Questions

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Dutch

OOooohhh yes. I'm sure you cannot possibly be wrong.

They released it. It was awful. They patched it to a new version, v1.05.

Since then, they've released a series of beta patches, all of which were worse.

No official version since when? Last November? Which version would that be then? Oh, yes...the same version they released last November.

Tum te tum te tummmmm.................

Patches don't make a game/company great: EA releases patches for their games all the time. Do you think EA is a good company? Is the latest Call of Duty a good game?

The answer to both is no: EA's sole interest is selling you next year's COD sequel. They only do as much work as is necessary to get people to buy the next game.

Do you seriously think this next final patch will magically fix CLOD? I sure don't. Don't worry though, because they'll address all the concerns in the 60$ sequel. How do we know the sequel won't be a complete failure like this game? How do we know they won't just continue to say nothing for weeks on end and then get angry when paying customers demand information on the product we paid for? Do we think this company will magically change and become the developer of our dreams after the legendary sequel comes out? I predict it'll be more of the same.

Maybe you can explain to me how a development team that releases a game in this state, releases a couple of mediocre patches that make the game worse for a lot of people, and then promise to fix things in the sequel indicates an interest in putting out a quality product instead of just a cash grab.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

Patches don't make a game/company great: EA releases patches for their games all the time. Do you think EA is a good company? Is the latest Call of Duty a good game?

The answer to both is no: EA's sole interest is selling you next year's COD sequel. They only do as much work as is necessary to get people to buy the next game.

Do you seriously think this next final patch will magically fix CLOD? I sure don't. Don't worry though, because they'll address all the concerns in the 60$ sequel. How do we know the sequel won't be a complete failure like this game? How do we know they won't just continue to say nothing for weeks on end and then get angry when paying customers demand information on the product we paid for? Do we think this company will magically change and become the developer of our dreams after the legendary sequel comes out? I predict it'll be more of the same.

Okey Dokey. Well here's a thought. Cliffs of Dover is without doubt the number one combat flight simulator which is prepared for the future. Other sims work well now, play well now, but Cliffs of Dover is prepared for the future. It wasn't supposed to be released when it was, it was supposed to be released when the best of technology could cope, on very low settings. As the old game was.

Unfortunately for the reputation of the game, it was pushed out as being ready NOW. It wasn't ready now at all.

Give it time chaps, give it time.

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Dutch

Okey Dokey. Well here's a thought. Cliffs of Dover is without doubt the number one combat flight simulator which is prepared for the future.

Being crap now does not mean it is well equipped for the future. There is a difference between an engine that is demanding on hardware, and one that is poorly written. One will work well on tomorrow's systems. The other will not.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

Being crap now does not mean it is well equipped for the future. There is a difference between an engine that is demanding on hardware, and one that is poorly written. One will work well on tomorrow's systems. The other will not.

Ah hah. And all of the people who post on this forum really know the difference do they?

I certainly bloody don't. Trouble is, far too many people who throw (ahem) faeces on this forum pretend they do do, but in reality know sweet F.A. (Fanny Adams in case I just broke a rule).

I saw this advert for a holiday in the Seychelles. It was really cheap. Certainly compared to a B&B in Bognor.....

Do you think i should book it? I mean, I've never been there before...............

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

I can tell.

Unless you're on the dev team, you don't know any more than him.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

I can tell.

Then please, enlighten us all with your prescient foresight. Let me guess, you also believe that Hobbits are real, and Tolkien portrayed a genuinely credible version of pre-history.

How could you possibly know whether or not 'Cliffs of Dover' is designed to meet the technology of tomorrow?

Oh shit. That sounds like raaaaaid, doesn't it?

[CaptainDoggles]

That was rude, I apologize.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

That was rude, I apologize.

No worries Doggles, and no need to delete the post.

It's just that I don't think any of the users of this software can confidently say that it was a 'timely' release, or otherwise.

Try running IL2 '46 on a celeron processor with 256mb of RAM and onboard graphics. Then come back and say 'the engine is not optimised'.

FSX with loads of add-ons still taxes my system. The software is always ahead of the hardware. Who's to say that this is not the same situation (apart from Ubi's marketing dept)?