, but i didn't start out that way...we all started somewhere

I'm an IL-2 virgin but have been doing flightsims since most of you all were in diapers. I did the very first version of Flight Simulator on an Apple II back in 1980, which took 20 minutes to load from a casette tape. I flew every flightsim there was in the golden age of computer gaming, when flightsims were what it was all about. I was flying online in DOS Air Warrior before most folks knew there was such a thing as multi-player games outside of hotseat and split-screen. And I went through Air Warrior, Warbirds, and Aces High.

I never did IL-2 because I got into online flying so early. In those ancient days, flightsim AIs totally sucked and once I'd found the MMO persistant world format of AW, WB, and AH, I never had any desire to play 1-off "deathmatch" games with only a few players. Besides, about the time I got into the MMOFS scene, offline flightsims went into scripted campaigns that were universally corny and had exactly zero replay value.

Unfortunately, these days I live way out in the sticks where I can only get broadband via satellite. Because I require broadband for my job, I can no longer fly online due to satellite's built-in lag of several seconds. As such, I'm once again insterested in offline play.

And to me, that means a fully dynamic campaign. I don't want to be able to change history, I just want the flavor of flying in a huge battle for as long as I live. You know, the way RB2 and OFF do things. Of course, the AI has to be pretty good, too, but that's no longer the problem it was back in the day.

So, until a few days ago, I was VERY interested in COD. I was almost obsessing over it, rereading all my books on the BoB. But then I found out that the dynamic campaign had been scrapped. As such, I will NOT be buying this game unless and until it has a dynamic campaign.

I'm not hard to please on the eye-candy front and flight mechanics front. After all, I date back to when airplanes were just tiny dots no matter how close you were to them, and terrain was a grid pattern with a jagged line along one edge representing mountains, and all controlled via the keyboard at about 5fps. So while I greatly appreciate all such realism efforts by the IL-2 team, I view it as a total waste because offline play is practically nonexistent.

Oh well. Maybe one day Maddox or the community will make a dynamic campaign for COD. That, and only that, will make COD worth my money. And by that time, COD will be in the bargain bin so I'll get a better product for less money than I would by buying it now.

So my $0.02 is that it doesn't matter all that much what eye-candy and FM/DM realism get into a game. What I want is offline play value, and I just don't see that here. And you know what? Even if I had DSL out where I live, I'd still only want COD for offline play because its online play is so limited compared to the MMOFS format I'm used to.

IOW, if the IL-2 community wants converts from other flightsims, it needs to offer them something they don't get elsewhere. It needs either a fully dynamic campaign for offline play, or it needs to go MMO. Without either, it offers nothing to folks who like those things more than they do arguably better graphics and realism. And that, IMHO, is a real tragedy.

[IceFire]

Are scripted handcrafted campaigns not enough to satisfy that single player need?

I find quite a bit of immersion can be built into these and hopefully CoD has more value there than before. Dynamic campaigns often feel somewhat stark to me... maybe I've not seen it done right?

I used to have plenty of fun with the Aces of the Pacific and Aces Over Europe and those had mostly two sentence briefings (except the historical missions).

I think with a large community of mission builders in the short term single player folks won't be bored and Oleg said there were hooks so I wonder how long it will be before one of the third party dynamic campaigns is adapted for IL2.

[Bullethead]

Originally Posted by IceFire

Are scripted handcrafted campaigns not enough to satisfy that single player need?

Absolutely not.

At BEST (which is very, very rare), they're fun 1 time through, but they have zero replay value because you know EXACTLY what to expect. Where's the feeling of having to check six constantly and wonder what you'll be getting into this time when you know full well that the only enemies out there are those you saw the last time you played this mission.

At worst (most of the time), scripted campaigns are so corny that they're unplayable even once. Instead of just letting you be a regular pilot of that time and place, you repeatedly have to do some utterly bogus thing like kill a particular enemy ace flying some ridiculously amped-up uberplane, or rescue "spit girl" (I'd rather rescue "swallow girl"), or what have you, with the fate of the world hanging on your actions, and you have to keep playing the same damn mission over and over until you finally beat it.

