Fresh stuff from sukhoi.ru (Discussion)

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by kendo65

To be honest Klem, I think Philip is saying pretty much the same thing:

2) We do not plan to develop new content for CloD [rewritten for clarity]

is effectively the same as

"CloD is being abandoned, only to be improved collaterally with what ever changes happen to BoM"

Abandoned the same way IL-2 Forgotten Battles was abandoned..

As in once they made the sequel (that included IL-2 Forgotten Battles) the support (patches, new content, free updates of planes, maps, etc) moved to the sequel.

Put another way 1C did not continue to provide support (patches, new content, free updates of planes, maps, etc) for IL-2 Forgotten Battles once the sequel to IL-2 Forgotten Battles came out.

Which is the method 1C has said they are going to use with CoD on several ocations..

Yet a hand full of people 'choose' to ignore that fact.

[FG28_Kodiak]

Some people don't understand the difference between content and engine. Cliffs of Dover uses a modular system, there is the core engine and the bob content at the moment, but it should not be the problem to add a BoM content (Map, Groundunits and Planes) to the core engine. Even if there is a MMO based on the CloD-engine, they can use the Map, Groundunits and Planes independent from it in a sequel. The only way to get the development cost of the CloD-engine back, is to publish new addition for it.

[kendo65]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

Abandoned the same way IL-2 Forgotten Battles was abandoned..

As in once they made the sequel (that included IL-2 Forgotten Battles) the support (patches, new content, free updates of planes, maps, etc) moved to the sequel.

...

The main difference is that Forgotten Battles and all the other titles were essentially complete and had achieved their (more limited) goals before the series moved forward.

The Battle of Britain was such a well-defined historical engagement with a distinctive atmosphere and varying strategic/tactical goals that any successful simulation needed to provide the capacity to recreate both individual engagements and give some feel of the overall campaign by including a career mode. The potential for exciting gameplay was HUGE.

There is good evidence that the developers goals for the game were to provide something along these lines. Luthier had a detailed (several hundred pages if I recall) design document for the planned dynamic campaign.

The enforced (?) early release and subsequent difficulties obviously killed any possibility of this being completed to schedule. We have instead got a threadbare, dryly technical simulation of the aircraft that took part in the battle flying over a mediocre (in my opinion) map of the area of operations. There is next to nothing in the way of gameplay, missions are incredibly few in number and limited in scope, the much-needed dynamic campaign is unfinished, historical atmosphere is negligible. The game fails totally in recreating any feeling of what it would have been like to take part in the Battle of Britain.

Compared to the original vision and any reasonable estimation of what a decent BOB sim should be able to do COD is woefully incomplete. And here is the main point - the fact that it is no longer the developer's intention to supply those missing elements does mean that the original vision and intention for COD has certainly been abandoned. We have the planes and a map. We don't have a decent BOB sim and we aren't going to get one.

Backdated game engine tweaks from BOM won't change that fact.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by kendo65

The main difference is that Forgotten Battles and all the other titles were essentially complete and had achieved their (more limited) goals before the series moved forward.

So what part of 1C saying they are going to finish CoD before the sequal are you still struggling with?

[kendo65]

Did you even read my post?

If so you certainly didn't engage with any of the main points.

If you want to have a discussion about it then at least deal with the points raised instead of playing your usual games.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by kendo65

Did you even read my post?

Not only read it but went as far as to quote it..

Hope that helps!

[kendo65]

I've stated my opinion already.

You're entitled to your point of view Aces.

Nothing more to say.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by kendo65

Nothing more to say.

Promise?

[philip.ed]

AoA, they say they will finish with it. It's not a finished game by an offliners standards like mine and Kendo's certainly.

There's a big difference. Before you and Force started arguing, my last post corroborated what Kendo just wrote to show that the situation between Il-2 and CloD is quite different.

Here's the original GameSpot review: http://uk.gamespot.com/il-2-sturmovi...eview-2829773/

Now look at CloD's: http://uk.gamespot.com/il-2-sturmovi...eview-6308918/

The score has more than halved. So a sim that scores so low is worthy to proceed with? It's improved since then, but only so that it can run better and look better. The content that's been added is extremely minimal.

This, really, is our point. Unless this sim morphs into the perfect BoB sim with the next patch, the team's position with BoM won't be as tangible as it could have been. I really want BoM to do well. I think the SDK can solve a lot of issues, but you're fooling yourself if you believe that this sim is the finished product.

AoA, this discussion isn't about understanding Luthier's perception on the sequels. Everyone understands that. It's interpreting the situation and seeing how it really compares to the example Luthier uses, of Il-2, to show that actually the similarities are only clear at first glance, but fall apart under careful analysis.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

There's a big difference. Before you and Force started arguing, my last post corroborated what Kendo just wrote to show that the situation between Il-2 and CloD is quite different.

Again, if you want to change the topic at hand.. Be my guest

But my answer to you delt specifcally with the 'aproach' that 1C took with IL-2 with regards to sequals.. And how Luither said they plan on using the same 'aproach' with CoD

Where each sequal includes the previouse version of the game..

As in all the planes, maps, features, etc.

And the sequal adds to it (planes, maps, features, etc)

Hope that helps!