![]() |
|
|||||||
| IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games. |
| View Poll Results: What should be IL2: CoD's primary focus? | |||
| Cliffs of Dover should focus on realism |
|
250 | 95.06% |
| Cliffs of Dover should focus on accesibility |
|
13 | 4.94% |
| Voters: 263. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
lmao, must be one of the devs who wants to go on Holidays!
__________________
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
I voted of course for realism.
But, in fact, this discussion should not even exist, as there is always the option.... for options in the game setup. But the problem is that the "kikools", who think they're the best, cannot simply stand the fact of not flying with all the "realism" options enabled, even if it is not realistic at all, because of their ego. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
I vote for Scalability.. I want the game to be commercial success first and for emost. That will drive future funding and development. FM's and performance online I want the server to be able to make sure everyone is on a level playing field..but if customer XYZ wants to play in arcade mode offline or on an arcade mode server and that allows thousands or tens of thousands in more sales then I'm all for adding those options to the realism panel.. I won't use them, but I don't mind them being there.
__________________
MSI P67A-65D Intel i5 2500K @ 4.2 Gig 8 Gigs Corsair DDR3 1600 RAM XFX 6970 Video Card Win7 64 Bit Home Ed ATI 12.3 Driver Package WD Caviar 7600 RPM HDD ATI CCC at DEFAULT settings |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
1. Realism is the default. A benchmark.
2. Lack of understanding of what real is, is met with explanation and education. 3. Accessability is the process of permitting the option of disabling or simplifying aspects of realism which is complicated, difficult or just inconvinient. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
from my Side:
this Simulator must be fully realism. For me its very import that you can fly your Plane truly as it was in 1941 (Technical/Physikal). Realism is the only Reason that i am using this IL2 Series. Accessibility should be only how it be in real life as Pilot. By the Way: I think Luthier will do his best, to bring IL2 Cod to the next Simulator Level. Also will pay small prices if they need for continuing Developing to supply the Developers |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I think a lot of people have thought of accessability in meaning forcing on all players the opposite of realism to make it easier.
__________________
XBL GT: - Robotic Pope HyperLobby CS: - Robot_Pope |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Let's back to mechanical tachometers and realism settings!
Now that they modelled both mechanical and electricl, they can set an easy instrument mode and a realism instrument modes... there's room for all... |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
+1
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ditto - We've all been newbies (In fact often I feel I still am over the channel - especially in red planes!!) - so give them options - it also means the devs hard work on analogue dials does not go to waste - any maybe they can just dampen the flutter down - (at the same time as they fix our clod-hopping mixture problems - or if we are mishandling the engines somehow give us some clues .Though the fact that even when I jump into a free flight over the channel it bumps imediatley if I am not on full throttle does seem to indicate some other problem - but thats off topic - sorry).
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
realism? Would that include restrictions on rear view ability even when loosening shoulder straps. Heads on swivels?
Lets face it, 6DOF, mouse lookaround and check yer six POV hat assignments are equally unrealistic with little penalty for being 'unstrapped' in combat even in full switch! Just wondering how far people would be prepared to go or do they have a cut off point? In which case the arguments 'for and against' are not quite so black and white! |
![]() |
|
|