Developer Diary, Part 79

[Jocko]

  Keep unlocks (at least planes and modifications) in the campaign alone, leaving QMB and MP unaffected by them, and I'll be happy.

+1

[Matt]

There's no such person in the entire WORLD who would need to fly plane A in order to get plane B in IL2BOS. No! You all here do have all the planes that we put in the game.

Now i'm really confused.

Atleast according to the video, if you don't have early access (=not bought BoS yet), you need to fly the Bf 109 F-4 to unlock the Bf 109 G-2 and Ju 87 and then the Ju 87 to unlock the He 111. And all that in the SP campaign. Is that not correct?

 

If that's correct, then everyone who bought BoS after release who's only interested in the He 111 (for instance) will have to fly plane A and B and possibly in a game mode he's not really interested in. If someone only wants to fly the He 111 and only in MP, he'll probably not be very happy about this, because he'll have to spend time in planes and game modes he's perhaps not interested at all. And then he even has to keep flying the He 111 in SP mode, to unlock all the loadout options.

 

Seriously? This comes as a surprise to people???!?

The unlocking in general doesn't surprise me, but unlocking planes does. I can't remember having ever reading about that, except for the Yak-1 and Bf 109 G-2, which were supposed to be unlockable in game, but that idea got (supposedly) canned a long time ago. I know i'm not affected by this unlocking planes myself, but who knows what the first expansion will bring.

Edited September 20, 2014 by Matt

[No601_Swallow]

Good lord!

 

God help the developers who've, you know, tried to make a game out this, erm, game. Woe and a thousand times woe!!! betide anyone trying to do anything new or fun to our hobby/passtime/obsession!

 

In the video and elsewhere, they go overboard to say how basically easy it will be for seasoned "expert" simmers to unlock everything, more or less. At the same time they're doing their best to give new players an incentive to work at the game, develop their skill(z) and learn some bleedin' history!

I think it's a great job and great innovation. We had to wait literally years for a single player campaign in RoF. Even now 3rd party "campaigns" are linked single missions (or at least were last time I looked), which are often great!

 

Personally, I can't wait to have a go at the SP mission generator, or whatever it's called. If I've "gotta unlock that next skin" and it encourages me to fly another one before heading for bed, or take off and land, or try my hand at some unaided navigation, well  - zippa-de-doo-dah - why would that be bad?

 

I want to throw my hands up in despair at the negativity here sometimes (although I remember well what simhq was like when RoF first arrived - bunch of pirhanas!). 

 

Who'd be a sim developer? Not for love nor money.

[zippyPerrserker]

I don't know, I don't think it's been that negative.

 

Yes people knew roughly about what was coming for a while, but now that the specifics are out there are more concerns and questions - why wouldn't there be? It's a flight sim forum after all!

 

For me personally I don't mind the campaign system, seems pretty interesting and they've been saying it wouldn't be a full on career like in eaw/rof/whathaveyou at first.

 

What I don't get, and I'm voicing my opinion so I hope they change it, is that apparently I can't even play the campaign unless I choose one of two difficulty settings - I'm sorry but that's kind of nuts. If I want complex engine management, but want icons, I can't even play the single player campaign at this point. 

 

Shouldn't I be able to? I'd love for this to be misunderstanding on my part, but I'm pretty sure in the video someone asks this very question and the answer is a straight up "no".

 

 It seems silly that if I play on 'normal' settings, but then turn off some helpers, I can't just play the game and get whatever the normal 'xp' would be to continue.

 

Hopefully I'm wrong about this, or if I'm not wrong, they'll implement a change where you can choose custom difficulty settings but only get 'normal'' xp or something.

[kendo]

My opinion is similar to the above.

 

Yes we knew about having to unlock mods and also skins, but aircraft came as something of a surprise.

 

And having to wade through the unlocks in the campaign is one thing, but the situation for QMB and multiplayer needs clarifying at least.

