So how is the game in it's current state

[Doogerie]

So as IL2 is now finially out I wasw oindeirng id ayone can tell me how is the game it looks good but i was wondering how is the SP campagane is it worth the price of access ?  

[SeriousFox]

I can't say that the price is reasonable, but BoS is definitely one of the best WW2 combat sim out there.

If you like to fly with real users in multiplayer, it will give you an unforgettable experience.

[Feathered_IV]

Sp has a way to go yet, but there are updates weekly. It's definitely worth getting into it now though.

[1./JG42Nephris]

It is a raw diamond.

Still needs a lot of polishing.

The game runs and is no bug festival.

Some decisions made are questionable and probably not everyones favour.

If I would be singleplayer only, I would have been disappointed I guess.

Edited October 29, 2014 by 1./JG42Nephris

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

It's a fantastic sim that's being held back by a forced singleplayer campaign.

[Leaf]

Before the usual suspects go "hurr durr SP is a disgrace, save your money, this game is terrible, let's teach the devs a lesson", here's my view:

The foundation of the game is there, and very solid. Due to financial limitation (or so I hear), things like FMB aren't yet available, but will be in the near-ish future.

 

Graphics, sounds and the feeling of flight is second-to-none. Watch some YouTube gameplay to get an idea (N8's videos are excellent).

 

Multiplayer is excellent, singleplayer...matter of taste. The missions themselves are very fun, varied and immersive. It's the bits inbetween missions that are rather lacking right now. Unlocks are a bit of a chore, but not too bad, and are over with fairly quickly. 

 

Main thing is, and this is what many on-the-fence-critics don't seem to grasp:
The more people buy the game, the more revenue the devs have to improve it. Engineers, coders etc. all need wages, so the more people buy the game, the better it becomes.

So I say: Buy it. Support the developers and enjoy this wonderful game. Is it perfect? No. Can it be? Yes.

 

 

Make of this unstructured ramble what you will. 

Edited October 29, 2014 by 19te.Leaf

[FlatSpinMan]

There's a comment worth repeating.

"The missions themselves are very fun, varied and immersive. It's the bits inbetween missions that are rather lacking".

[Finkeren]

The sim itself is second to none and runs really great with practically no issues. There's loads of content and intricate detailscto explore.

 

MP is coming along nicely though we are still some way from 100 player Atag server for ClOD.

 

SP campaign was a disappointment to many (myself included) and is rudimentary at best. However, if you think of it as more of a random mission generator rather than a full fledged "campaign" it's really not bad at all. The missions themselves are fine and the AI is mostly functional.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Game itself works and runs, MP is running and getting DServers by the end of year it seems. SP content is pretty much as Finkeren said. More "modules" and content along the road, some 6-12 months away. If price feels steep, just wait for sales. If price not an issue, just grab it.

[1./JG42Nephris]

There's a comment worth repeating.

"The missions themselves are very fun, varied and immersive. It's the bits inbetween missions that are rather lacking".

God thank one cant argue about ones favour

As this SP is actually the worst part of the game and ruins imho a lot of the hard done work.

Edited October 29, 2014 by 1./JG42Nephris

[JG1_Pragr]

I repost what I write on our squad forum.

 

Experience, opinions and comments after one week of BoS play or why I think the game is successful after all.

 

Let me say that I was really disappointed after releasing the game. Flight model is not what I would expected exactly, strange rudder authority and the absolutely PoS needs of offline play to unlocking mods of individual planes. These are my biggest complains about the new Il-2 Battle of Stalingrad. My depress became even deeper when I had joined the multiplayer for the first time.