Either way, the ONLY replay value of a scripted campaign is trying to beat your previous score by memorizing a pattern of actions based on complete familiarity with the situation. This might appeal to the Nintendo crowd but not to anybody beyond puberty.

Look, I'm a game designer myself, and I tell you, a "hand-crafted scripted campaign" is a complete joke. The "hand-crafted" part is just a marketing ploy to cover up the fact that the devs put next to zero effort into it. It's just a series of linked scenarios with little if any carry-over from one to the next. Anybody with a mission editor can do the same thing. The only thing the devs add is bogus things like your best friend from childhood always going down in flames during this one mission while saving you from some enemies who always magically spawn right behind you no matter how well you check six. Gee, what fun.

So, to me, in the absence of MMO action, a flightsim simply must have a truly dynamic campaign or I won't buy it. If I can't join any squadron on either side, and fly whatever missions come my way (and they're different each time I play that squadron), then forget it. It doesn't matter how pretty the game looks or how realistic it is if there's nothing meaningful to do with the aircraft. I'm not spending $50 to fly a few corny missions and be done with it.

[nearmiss]

Bullethead

I've never enjoyed a computer generated campaign.

I have enjoyed plenty of human created IL2 campaigns. The new FMB tools in the COD should improve all campaigns.

Discussing this is too time consuming for me. It is a topic that has been covered several thousand times over the years from Il2 users.

I'm not alone there are plenty of IL2 users that will not agree with you.

[BadAim]

For the most part, the "IL2 Aficionados" are here for the simulation of WWII flight. After 10+ years, I'm convinced that's what Oleg and his team are here for. If "we" look for casual gamers to subsidize "our" hobby, so what? "They" will be just as happy with their 20hrs of game play as we will be with "our" hundreds. Why all the fuss? By the freakin game for your own reasons, or don't. Either way, it's a pastime. If it's more than that, it will never bring you any joy. (unless your on the development team)

[Bullethead]

Originally Posted by BadAim

For the most part, the "IL2 Aficionados" are here for the simulation of WWII flight. After 10+ years, I'm convinced that's what Oleg and his team are here for. If "we" look for casual gamers to subsidize "our" hobby, so what? "They" will be just as happy with their 20hrs of game play as we will be with "our" hundreds. Why all the fuss? By the freakin game for your own reasons, or don't. Either way, it's a pastime. If it's more than that, it will never bring you any joy. (unless your on the development team)

Look, I'm not dissing IL-2, Oleg, or anybody who plays these games. While I have never owned an IL-2 title myself, I've flown them a few times over the years at friends' houses and have always been very impressed by the overall quality, both visually and mechanically. It's only been the rather limited forms of gameplay of the franchise that have kept me from buying the games. Obviously, the existing IL2 community is quite happy with it, but they're a niche within a niche. While all serious simmers want realism, most of them are willing to settle for a bit less to get the gameplay they want. So until the IL2 franchise puts out that type of gameplay, it won't attract much in the way of new customers, no matter how realistic and graphically stunning it is.

I only got into this conversation because, from lurking here and at Ubi in anticipation of COD, I've noticed a lot of folks (such as the one I quoted in my 1st post here) hoping COD will bring in more customers, thus allowing Oleg to do more IL-2 stuff in the future. Or at the very least, that it would generate enough sales that Ubi would quit dictating release dates that cut planned features from Oleg's games. Being both a potential new IL2 customer and an indy game developer myself, I felt qualified to comment on these subjects. Sorry if I ruffled any feathers.

[nearmiss]

You are going to love it.

Oleg is in charge, you'll not get a loser.

Forget all the speculations, you'll see the BOB COD will come through.

I remember all the times when Oleg released IL2 addons. Always better...

The dynamic campaigns were all created for IL2 by third parties. Oleg acknowledged that as well last week.

The dynamic weather will come along as well. I'm not going to sweat it, the BOB COD will be awesome... and you can look forward to all kinds improvements in patches and addons.

I suspect the Med with Malta, N.Africa,Taranto,etc. will be second theatre, because the aircraft we have will work. We'll get double duty out of the Italian aircraft as well.

We can't overlook the Gloster and Fairey Swordfish