 

The fine details were not clearly communicated. Now it seem the whole game is to be built around unlocks with no (?) way out for those who just are not interested. I will enjoy this game whatever I am sure, but some of the apparent rigidity in this approach seems totally unnecessary and counter-productive.

 

At least give those with no interest in unlocks a way to play the game how they want without jumping through arbitrary hoops.  

[354thFG_Leifr]

 

Well, it's really your fault for buying things blindly and not doing the research. They have been very open and forward with how the campaign was going to work.

 

Too many people are flipping out about this like it's a surprise. I don't get it. They NEVER said it was going to be like ROF. All the people who assumed or preferred it were setting their expectations without checking what the devs were saying.

 

I was always aware that the unlock system was going to be implemented, I did hope however that they would renege on the promise and do away with the silly idea. As far as I could infer from the published material, complete aircraft unlocks (unlocking aircraft A to get aircraft B and so on) was not part of this idea, I was under the impression that it would be additional items that would have to be unlocked (windscreen shields, gun pods etc) - I don't recall any material that suggested a tiered aircraft unlock approach in a similar manner to WarThunder.

Campaign system is a non issue for me as I know that third party development will always follow and trump anything but in by the proper developers.

Edited September 20, 2014 by Leifr

[Nil]

The only thing I can complain about right now is the lack of custom-settings in campaign, as long as they are 'higher/harder' than normal it should give at least 1x the XP (as normal does) I have a VERY bad sense of directions, even worse over a snowy landscape.. I can hardly find my toilet without the GPS in my phone. But I still want complex engine management and every other Expert thingie, But I really would like to see at least my own plane on the map, and preferrably pre-plotted route, at least until I get used to 'landmarks' (I havn't played since august, since it was soo much easier to keep the place clean without all the flightsim equipment out of the way, (so in a way it's my fault that I don't know my game-area surroundings))
The other parts of the campaign were already announced, so I can't complain about that.
But unlocking skins in SP to be able to use in MP!? Ann having to fly the 109 to be able to fly the stuka, to be able to fly the He111!?
What if I want to start out as a HE111 pilot? I don't think they had to fly the 109 to qualify?
Sorry if it sounded like a total rant.. Great news that you are doing progress, even thou I don't agree with all things..

[Sokol1]

It easy. See all more "game" and less "super simulator". Worth read (use translator).

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/1921-obsuzhdenie-79-j-chasti-dnevnikov-razrabotchika/page-4

 

We are only the 5%.

 

Sokol1

Edited September 20, 2014 by Sokol1

[SvAF/F19_Klunk]

Dear G*d... The drama!

And why don't people actually READ comments from the developers? Calm down, have a cup of Java and read the developer's diaries from #1 to 79.... And all the answers from Zak et al and then come back and post you grievences.

Edited September 20, 2014 by SvAF_Klunk

[Stolle]

The only gripe I have is that I have to wait more than "two weeks" 

[=69.GIAP=RADKO]

There's no such person in the entire WORLD who would need to fly plane A in order to get plane B in IL2BOS. No! You all here do have all the planes that we put in the game.

I have no doubt in my mind no matter what happens with singleplayer, multiplayer will become what people expect thanks to your hard work and the backing of the community.

 

I think people are less concerned about what planes they have but the actual fact there is a progression system in general for everyone. This isn't because people are protective of MP, it's because its not what flying missions is about. It shouldn't be about getting a sense of achievement through how much XP you earned in a mission. It should be that self gratification you get for achieving your OWN goals.

 

Creative Assembly also introduced a progression system with Shogun 2 that only resulted in creating a divide between the community. Shogun 2: Total War, a game, also contained historical events with some accuracy. Some games are best left alone when it comes down to XP progression. 

 

There is a large number of consumers playing arcade flying games at the moment and I understand you want a peace of the pie...but I already think you will get some of that thanks to what the IL2 series is all about,creating a challenge and giving people their own feeling of satisfaction. You don't need a progression system, it's artificial and will make anyone feel less immersed at the end of every mission. They want to feel like they've just partaken in WWII !!!

