Game version 1.003 discussion

[Leaf]

No, it's because a lot of people would apparently rather argue about it than play it.... That's why I read more than I post and try to fly more than I read the forum. Maybe everyone that is so upset will get all their toys soon and go back to playing instead of griping. 

Good point. Some seem to enjoy the forum, er, "discussions", more than the actual game.

[SharpeXB]

The community has already created excellent aircraft guides that are available here on the forum. So the developer can work on more pressing things for now. The RoF manual is very nice.

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

AHHH I'm loosing sleepppppp, over this gameeeeee. I Must not Stop playinggggg.   :wacko:                              

[Feathered_IV]

This whole website is a giant interactive manual. You can get any answer you require, plus a few you'd rather not.

 

Comprehensive game manuals were great before the internet. Not so much now though.

[AndyHill]

Wrong.  BoS has had presets from day 1.  Keep in mind that day 1 was only a few days ago.  Their experience with RoF is that of a live product with lots of customers that need help.  

 

In any case, I get it, you don't like presets.  I don't really like presets.  But I also see why they might feel that they need to do it.  It certainly makes more sense that some crazy BS about the developers wanting to control blah...blah...blah...

I don't really see the timetable the same way. To me day 1 was either the day we first laid eyes and fingers on the first beta or when the game is "finished", neither of which happened a few days ago. 777/1C themselves pretty clearly stated that this is a commercial release, not the end of development - which is indicated by continued hard work with important features such as multiplayer and mission editor.

 

As for the preset discussion it's true I don't like the locked presets at all personally, but I also think it can't be very good business-wise. For example the triple-screen problems that have been bugging me and a few other people since the locked presets were introduced has a quick and simple customer service fix: "please disable post effects, it's a minor reduction(?) to visual quality but will make the game work properly while we fix the underlying issue (there is also another issue with triple screen nowadays, though, and it might not be as easily fixed so it's perhaps not a perfect example)." However, now they have programmers working on the issue while (admittedly probably not trillions of) unhappy customers are waiting for the solution.

 

The triple screen thing is just one example I know of, but I've been PC gaming for a long time and I can't even count the times a new driver or whatever broke something I had to fix by tweaking settings so it probably won't be the last such problem. Instead of being fixed by the community and customer service all such issues currently immediately escalate to programmer level, which is probably an order of magnitude worse for business. And what can even they do if it's an nVidia or AMD driver that's buggered? That's the gripe with the locked presets me and some others seem to have; it makes things worse for us and I/we just can't see any kind of an upside there.

Edited October 31, 2014 by AndyHill

[unreasonable]

Good point. Some seem to enjoy the forum, er, "discussions", more than the actual game.

That reflects the fact that the game as designed is like a casual pick-up: great for a one nighter but you would not want to have her around the house all the time.

 

For many of us a good flight sim is not a product: it is a hobby in which they have made a significant investment of time. To people like that, the attitude taken by the developers is like the management of a golf club telling members that they are only allowed to play foursomes.

 

I still want to know why the historic features in the SP campaign advertised in the early DDs were cut.

[BraveSirRobin]

but I also think it can't be very good business-wise.

 

That really isn't your problem.  It's not your business.  

[Original_Uwe]

That reflects the fact that the game as designed is like a casual pick-up: great for a one nighter but you would not want to have her around the house all the time.

 

For many of us a good flight sim is not a product: it is a hobby in which they have made a significant investment of time. To people like that, the attitude taken by the developers is like the management of a golf club telling members that they are only allowed to play foursomes.

 

I still want to know why the historic features in the SP campaign advertised in the early DDs were cut.

Here here!

I can't select the best graphics settings for my rig.

I cannot play a coherent unit based historical campaign.

I cannot create a coherent unit based historical campaign.

I cannot play the coherent unit based campaigns created by others.

I am forced to play a garbage campaign in order to unlock common front line mission essential equipment and skins.

When a work around is found to the above by running at x16 speed the devs punish us by limiting it to x2.

I cannot create skins (to my knowledge anyhow, might be wrong).

I dislike online play.

 

So what, exactly, is there left for me to do with this 100 usd boondoggle?

Edited October 31, 2014 by forsale

[ST_ami7b5]

After all those restrictions and closing "backdoors" it seem as if devs wanted to show their customers 'who is the BoSs'.

Which is unbelievable.

[Veteran66]

forsale nice name!

Why you trolling here?

[TG-55Panthercules]

So what, exactly, is there left for me to do with this 100 usd boondoggle?

 

 

Maybe sell it to the guy that started this thread?