 

But as I play it more and more, my frustration is smaller and smaller. I had to remember all the times I switched from one sim/game to another and there were many things done a different way. My virtual life of serious pilot began with Falcon 3.0 (I don’t count the games like F-19, Aces over Europe, Pacific, or even the 8-bit stone age era of Tomahawk). Than the Falcon 4.0. And this was my first problem. This game from 1998 set my expectations so high that when Il-2 was released, I was really pissed. OK, it was the “sim” of planes from WWII but that was the only thing on the positive side. Everything else was worse. Static campaign made from preplanned missions? No clickable cockpit? And the graphical representation of cockpit itself? It all was like return to pre Falcon 4.0 era, in general 4 years old in time it was released. My first thoughts were like “YGBSM”. This game is big obsolete piece of sh.t and I don’t understand why so many people are so excited about. Are they blind? But the Il-2 survived next ten years and became the most successful sim.

Then in 2003 I discovered the online world. It was thanks to the good old WWIIOL. In those days 1000+ players on the ONE server was common practice. Some in the air, some on the ground in tanks, ground powders, AAA gunners, truckers and so on. There was nothing like AI. The flight model was different than in Il-2 (it used the continuously computed FM instead of table based FM in Il-2). Il-2 fans claimed their sim is better, WWIIOL fans claimed theirs better. Still WWIIOL was way more excited to play (for me) just because of the multiplayer experience Il-2 could not compete. When the WWIIOL died slowly I switched to the Il-2 once again. And once again I feel like in very bad joke. How the hell can so many people like this game? Strange FM, sometimes very strange DM (I could repeatedly shot down B-17 with single 20 mm hit into the wingtip), no online campaign (it became better later), very simple terrain, these stupid forests instead of every single tree modeled and so on. But after first disappointments I realized I can live with and spent some funny years with that game.

I think similar thing happened to me during my first experience with BoS. I play CloD, I play DCS and now there is BoS. Both the other games are better in some way. But they are worse in the others. For the first I saw these cons but now I’m discovering the pros.

 

I try to summarized it. BoS cons:

- flight models feels like ultra light plane with overrated engine. It’s my personal opinion, maybe this is how it should work in fact. I don’t know. It’s different, but I can live with;

- rudder authority. It rolls the plane rather to made it side slipping;

- visualization of cockpit gauges seems a bit obsolete. But this is another thing I can live with;

- unlocking mods. This is something irritating me a lot. It is unacceptable thing unless the it should be finished during multiplay.

 

BoS pros in compare with DCS and CloD:

- it offers multiplayer experience. This is where the DCS loosing a lot;

- this even stands for the CloD especially with the features BoS offers for future online campaigns;

- DM. Maybe it isn’t so detailed like in the CloD but still I think it’s better. According to my experience the E-1’s armament in CloD (2 MGs in wings) is better and more effective than 20 mm canons (including MG-FF/M). The number of 20 mm hits needed to destroyed planes like Spitfire is ridiculous. Especially if you compare it with the historical sources (3-4) hits needed to single engine fighter destruction. Or the current presumption that ten 20 mm hits from M-61 are needed for MiG-29 size plane destruction;

- the whole environment and ground war in BoS offers deeper immersion than either DCS or CloD.

 

Now few thoughts about the multiplayer. My biggest mistake came with my RoF experience. Because Syndicate server was always one of the best there, I joined it on BoS. It was huge mistake. There is the one and only mission, running on that server (or I have just a bad luck?). And even this mission is not on the top of what you would expect from these guys. I named the enemy icons on briefing maps while you are in the air and so on. So I joined a different server, the Heavy metal or something like this and whoa, it’s totally different story. Different missions with highly detailed plans, moving ground units, air supply made by players and lots o other features. Something I haven’t seen for a long time (never in CloD and last time in the ADW in old Il-2). With 130 pilots limits it’s the best what we can find on the whole internet. (it is limited to 33 atm due removing some bug in the game). Still there was no sign of lagging under the full stress of 130 people on the server. It offers probably the best multiplayer experience of WWII combat available, with all respect to the CloD.

 

One last thing. BoS and CloD are hard to compare. CloD became playable after ten years of development and like two years hard work of Team Fusion (which made a damn good job). BoS has like two years of development from zero to current (IMO) very good and competitive status.

 

That’s my personal up to date experience from BoS.

 

Sorry for wall of text and more detailed description.