Edited September 20, 2014 by =69.GIAP=RADKO

[Bearcat]

I'd be fine with it if the unlocks were exclusive to the campaign. What I don't like is the campaign dominating my whole game experience, not allowing me to use whatever modifications (or planes for new players) I want in QMB and MP, until I've really spent a lot of time in the campaign.

Even if someone was to make something similiar to PWCG seen in ROF for BoS, with the current plans that wouldn't change the fact that I'd still be forced to play the default campaign to unlock modifications, skins and planes for every other game-mode in the game.

 

This my take as well.. However if there is one thing this team has shown.. at least that I have seen is that they are reasonable.. so I will just wait to see what the final product is before I get too excited about anything that I do not like.

[BraveSirRobin]

Forcing MP-only people to fly SP to unlock things is idiotic, but they've been pretty open about this from the start.

[Freycinet]

It has just arrived, so I don't have any specific news about it yet

 

 

....And your DK2 arrived on the very day that OR reveals a new model which is supposedly as big a jump over the DK2 as the DK2 was over the DK1...

 

Crescent Bay Rift:

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/oculus-unveils-new-crescent-bay-rift-model-with-in/1100-6422451/

 

I'm beginning to think that the business model of OR is to release a heap of different DK's and earn all their money on those...  :-)

[VBF-12_Snake9]

 

 

It's kind of disheartening to watch the 777 guys doing such wonderful job with many difficult aspects of the game and then shooting themselves in the foot with really simple stuff, like for example fixed difficulty options and the very limited hardware settings.

 

 

Still no trim on axis,  I agree such a bull**** hardheaded position. 

[Cavemanhead]

Here is my comment now that you see how the Campaign will work.

 

Loft has built what he promised he would. He never said he would build the same system as ROF or 1946 or anything else. It's all there in the Dev Blogs.

 

I always knew some in the hardcore community wouldn't like this system, but luckily for you I am still here and will work with talented individuals in the community utilizing the tools like the ME and give as much support as I can so eventually there can be a Campaign that is a more like the other campaign systems you like. With the ME and a little programming talent an amazing dynamic Campaign system can be built along the lines of what Pat Wilson built for ROF over the past 3 years. It's really good and is a testament of what can be achieved with our technology.

 

The guys who want a certain type of deep role-playing campaign are not the average customer any more in this genre unfortunately. I'm one of the old school types myself too, but its not easy making a popular flying game these days with simply the older game-play designs. 

 

What you will enjoy is a sim/game that WORKS with minimal bugs that prevent you from flying and fighting. That has always been the first priority. The role-playing and historical detail you may want will have to come later on, just as much of it has come from the community with all the other popular simulations ever made. This is actually where 90% of my fun has come from as a sim pilot the last 15 years.

 

It will all sort itself out in time.

 

Jason

 

Great post.

 

The sim seems to have a great technical base to build on.  I hope to see it around for many years to come with more and more hardcore polish put into the core, supported by that "game players", who I believe in time will get bored with simple dogfights and desire a more "complete", real experience.  I suppose I'm a rare bird but a campaign is really meaningless to me...  My desire is to fly a WWII bird in the most "real" experience that can be offered in terms of FM, DM, and graphics.  Just put me in the cockpit and I'm there... 

[FlatSpinMan]

So, just to clarify:

Premium founders will have all aircraft available in ALL game modes from the day of release?

 

Buyers of the premium and regular versions after the official release will have to play the single player campaign to unlock planes?

 

ALL players need to play the SP campaign to unlock skins and full loadout options. Without doing this they will be unavailable in QMB and MP?

 

 

I'm not really an online player, but how will multiplayer servers work if players have different aircraft and loadouts available? That sounds very restrictive for the mission builders.

 

 

What's the rationale for this approach?

[Baldric]

I don't have a problem with the initial SP campaign set up to offer xp points/unlocks for completions-- been a trend for awhile in game designs so not surprising the devs adopted this.  I will likely spend some time in the SP Campaign as I love to fly these machines.  I'm also looking forward to using the mission builder (currently enjoying the qmb) when it's released as that's an area I really enjoyed in original IL2 (co-op squadron missions is the MP I enjoy).  Just my two pennies worth. 