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/12406-what-best-way-purchase-game/     

 

 

Actually, I'm surprised, disappointed and saddened by all the points that you listed in your post.  I guess I'm mostly saddened by the realization that I'm just not the target audience for this game and that it's looking very unlikely that it will ever be the historically-focused combat flight simulation that I was hoping it would be.  I can't really fault the devs for chasing what they believe to be their best target audience and designing the game to try to attract that audience.  However, I am pained by the realization that they appear to believe that it is not economically viable to both attract that audience and also provide an immersive, historically appropriate simulation experience for those of us who, I believe, have formed the traditional core fan base for this genre since it began, and even more pained to think that they may be right.  

 

I suspect that it's basically a lose-lose situation for "us" at this point - if they're wrong and BoS fails because of these design choices, it will probably be perceived that the howl from the hard core traditional simmers was the cause for that failure, and if they're right and BoS succeeds it will probably be perceived that the success was because of these design choices (rather than in spite of them).  Either way, the likelihood that this team or anybody else will try to create a truly immersive, high quality historical combat flight sim in the future is probably diminished.

 

I hope they do succeed, and that maybe with such success will come the ability and desire to retrofit BoS with some of things that seem so glaringly absent (from the traditional simmer's perspective) at this point.  The core of an amazingly good sim is present here - it's just wrapped in a design theory/package that doesn't currently do it justice (again, from the  traditional simmer's perspective).  

 

For now, I'll just fly the occasional mission when I get a chance, and try to have fun doing that without thinking about how much better it could have been and maybe will be some day, and hope that it evolves into something better before I get tired of those individual missions.  Given the number of planes and different types of missions that are already possible with what is here, and the small amount of time I have to fly it these days anyway, that will probably take me a while.  Thus, there's probably a pretty good chance that either the devs or third party modders will be able to create the "missing" elements before I can exhaust what's here now.  

 

So, at least I have something to look forward to  

[unreasonable]

A good thing to add about the latest build, unless I am only imagining it.  In my last couple of escort missions in F-4 with a single wingman I am convinced that he is trying to keep station in a better position - ie nearer 4 o'clock than the previous 5:30 - so I can see him with a left turn of the head without having to turn right round to look behind. 

 

Obviously you have to fly smoothly to get this and changing direction needs to be smooth as well, but this is much better than the previous conga line. Not seen what it looks like with 4 planes yet.

 

Anyone else noticed this?

 

Sadly, seeing the wingman in his splendid skin flying in close formation makes you wonder why he has no unit markings....  sorry, had to get that in, bastardly grinding and all that!

[Matt]

 

Wrong.  BoS has had presets from day 1.  Keep in mind that day 1 was only a few days ago.  Their experience with RoF is that of a live product with lots of customers that need help.

OK, let me rephrase it, BoS had custom settings during the alpha (and perhaps beta, not sure at what point it went from alpha to beta). A point at which restricting graphic settings (options in general) made more sense than after release.

 

And again, if lots of customers need(ed) help in RoF, why have there never been any presets and why did they even start BoS development with custom settings? I've not visited the RoF forums lately, but was the idea for presets ever requested, suggested or otherwise mentioned on those forums? Either by the community or the devs?

 

In any case, I get it, you don't like presets.  I don't really like presets.  

Just because you don't like presets doesn't mean that i don't like presets. I do like presets. In addition to custom graphic settings, presets are an excellent idea. Presets are not the concern, lack of custom graphic settings is. And custom graphic settings won't work against presets at all or make them useless (basically have nothing to do with them).

 

I also like presets for other things, like network connection etc. Again, in addition to custom settings.

 

Currently, BoS looks worse, regardless of the preset you choose, than what you could achieve with custom settings. Is it really a good idea to not let people use custom settings to get the best out of BoS visually and post screenshots or make videos with those settings?

 

But I also see why they might feel that they need to do it.  It certainly makes more sense that some crazy BS about the developers wanting to control blah...blah...blah...

I'm not sure if people might get that impression and if might influence their decision on wether or not to get BoS. But i merely stated why i don't buy this "customer support issue" as the sole reasoning for no custom settings. Especially after closing the backdoor, which i really doubt anybody actually believes made people contact customer support. And i was OK with the backdoor, if they don't want to add custom options via the GUI itself for whatever reason, they could at least offer a way to edit the cfg. Even though i would prefer custom graphics in the GUI of course and that could give the devs a way to explain that custom graphic settings are not supported (via a disclaimer that pops up when you click on custom graphics for instance) and they won't answer customer question about the custom graphics.

 

I would even willing to put up some graphic settings tutorial on these forums if this would help things.