[SYN_Jedders]

Hi pragr!. Just a quick note. We are indeed running only a simple mission ATM as we test for optimisations. We have some complex stuff ready to go but we need to help the Devs just now.

[J2_Trupobaw]

In my experience the SP campaign gets more interesting the more you play it - missions seem to get more complex both in further chapters and as you play more and accumulate "pilot levels". Thus the first missions of first campaign chapter are very simple - go to your objective by shortest route, destroy your target which may not may not be escorted, go back. In later chapters you may see your airfield strafed by ground assault planes as you take off, run into enemy interceptors if you skip your waypoint and try to reach target by shortest way, go through escort mission without seeing enemy plane then run into huge AI furball at  point you were supposed to escort bombers to, or get sent against air covered target without escort. This making missions more complex as you progress is fine idea in theory, but seems to put off many people who look at first missions, say "boring" and never look back. 

Edited October 30, 2014 by Trupobaw

[ShamrockOneFive]

I think it's good to very good. The product is stable, it doesn't crash, it runs well even on slightly older hardware (although you still need a beefy gaming rig to do it properly), and it has a fair bit of content built into it. The aircraft are beautiful to behold and the graphics engine is very good. The single player is a mixed bag but it has it's moments. I haven't really tried multiplayer yet.

 

It's not a turkey. It's a solid simulator but there are some design decisions that have made a lot of people angry (the nearly mandatory single player campaign). There's some rough stuff to work out.

 

Not sure what the future holds... but I hope there is time to refine, revise, and adapt.

Edited October 30, 2014 by ShamrockOneFive

[GP*]

Great thread, because I think it allows us to take a step back from all the details we complain about and evaluate the sim as a whole. I hope the devs take a look at this and see how many are happy with the sim overall / as a whole.

 

I think IL2 BoS is great. The things I don't like are the same as everyone else, and I especially don't like the ultralight behavior that some of the planes exhibit. However, I still think it's an incredible game that's worth every penny. I have faith that it's going to mature very nicely, and will be loved for years to come. I hope it's successful enough to warrant follow on games as well. 

[JG1_Pragr]

Hi pragr!. Just a quick note. We are indeed running only a simple mission ATM as we test for optimisations. We have some complex stuff ready to go but we need to help the Devs just now.

 

Hi. That's definitely a good news

 

S!

[=69.GIAP=Shvak]

Cons

Is it worth the money. Simple answers no. It is a released game with a price tag way above what one would expect. FM in the air seem okay but I am not sure they have got it right on the ground. Force feedback is non existent on the ground.

Multiplayer has taken a massive reversal of fortunes as only 32 players are now supported. Considering you have several multi-seat planes and you can understand the problem... The map is white as hell and in no way historical for the entire battle. Not going to bother talking about unlocks sigh!

Missing planes detract from authenticity. They do not need to be flyable but they need to be there.

 

Pros

When it works and you get into the air it is wonderful. It feels gritty and real world like. Scoring a kill in a VSSR plane feels like an accomplishment. The way the twin engine bombers are handled is awesome and bomb drops look good.

 

While I have more cons than pros sometimes you have to go with your gut and Il2 BoS feels like it is going somewhere. I enjoy flying it and that in the end is the only yardstick I truly measure a sim by.

So when you ask is it worth getting, the answer sadly is yes

[Mirtma]

I was playing campaign yesterday. Time was set just before dark. I've intercepted enemy bombers, chasing them to their airfield. When suddenly blinding light. What a surprise. Searchlights were tracking me and wingmen. Really nicely done!

[Leaf]

Cons

Is it worth the money. Simple answers no. It is a released game with a price tag way above what one would expect. FM in the air seem okay but I am not sure they have got it right on the ground. Force feedback is non existent on the ground.

Multiplayer has taken a massive reversal of fortunes as only 32 players are now supported. Considering you have several multi-seat planes and you can understand the problem... The map is white as hell and in no way historical for the entire battle. Not going to bother talking about unlocks sigh!

Missing planes detract from authenticity. They do not need to be flyable but they need to be there.