 

Kind regards,

Dave

[Pollux]

So, just to clarify:

Premium founders will have all aircraft available in ALL game modes from the day of release?

 

Buyers of the premium and regular versions after the official release will have to play the single player campaign to unlock planes?

 

ALL players need to play the SP campaign to unlock skins and full loadout options. Without doing this they will be unavailable in QMB and MP?

 

 

I'm not really an online player, but how will multiplayer servers work if players have different aircraft and loadouts available? That sounds very restrictive for the mission builders.

 

 

What's the rationale for this approach?

 

 

 

I ask myself the same question. 

 

I am very skeptical and worried about this aspect of the game as most of the members of my squadron ... 

Edited September 21, 2014 by Pollux18

[whatnot]

After watching the video and letting the discussion sink in for a day now, I'm willing to digest and accept the XP-grind campaign model that was presented (well I guess I don't have many other options, do I ).  

 

I guess it's got a lot more to do with lack of budget for building a detailed and historically accurate campaign than this approach being the dream what the dev team would want do if they had unlimited money coming in like Robert with Star Citizen.

 

What makes it even easier to swallow is the fact that Jason mentioned the creation of campaigns is up to community so I assume it means that the dev team will provide robust tools enabling us to do so.

 

One thing I can't get over however is lack of 'Custom' settings! I always fly with expert settings, BUT one big part of the experience are outside views! It's not about abusing them to get an edge in the QMB-campaign or anything like that, I just enjoy panning the cam around my perfectly trimmed bird while I'm en-route to mission objectives.

 

You could say that dumb it down to Normal, but that would kill the sim, so I'm fu*ked if this is not fixable. MP is different of course, but why on earth not have it for SP? Just drop 10% or whatever in your XP-grinding algorithms per every checkbox, but please let us enjoy the cinematic aspects of the game as we grind out our next unlock.

[Alibaba]

They want to make game for casual gamers, and sim players(pretty old news there). Like water and fire, here we are.

[sturmkraehe]

As far as I understand this will be no career mode. And consequently there won't be user made campaigns as the AQM does not allow for it. 

 

I like the AQM but I am disappointed that there's no career mode at all. The career mode in RoF is so excellent, why don't you just transport it to BoS? Or if you think usefull, I would pay a couple of bugs to get such a career mode for BoS (allowing also to unlock plane upgrades).

 

I also don't quite understand the choice for forcing people into airstart for short missions. At least let people choose if they want to start in air or from ground.

Edited September 21, 2014 by sturmkraehe

[Endy]

sturmkraehe -- The airstart for short missions is because you are already half way or so, to your target area. If you were to take off from an airfield it would be a long[er] mission.

                        Just saying.

[Livai]

This Game and the Campaign are called " Battle of Stalingrad " but there could be some days Campains found like    " Battle of Moscow ", " Battle of Kursk " or " Battle of Okinawa "   ---> Why not to call this game " IL-2 Anniversary " and all know automatic what comes next?  

 

What, first " Custom Graphic Settings " gone now " Custom Realism Settings ", too. Please, not again where someone say to the customer how he should play this game not how he like

 

The new HUD design looks now with this update much more better.   

[sturmkraehe]

 

What, first " Custom Graphic Settings " gone now " Custom Realism Settings ", too. Please, not again where someone say to the customer how he should play this game not how he like

 

 

Can't agree more. I am not a child who has to be told how things should be. I am a full grown-up capable of making my own decisions ...

 

At least my boss at my company grants me the responsibility to make decisions at work so I think he believes that I am old enough to take this responsibility and assume the conequences. I don't need being paternalised for my game settings.

Edited September 21, 2014 by sturmkraehe

[Zoltann]

More of a lurker but first rate customer of 777. I have everything from ROF. Muromets. BOS.