Edited October 31, 2014 by Matt

[LLv24_Zami]

A good thing to add about the latest build, unless I am only imagining it.  In my last couple of escort missions in F-4 with a single wingman I am convinced that he is trying to keep station in a better position - ie nearer 4 o'clock than the previous 5:30 - so I can see him with a left turn of the head without having to turn right round to look behind. 

 

Obviously you have to fly smoothly to get this and changing direction needs to be smooth as well, but this is much better than the previous conga line. Not seen what it looks like with 4 planes yet.

 

Anyone else noticed this?

 

Sadly, seeing the wingman in his splendid skin flying in close formation makes you wonder why he has no unit markings....  sorry, had to get that in, bastardly grinding and all that!

 

Yes, wingmen keep their position pretty well these days. Theres a lot of good in AI, for example I like to watch them to land because they dont make it perfect. Bouncing more or less, it looks very realistic. Atleast when I am landing it is very bumpy ride  

Ground attack on the other hand still seems to be a big problem for AI. They just dont attack, no matter what you do or command. They circle around and fly home with full bombload and dont fire a single shot, atleast in jabo missions.

 

And the unit markings would be essential IMO. Atleast different variations of skins for wingmen and AI flights instead the always the same default winter skin. It looks so generic now, really bad for immersion. When overall quality of the game is top notch this issue is quite strange.

[IckyATLAS]

A game is a game. I am not sure that BOS was advertised as an accurate historical documentary to the last battalion, tank platoon plane skin, street combat between soldiers  etc... If it was the case none of the PCs we have could handle it in real time and the development of the documentary could last another 10 years.

 

Battle of Stalingrad has to be seen as inspiring the game we have.

 

Once this is accepted things go better.

 

Now the Battle of Stalingrad is different from the Battle of Britain. BOB was mainly an aerial battle. BOS was much more an air-ground and ground-ground battle.

The only criticism I can make here is that the ground part is clearly not at paar compared to the aerial part. 

I hope that over time the ground part will be much more active and animated. I would love to have platoons of soldiers moving behind tank battalions etc. etc.

[Brano]

Jason,

 

Can we get simple option in menu for graphic presets "TURN OFF POSTPROCESSING"? I think it would be a good compromise for everyone.As starter.Later we can see if more can be "unlocked" (No sarcasm intended  ).It would also be in par with your continuos improvment attitude with servers,starting optimalisation on 32 players and continue to raise up the bar along the road.

 

Thanks for reply and have a nice Friday.

[Tektolnes]

I'm not sure if people might get that impression and if might influence their decision on wether or not to get BoS. But i merely stated why i don't buy this "customer support issue" as the sole reasoning for no custom settings. 

 

 

Also as Jason stated there's thousands of people playing the game without any sort of quick start guide explaining the game content and the devs are not getting inundated with support queries. Logically adding in custom graphic settings would not result in a huge spike in support queries as they're far simpler to understand than working out the details about the planes. If Loft's premise for restricting graphics to presets only was support issues then it's been shown to be a flawed premise. If there's some other reason for his decision I'd like to hear it. Would also like to know if there's a road map for fixing these post effects in order that many of those who fly at ultra settings don't have the visual quality of the game negatively impacted. Bad enough that we can't turn them off but it's doubly bad that we can't turn off broken functionality. 

[LLv32_kankkis]

Like the sim very much and career too, but waiting CTD fix.

[unreasonable]

Had three good missions today,  no ctd. Now I am reluctant to start a fourth, since previously my ctd rate was about 1 in 4 ....

[LLv32_kankkis]

I got tuesday CTD in my first mission, after 30min flight when flying return to my base, then IL2 not responding

Edited October 31, 2014 by kankkis

[AndyHill]

That really isn't your problem.  It's not your business.  

Well it kind of is. Every time I participate in discussions like this I try to see all of the angles relevant to the issue at hand, which I've found to usually be the most productive way to get conversation going. And of course the financial success of BoS is also important to me personally, because it's the only way to keep the promising start growing and improving over time.

[BraveSirRobin]

Well it kind of is. 

 

No, it isn't.  Not in any way whatsoever.  You're not an investor.  You just bought a license to use the game.  If you want to make the design decisions, you need to have a lot more money on the line.  

[AndyHill]

Hm how about the rest of the stuff I wrote that kind of explains why 1C/777 side is a consideration even though I'm not an investor?

[BraveSirRobin]

Hm how about the rest of the stuff I wrote that kind of explains why 1C/777 side is a consideration even though I'm not an investor?