 

 

No offense, but CloD went bankrupt and DCS's prices are even higher. $60 for a game is a perfectly normal price to pay for a game these days.

Regarding the lack in content, the devs stated that they simply didn't have the funds or the time to expand it.

Let's just hope multiplayer gets sorted for at least 64 players soon.

[Lusekofte]

Compared to cod this got good sides and bad sides, Comparing cod to bos I would say the same thing. It is smooth, good 3d and excellent light/ shadows . Gamephysics are best in genre in my point of view. Effects a bit overdone together with gun effectiveness compared to other cfs . 

Lovely FM with a bit too oversensitive rudder reactions, and some odd behavior when no fuel and bomb load. 

All in all a great sim and worth the money. As in every other community the emotions run higher than the common sense , not any news there.  Extremely good and bad review´s are entirely based on those conditions 

Edited October 30, 2014 by LuseKofte

[DD_bongodriver]

No offense, but CloD went bankrupt and DCS's prices are even higher. $60 for a game is a perfectly normal price to pay for a game these days.

Regarding the lack in content, the devs stated that they simply didn't have the funds or the time to expand it.

Let's just hope multiplayer gets sorted for at least 64 players soon.

 

No offence but CloD is not even relevant in the discussion, but while it was still a going concern it price was much more bang for buck and Team Fusion have proved what it really could have been, DCS prices reflect the much higher level of work that goes in to produce the modules, let's not forget the base game DCS world is 100% free and comes with a couple of free aircraft.

[Lusekofte]

It is a game and it is worth it if you have the money to spend. It is all relative and subjective. In the big picture we have shown in this sim and cod , that we aren't a community worth investing in. No matter what, we manage to make a huge problem.

Personally I find the obvious fault in some performance chart in the Dora in DCS as more of a wakeup call. It shows how difficult it is and it shows what sim we will be patient with and witch we going to give hell

[DD_bongodriver]

 

 

It shows how difficult it is and it shows what sim we will be patient with and witch we going to give hell

 

Nonsense, all sims get hell and praise in equal measure, don't even try to claim BOS get's an unfair share of criticism.

[Finkeren]

Silly discussion. Measured in entertainment-hours-per-Dollar, flight sims are dirt cheap, regardless if they cost 40$ or 100$.

[=LD=Hethwill]

Comparing DCS + CloD + BoS is the same as comparing IL-2 1946 + Aces High + WW2 OL. ... makes little sense.

 

---

So, regarding BoS...

 

It is a newborn great air combat simulator.

 

It has the most important aspects of such a game in place: air and combat. Flight is well modelled. Combat is intense. Ballistics and effects of combat are very credible for a software in a home computer simulating real life situations

 

Being a simulator it requires to go through a learning curve respecting both the game intricacies like controls, adjustments, and the simulation itself, how the planes behave, and this single aspect is what motivates progress in simulator scene using our home computers.

 

Some of the options are locked, like graphics fine tuning. It is not bad, but it is not good.

The Campaign and QMB are the same stock of Mission Generation system, being the Campaign split into different Chapters which have increased difficulty. I would expect more density in the air in some missions for I cannot believe that my squad and the target squad are the only guys in the air with mission to do. AI missions generation as a new layer into the generated missions are needed to populate the campaign life.

 

Community wise BoS is strong and the future release of DServer and Full Mission Builders and Skin modification will add a whole new way to use the game.

 

All in all BoS is done in great detail. Has some superb core and then fail at some aspects such as the locking of visual options and also in the extra guns and ordnance and skins which are won by playing the Campaign.

 

In itself the Campaign is, in its sterile state, quite entertaining after a day at the office and half an hour full flight is enough to do a mission from take-off to landing.

 

BoS is highly recommendable as a new generation WW2 air war in the east simulator. I am sure the engine survives through the decade to deliver us more WW2 content and scenarios.

[Lusekofte]

Nonsense, all sims get hell and praise in equal measure, don't even try to claim BOS get's an unfair share of criticism.