 

Guys, you did well with this game. A huge potential is there.

 

But you got me worried, gotta step in...

 

It has been said more eloquently in previous threats, but:

 

 

01. I can live with new style of campaign, even if its nothing more than a pepped QMB.

 

      Its finacially viable, and I want 777 and 1C to thrive. THAT and good VALUE for money opened my wallet for everything thusfar.

      As Jason said, in time something less childlish as a campaign will come eventually. Jasons word is good enough for me.

 

 

02. Separate the plane unlocks SP and MP PLEASE. 

 

       Simply defuse this topic.

 

 

03. Allow the CUSTOMER to set difficulty setting by simple checkboxes.

 

     Do we really have to spell it out?   Do not tell me how to PLAY. Jeez. 

    You guys keep talking about "game should be fun" stuff in every vid. Then you lock my preferred gamestyle? Why? Save time?

     With all due respect Devs, this is a serious error of judgement which must be adressed ASAP.

 

04. Allow us to select the graphical settings.

 

      I did not invest in an expensive rig to have no say in its use.

 

 

Let all this and previous feedback sink in please,  and make your CUSTOMERS happy returners...

Be men. Act. Do not alienate your fanbase by ignoring their intellect and individuality. That system never worked, did it?

 

 

Dux out.

Edited September 21, 2014 by Zoltann

[SYN_Lt_Dan]

 Custom Graphic Settings  never got my head round that one 

[duko]

+1 for custom setting in campaign

[1./JG42Nephris]

Looks a bit like controll bondage on their side.

Controlling grafic presets

Controlling skin management

Controllng user name

Controlling diffculty settings

Controlling fmb accessors

At each single it is not much, but all in all it bothers a lot.

It is no bad game, and for a quick jump after work it fine for 30mins

But I dont see the way the game will tie users like Il2 1946 did over 12 yrs.

Yes I know 30% to go ....however dont expect any changes in that points.

And now, stone me, for not sharing the "kumbaya feeling".

[sturmkraehe]

I don't always agree with you, Nephris, but on this point you have nailed it for me. This is paternalizing at its worst.

 

Is it too complicated to calculate the xp multiplication factor for custom settings?

 

Here's a formula:

 

n: number of difficulty settings (switch on: make it easy; switch off: make if more difficult)

 

k: flag if setting is switched on or not; 1 means: setting is switched on; 0 means switched off

 

D: is maximum possible multiplication factor.

 

Multiplication factor = D*sum [(1 - k) / n]

Edited September 21, 2014 by sturmkraehe

[LizLemon]

Looks a bit like controll bondage on their side.

Controlling grafic presets

Controlling skin management

Controllng user name

Controlling diffculty settings

Controlling fmb accessors

At each single it is not much, but all in all it bothers a lot.

It is no bad game, and for a quick jump after work it fine for 30mins

But I dont see the way the game will tie users like Il2 1946 did over 12 yrs.

Yes I know 30% to go ....however dont expect any changes in that points.

And now, stone me, for not sharing the "kumbaya feeling".

 

Couldn't agree more.

 

Being too restrictive will only turn people away. A game with an MP component wont survive long without a community. 

[Gitano_Fraile]

I wonder when the game is released?

[IRRE_Belmont]

I wonder when the game is released?

[Juri_JS]

Looks a bit like controll bondage on their side.

Controlling grafic presets

Controlling skin management

Controllng user name

Controlling diffculty settings

Controlling fmb accessors

At each single it is not much, but all in all it bothers a lot.

It is no bad game, and for a quick jump after work it fine for 30mins

But I dont see the way the game will tie users like Il2 1946 did over 12 yrs.

Yes I know 30% to go ....however dont expect any changes in that points.

And now, stone me, for not sharing the "kumbaya feeling".

I have to agree.

 

With too much control and being too restrictive the BoS developers run the risk of shooting themselves in the foot. In my opinion one of the reason for the long term success of the old Il-2 was its flexibility and customizability that allowed people to play it they way they prefered.