 

What about it?  I'm pretty sure that most of us hope the game does well.  That doesn't mean we get to make the design decisions.  It also doesn't mean that every decision we don't like is some sort of conspiracy.  Sometimes developers just make bad decisions.

[VBF-12_Snake9]

 

 

Later we can see if more can be "unlocked" (No sarcasm intended ).

 

This made me think.

 

Full completion of the SP campaign should unlock custom graphics option.  This way people are given a carrot for completing the campaign, and this custom graphic argument gets slowed somewhat.   

 

Also there should be a trim on axis achievement unlock.  That would be welcomed. 

 

Maybe a custom skins achievement unlock. 

 

Who knows. 

[Jason_Williams]

This thread is to talk about the current build. Please go back to that track. I'm guilty too. There is the rest of the forum to worry about the rest.

 

Jason

[Brano]

Should I repost my question to you to "Questions for developers" thread?

[ST_ami7b5]

Should I repost my question to you to "Questions for developers" thread?

[Magnum11]

Is anyone, Else not hearing hit or flack sounds .....I have checked on two diffrent computers ..Still no hit or flack sounds. even checked drivers etc...Asus Rampage IV onboard sound Realtek 5.1 ,Win 7  Thanks  Ps Maybe a look into by someone official Hay! jason one Pug Lover to Another

Edited October 31, 2014 by Magnum11

[ST_ami7b5]

Never heard a hit.

Realtek 5.1.

[Tektolnes]

Is anyone, Else not hearing hit or flack sounds .....I have checked on two diffrent computers ..Still no hit or flack sounds. even checked drivers etc...Asus Rampage IV onboard sound,Win 7  Thanks 

 

Try here to see if it helps: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/12189-no-impact-sounds-mp/

 

Worked for me to get a bump in hit sound volume. Still think they're a bit on the light side but it's at least a bit better now. 

Edited October 31, 2014 by Tektolnes

[SYN_Jedders]

Essentially turn your ingame volume to 100% and your windows volume down to around 30% for BoS. Works for me and some others, not for all though.

[ST_ami7b5]

Essentially turn your ingame volume to 100% and your windows volume down to around 30% for BoS. Works for me and some others, not for all though.

Is this a common practice in 'other' 'sims'?

 

Ok, ok,..

[DD_Arthur]

Is this a common practice in 'other' 'sims'?

 

Ok, ok,..

 

Yes....at least this is what to do in Cliffs.

[Sokol1]

O.M. recipe for the 1st 'Il-2"...

[LastRightsXIII]

 

 

Is anyone, Else not hearing hit or flack sounds

I know when I'm hit.

It announces itself quite rudely.   

[Original_Uwe]

forsale nice name!

Why you trolling here?

Not trolling, just airing legitimate grievances like everyone else.

[TG-55Panthercules]

Not sure if this is an auto pilot bug or an effort by the devs to discourage/prevent achieving unlocks via autopilot, but I have run 3 test missions today with essentially the same result.  I was really just doing some graphics tests regarding DSR, but figured while I was at it I might as well be making some progress on unlocking stuff, and I was running these during some conference calls for work so I was using auto pilot.

 

For 3 missions in a row in my Stuka the auto pilot killed me.  In the first and third test missions, it lawndarted me by failing to pull out of dive bombing runs about a half hour into the missions (after making a couple of successful ones, it flew into the ground trying to drop the third bomb).  In the second one, I alt-tabbed out to post some results and when I alt-tabbed back in I was already dead after only 4 minutes into the mission - didn't see it happen so I'm not sure what the cause was for that one.

 

If this is just intentional to prevent the unlocks, then so be it, but I thought I'd mention it in case it's indicative of some unintended problem with the auto pilot routines.

[sturmkraehe]

I really think the engine management logic for normal difficulty settings needs a little revision. Currently the autopilot manages the throttle position in case of the engine getting either to hot or too cold. While it is no specific issue when the throttle is automatically reduced in case of overheat there is a problem when the throttle is automatically increased due to an engine too cold. I recently had the problem that after a dive I could not reduce throttle to zero for landing because the engine was apparently too cold. I had to fly extra rounds to heat up the engine before I could reduce the thrust (otherwise I would have had to make an extra fast landing).

[TG-55Panthercules]

This escape key bug is really bugging me.  Finally finished a complete mission with the Stuka on expert, and I'm sitting next to the runway on my home field unable to exit the mission because nothing happens when I press the Esc key. I don't even really care about the unlocks, and if they weren't there I'd just shut the thing down and only be mildly annoyed because of the bug, but knowing that I've made no progress toward the unlocks and will still be flying my green skin in the winter for the foreseeable future somehow makes it feel worse having to lose the missions to this bug.