Mods discussion, links, etc

[KaBoom]

Do I need to remind you again,with a quote from the author AndyJWest...
what the thread was suppose to be about

The thread was not a "state your opinion" thread on Mods
Why would you assume it was

I suggest go and reading what I posted and quoted to begin with,
more thoroughly this time before posting

Also,go read the authors first post

BTW,nobody said or posted anything about it being a save the mods world thread... let alone let's bad mouth mods and those who have made any

It seems no matter what is posted,it is either to lay blame,insult or for some to defend

I find it all a little bit absurd to say the least
Quite humorous to see how offensive Mods are to some people

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

I didn't read anywhere that this was only a 'Mods save the world' forum.
So why I'm not supposed to write my oppinion about mods here?

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

I will not let anyone forbid me to say my oppinion... nowhere! Especially in a place, where so much people expressed their oppinion too. Why should I keep quiet then, huh?

I'm sorry for the author, who's kind request was for nothing. But I will not take that on my head, boy!

[Azimech]

I have the feeling a lot of modders may have wanted their stuff to be included but if it's rejected due to sub-standard work, it may hurt the ego.
On the other hand stuff that's looks good but is much more complex and would cause a huge fps drop on old machines, isn't it time for some users to upgrade?

And I understand the position of Maddox Games/1C/TD, lowering the standards for inclusion of mods will make some people happy, it will piss off a huge amount of people, and will start a new endless discussion. Where would it stop? It's a slippery slope. Better to accept certain parts of the game that are outdated but at least familiar and characteristic, than to suddenly change something on a fundamental level that could divide the community again.

But I would like, and please read "like" not "demand", to read what the difficulties are for inclusion of some mechanism that looks inside a folder with custom, user installed, sounds. If they're not there, stock is used. That way it would be the user's own responsibility, no-one would have to pay royalties or provide tech-help. I used to play Doom II with "NI" coming out of my handgun, monsters sounding like John Cleese and other Holy Grail sounds. Hilarious.

[_1SMV_Gitano]

Originally Posted by Azimech

[...]
On the other hand stuff that's looks good but is much more complex and would cause a huge fps drop on old machines, isn't it time for some users to upgrade?[...].

The game has to be able to run on machines with the minimun specs reported on the box. I guess a 100 MB cockpit would turn the game into a slide show even with minimun settings.

[Azimech]

The box... I have the DVD here that was printed in 2006.

Pentium III or Athlon 1 Ghz. 64 MB 3D Card. 512 MB memory.

That *severly* limits development, these values were common 10 years ago.
I know of no-one who uses such ancient crap for playing IL2 (the ones who do, should get themselves a foam baseball bat and hit themselves on the head with it). I see dual core machines placed on the sidewalks as garbage nowadays.

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Originally Posted by Azimech

I know of no-one who uses such ancient crap for playing IL2 (the ones who do, should get themselves a foam baseball bat and hit themselves on the head with it). I see dual core machines placed on the sidewalks as garbage nowadays.

What an arrogant attitude that is.
I occasionally play it on a Mobile Athlon 64 with a ATI Radeon 9700 And I don't want to miss that possibility.
Ist still remember very well that day, as 1CM introduced the 'new clouds' and I wasn't able to play it on my 800MHz P4 with Geforce 4 anymore. I was quite upset. And did you know, there are still people playing it via 56kb modems!

You should know, that the world isn't everywhere as shiny as at your home.

The stock standards won't change. Period.

[Artist]

My 2 cents for the two discussions:

- Quality of Mods: many a thousand dillettantes are required for one or two true masters to emerge. You cannot have the latter without the first.

- System requirements: Many more people simply cannot afford what is just ordinary standard to many.

I am glad about all the modders, glad about the quality-filter provided by TD and glad about TD's "The stock standards won't change" policy: If offers me and everybody else the freedom of accessibility and choice.

Artist

[WWFlybert]

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

What an arrogant attitude that is.
I occasionally play it on a Mobile Athlon 64 with a ATI Radeon 9700 And I don't want to miss that possibility.
Ist still remember very well that day, as 1CM introduced the 'new clouds' and I wasn't able to play it on my 800MHz P4 with Geforce 4 anymore. I was quite upset. And did you know, there are still people playing it via 56kb modems!

You should know, that the world isn't everywhere as shiny as at your home.

The stock standards won't change. Period.

you must mean 800mhz PIII .. P4 started at 1.4Ghz in November 2000, though those were worse that even 733 mhz PIII 133 FSB

by Summer 2002, there were some nice P4 machines up to 3.06ghz and DDR RAM rather than the original RAMBUS only P4 / 423 socket

I run a 2.4ghz P4 that has 512MB RAMBUS with a 7600 GS 512MB AGP 8x card (4x on my machine ) and need to run 1024 x 768 res and not highest settings to get playable framerates and only occasional drawing pauses .. I'd add RAMBUS but it's terribly expensive .. so ..

Just got a used 3.2 HT (and can get a 3.6 HT P4 cheap for it too ) P4 with 2GB DDR, new 500GB HDD and a 1GB PCI-X x16 nVidia 430 card (less than $80) .. whole deal cost me $300 .. this is nearly a 6 year old machine

RECOMMENDED specs on IL-2 1946 box is 2.4ghz processor, 1GB of RAM and 128MB video memory (which, IMO is absurd spec these days)

so while I am quite poor, I think holding to stock minimum specs of machines 8-10 years old for official releases is unnecessary and makes for lower quality, considering that if a person is still interested in flying IL-2 1946, they most likely have a computer and graphics card exceeding the recommended specs .. even 5 year old laptops designed for gaming have recommended specs and I suspect very few would be left out if IL-2 1946 no longer run acceptably on PIII systems .. Win98 being now unsupported and PIII, except perhaps 933 or 1ghz 133mhz FSB not very able to run WinXP .. which itself will be unsupported in less than 3 years

just my opinion of course, however I'd prefer some things in IL-2 be higher quality, or have some large aircraft, gunner cockpits and pilot cockpits that might moderately exceed current poly and texture limits, than to cater to such low minimum specs

56k modems ? .. must be very tough for those people to even download the updates ..