 

No they are not, and there are a difference in how the criticism are and how fast love turns to hate, I observe nothing less than a campaign against BOS and people not even tried the game are ranking it all over the net, do not even try to deny it. But there are also perfectly legit and understandable criticism. I respect the simple fact that people do not like it. But simply saying a game is worth it or not based on the current state and parts of the game is totally out of order. A game is worth it if you can afford it and know that it like any other game you buy is a possibility that it was not how you thought it to be, and it might be you leave it. This community does not, when they find it not to be what they thought , they campaign against it, rather than just ignore it

But I did not say what you say and you also proved a earlier statement I had, thx for that one

Edited October 30, 2014 by LuseKofte

[DD_bongodriver]

 

 

But simply saying a game is worth it or not based on the current state and parts of the game is totally out of order.

 

Why? the games current state is 100% and released, if that isn't enough to qualify it for full scrutiny then what is?

 

 

 

But I did not say what you say and you also proved a earlier statement I had, thx for that one

 

errr.......you're welcome?

[Lusekofte]

Bongo , listen , I read your post and I mostly agree on them, you are very specific in your critique and they are in my point of view very important here. I have never you in mind when I bring this up.

And my English writing make me sound somehow childish and direct, I agree in what you say most of the time and even now in most of the part

[CIA_Yankee_]

No offense, but CloD went bankrupt and DCS's prices are even higher. $60 for a game is a perfectly normal price to pay for a game these days.

Regarding the lack in content, the devs stated that they simply didn't have the funds or the time to expand it.

Let's just hope multiplayer gets sorted for at least 64 players soon.

 

Yeah, pricing objections makes no sense. 60$ is spot on for a newly released game.

 

I just don't understand any comments about the price being too steep. It's a newly released flight sim, and the price is completely appropriate and in line with most games, as it should be.

 

Now, if this were some game driven by microtransactions, the full 60$ might be too steep, but that's not the case right now, and you pretty much get the full package for the price of a full game release. Quite appropriate.

 

As for enjoyment, I think you'll find that it's a very well done flight sim, with beautiful graphics and handling. If you're a fan of WW2 flight sims, you should get it.

[[TWB]dillon_biz]

This sim itself is spectacular - once you get flying and fighting that is.  Absolutely the best quality flying simulation, bar-none.  

 

However, everything else has taken a turn for the worse as far as game design choices and the abysmal release.  You can tell that the devs seemed to have lost their way towards the end up until release with some pretty obviously unfinished or overlooked elements.  

 

Take this for example: the famous unlock system.  Unlocks are obtained by completing campaign missions that give you XP.  However, these XP points can only be gained through the SP campaign.  If this is the case why, when finishing a flight in multiplayer does the game tell you that you've gained (or not gained) XP?  I know what some of you may be thinking "gee dillon that seems like an awfully insignificant thing to be worried about".  And I'll concede that point, but if the unlock system was planned from the beginning like this, why even include an XP element in the MP side at all?  Seems to me like the devs weren't quite sure what they wanted to do themselves.  When they finally decided, and it turns out that 90% of the community didn't like it, instead of nipping the problem in the bud they went into damage control mode and alienated more potential customers.  

 

Additionally, seems like 1CGS is heavily reliant on unpaid volunteers pouring hundreds of hours to develop and refine the MP missions etc. -  a significant portion of the product we paid to support develop - yet seems it fit to hire people to talk the game up on these as well as other forums and communities.  If anything they should hire a good PR professional.  It sounds to me like setting good priorities is not the major priority of the dev team.

 

All in all, its a great game.  I thoroughly enjoy playing this game and supporting its development.  I do not, however, thoroughly enjoy sifting through bullcrap to get to that enjoyable place.  

[Bearcat]

This sim itself is spectacular - once you get flying and fighting that is.  Absolutely the best quality flying simulation, bar-none.  

 

However, everything else has taken a turn for the worse as far as game design choices and the abysmal release.  You can tell that the devs seemed to have lost their way towards the end up until release with some pretty obviously unfinished or overlooked elements.  

