|
|
|
|
#1
06-05-2012, 02:59 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Luither recently said CoD is going to follow the same development path as IL-2 did.. Where each sequel will include the previous version and at the same time add new features and content (maps, planes, etc). That is the 1C 'way' of providing updates.. via sequels that include the previous version of the game and add more to it. The 'other way' of providing updates is the RoF way.. where you pay for each and every update (planes, maps) separately.
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on. 
|
|
#2
06-05-2012, 04:52 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I completely agree. But note that there is a lot of change in 10 years. 10 years ago CloD would have been a complete revelation, just as the original Il-2 was. It offered, as I said, everything over the competition. But in today's world CloD is hard to compare: once you've experienced the awesome graphics, it's relatively empty for an offline user like myself. And that's not because I am against the sim (heck I tried to help the team as much as possible to make it excellent by providing Oleg with research) so it is a shame for me to say this.
I think the business model is simple and effective. But it needs the original game to be well received first. The difference is that although the original was difficult to run on high settings, on the lowest it still offered a lot over the likes of CFS, Fighter Squadron, EAW et al. With CloD there are a lot of similar sims for being to go back to.
__________________
Luthier: If not for your guys' criticism and incredibly high standards, we'd never have become what we are. Keep it up! Source for the sceptical: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...11&postcount=9
|
|
#3
06-05-2012, 06:05 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
If you want to talk about how software tools, video cards, PC, etc has changed over the past 10 years than you may want to start another thread on the topic? Just a thought.
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
|
|
#4
06-05-2012, 06:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Saying the developement strategies between IL-2 and COD are similar are just plain wrong. Less than a year after release, IL-2 had 6 patches and in those patches had added 17 more flyable planes among a host of other fixes and features. COD still hasn't delivered what they said was going to be in the box and have already said there will be no more planes released for it. What about the SU-26 stunt plane they were flogging before release and everyone was going to be able to test the flight model with? You can't compare the 2 for strategies. IL-2 had established a good deal of respect for the devs with the patches, added planes, and other stuff. COD has not given us anything to earn any level of trust or respect that would merit purchasing future products.
|
|
#5
06-05-2012, 07:03 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Exactly the point I'm trying to make. Their overall goal seems similar (although the announcement of an MMO throws this into doubt) but the state of the games is completely different. Indeed, the Russian conflict was relatively new territory for people and thus it's harder to tell if the campaigns are realistic enough. There were also no competitors in this theatre of operations. CloD is different as it has a host of sims as potential competition (even modded Il-2 can take away potential customers). Thus for them to move onto the next one, it would have needed to have cemented a good deal of respect which it hasn't, sadly.
__________________
Luthier: If not for your guys' criticism and incredibly high standards, we'd never have become what we are. Keep it up! Source for the sceptical: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...11&postcount=9
|
|
#7
06-05-2012, 07:28 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
It is easy to spot the person that does not have an intellectual argument to address the topic at hand..
Just look for the guy that has to resort to attacking the messenger.. Why? Because they know they can not attack the message! 
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
|
|
#8
06-05-2012, 07:30 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Note I did not say the development strategies are the same as IL-2.. It was Luither than said the the development strategies are the same as IL-2, with regards to how they are going to handel sequals Hope that helps!
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
|
|
#9
06-05-2012, 07:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#10
06-05-2012, 07:41 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Which is fine, your welcome to your opinion All in all I am just glad I was able to help you understand what it was Luither said wrt sequals S!
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