[FlatSpinMan]

This Game and the Campaign are called " Battle of Stalingrad " but there could be some days Campains found like    " Battle of Moscow ", " Battle of Kursk " or " Battle of Okinawa "   ---> Why not to call this game " IL-2 Anniversary " and all know automatic what comes next?

 

 

They were talking optimistically about future releases, which would pretty obviously not be in the battle of Stalingrad, but would be added to the sim series.

And consequently there won't be user made campaigns as the AQM does not allow for it. 

 

   and

 

I also don't quite understand the choice for forcing people into airstart for short missions. At least let people choose if they want to start in air or from ground.

The vid mentioned, and Jason posted, that usermade content would be able to provide more traditional type campaigns once the fmb has been released more widely.

 

 

It's probably because it's hard to set up missions starting virtually on the frontline to enable players to fly a 'short' mission from take-off.

[actionjoe]

02. Separate the plane unlocks SP and MP PLEASE. Simply defuse this topic.

 

I'll even add, keep the unlocks only for this "campaign mode". If they rely on third parties/community to add content, it will be terrible to have really interesting SP campaign that can only be played by those who have unlocked the planes/modifications.

Again, how it will be fun to force people to play things they don't want to?

 

 

 

There's no such person in the entire WORLD who would need to fly plane A in order to get plane B in IL2BOS. No! You all here do have all the planes that we put in the game.

 

Well, that is not what I (and other) understood.

In order to clarify that, can dev answer this simple question?

 

What planes will be immediatly available(at the first launch of the game) to a new customer in any mode (SP & MP) after game release?

 

[SYN_Mike77]

Here is the way I understand it:  All of the planes will be available (to those who have bought them) in QMB and in MP.  In the career mode you will have to unlock planes as you progress through the series.

 

What needs clarifying is what about mods and skins?  Do I have to play in the SP career to get the gun pods or rockets or snow camo skins when I fly in MP? 

 

I think at least  50% of the worry and angst is a language problem.  I wonder if this level of hair pulling is going on over in the Russian forum?

Edited September 21, 2014 by SYN_Mike77

[Vaxxtx]

They were talking optimistically about future releases, which would pretty obviously not be in the battle of Stalingrad, but would be added to the sim series.

The vid mentioned, and Jason posted, that usermade content would be able to provide more traditional type campaigns once the fmb has been released more widely.

 

 

It's probably because it's hard to set up missions starting virtually on the frontline to enable players to fly a 'short' mission from take-off.

The thing that bothers me about that statement is he referred to Pat Wilsons missions generator (no, its not a dynamic campaign) for RoF. While Pat did great on what tools were given to him, it was utterly clunky and not user friendly. The whole thing about you have to setup,  tab out, save game, after mission. Using 2 different interfaces just play it was a huge turn off.

 

I am really hoping the standards have risen for user made campaigns. I mean seriously, a tool like Lowengrins DCG for IL2 '46 for BoS would be heaven for both online and offline users. But I am skeptical if that can even be done. Since not sure of the scope of the tools available, but I am skeptical if it will be deep enough.

[AndyHill]

The true genius of Lowengrin's campaign is that it's functionally very simple. The tragedy is that nobody really noticed how simple it would be to improve upon it and translate to other simulators, so it's a bit of a waste as far as pioneering work goes. The good thing is that RoF / BoS people seem to understand the importance of a good campaign (whether or not you like the current versions is irrelevant), that means there's a decent chance they will have one sooner or later. I wish that was the case with certain other simulator(s) that otherwise have some promise but little gameplay and not much promise of things improving. 

 

PS. Here's a suggestion for the campaign: make the number of survived missions in a row increase XP or whatever score you get from the missions and you will add an incredible amount of tension and realism to the experience, since survival becomes the highest priority as it pretty much should be. 

[IRRE_Belmont]

The most important thing to remember is that at least, there is some SP content on launch day..

 

I dont think the ROF campaign was availbable on the release day (correct me if i'm wrong)