Jump to content

102nd-YU-Devill

Members
  • Content Count

    2
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About 102nd-YU-Devill

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Abu Dhabi, UAE
  1. 102nd-YU-Devill

    SEOW

    SEOW is the best online campaign system ever designed for flight sims. Shades did a once-in-a-generation feat! I really hope IL2 BoS will get a SEOW campaign framework, it would make this game last for a very long time.
  2. Definitely complex start-up procedures should be in, however only if we have as detailed engine menagement, otherwise it has no purpose. And this has nothing to do with a clickable cockpit. If you want full immersion, build a switch box as some people suggested. Clickable cockpit is not manageable in flight and is a completely unnatural interface, bringing very little to immersion. But why do I want everything to be as detailed as possible in a combat simulator? As other people said, the complexity is an important part of a combat SIMULATOR. "Simulator" is different than "game" in that it sacrifices player comfort for providing as real as possible a challenge. When I fly the IL2 1946 I do it only in a SEOW battle. For those who don't know, this means one or two missions per week, for which you have to be ready, briefed, trained with your teammates. You assemble 60-100 people organized in squadrons and you fly a mission of 2 or sometimes 3 hours from take off to landing and your best reward is to come back alive. Sometimes, out of this total mission time, combat takes only a few minutes. You are at the edge of the endurance of your plane, and the edge of your personal endurance since you have to fly the thing for 2 hours without pause or stop and without letting your guard down. These kind of missions are the absolute best in recreating a "realistic feel" of any combat simulator I've ever tried; and I've tried every single one made for a PC from 1993 onwards. Anyway, back to the point: immersion of such a mission can only be enhanced by introducing more realism even at the start up sequence. You start with a full squadron of 12 planes lined up at an airfield, you have to fly for a long strech until you get to your target, so knowing the proper procedure for a correct and timely engine start is an essential challenge in maintaining a cohesiveness of your squad. Has nothing to do with civilian flight training, and it was a real task in WW2 pilot missions. So, why take it away? Of course, I am not at all against having simple engine menagement options or start-up options. Different people want different things, but robbing a SIMULATOR of complexity because people like it simple is completely BS! Nobody here is advocating that "simple" mode should not exist, so why do people deem it necessary to advocate that a "complex" mode (for everything that can be modelled as complex) should not exist in a sim? There are plenty of "World of Airplanes" type products on the market that cater to this, so if someone wants to call this a "sim" then by all means don't be shy to make it as complex as possible, limited only by computing power requirements and designer/historical knowledge. I do need to say one more thing: I have never been dishartened by a steep learning curve of a game or a sim, but the thing that gets me down the most is a bad control assignment interface in game options. I do not know why, but most of the newer sims are doing a terrible job at this, including RoF. I feel developers are trying to invent hot water and over-engineering it in the process. And the result is a terribly complex and unwieldy interface.
×
×
  • Create New...