 

Take this for example: the famous unlock system.  Unlocks are obtained by completing campaign missions that give you XP.  However, these XP points can only be gained through the SP campaign.  If this is the case why, when finishing a flight in multiplayer does the game tell you that you've gained (or not gained) XP?  I know what some of you may be thinking "gee dillon that seems like an awfully insignificant thing to be worried about".  And I'll concede that point, but if the unlock system was planned from the beginning like this, why even include an XP element in the MP side at all?  Seems to me like the devs weren't quite sure what they wanted to do themselves.  When they finally decided, and it turns out that 90% of the community didn't like it, instead of nipping the problem in the bud they went into damage control mode and alienated more potential customers.  

 

Additionally, seems like 1CGS is heavily reliant on unpaid volunteers pouring hundreds of hours to develop and refine the MP missions etc. -  a significant portion of the product we paid to support develop - yet seems it fit to hire people to talk the game up on these as well as other forums and communities.  If anything they should hire a good PR professional.  It sounds to me like setting good priorities is not the major priority of the dev team.

 

All in all, its a great game.  I thoroughly enjoy playing this game and supporting its development.  I do not, however, thoroughly enjoy sifting through bullcrap to get to that enjoyable place.  

 

This is a unsubstantiated rumor at best and an outright lie most likely.. I will leave this post standing.

[Bearcat]

Cons

Is it worth the money. Simple answers no. It is a released game with a price tag way above what one would expect. FM in the air seem okay but I am not sure they have got it right on the ground. Force feedback is non existent on the ground.

Multiplayer has taken a massive reversal of fortunes as only 32 players are now supported. Considering you have several multi-seat planes and you can understand the problem... The map is white as hell and in no way historical for the entire battle. Not going to bother talking about unlocks sigh!

Missing planes detract from authenticity. They do not need to be flyable but they need to be there.

 

Pros

When it works and you get into the air it is wonderful. It feels gritty and real world like. Scoring a kill in a VSSR plane feels like an accomplishment. The way the twin engine bombers are handled is awesome and bomb drops look good.

 

While I have more cons than pros sometimes you have to go with your gut and Il2 BoS feels like it is going somewhere. I enjoy flying it and that in the end is the only yardstick I truly measure a sim by.

So when you ask is it worth getting, the answer sadly is yes

 

I am curious.. why sadly?

 

No offense, but CloD went bankrupt and DCS's prices are even higher. $60 for a game is a perfectly normal price to pay for a game these days.

Regarding the lack in content, the devs stated that they simply didn't have the funds or the time to expand it.

Let's just hope multiplayer gets sorted for at least 64 players soon.

 

When it was released 3 years ago CoD was $50 so that is not much different from BoS standard.. and if you compared the pricing in DCS it becomes a no brainer. Thanks to that last patch and TF I no longer feel ripped off by CoD .. even though when it finally became playable to me it was selling for $10 (I bought it the first week it was out..) .

 

No offence but CloD is not even relevant in the discussion, but while it was still a going concern it price was much more bang for buck and Team Fusion have proved what it really could have been, DCS prices reflect the much higher level of work that goes in to produce the modules, let's not forget the base game DCS world is 100% free and comes with a couple of free aircraft.

 

It is.. just as an example of another sims pricing.. It's pricing today is totally irrelevant.. and DCS comes with a Su-25 and a dearmed P-51.. If you want guns at the very least you will have to pay $80 for two WWII AC... just to keep things in perspective...

 

Nonsense, all sims get hell and praise in equal measure, don't even try to claim BOS get's an unfair share of criticism.

 

True to an extent.. but Bongo.. you gotta admit from some circles BoS is getting a lot of flak.. and I am not saying that some of it is not very well deserved.. but some of it is waaaay over the top..

 

Silly discussion. Measured in entertainment-hours-per-Dollar, flight sims are dirt cheap, regardless if they cost 40$ or 100$.

 

True dat.. by that standard the $210 I spent for all of the IL2 modules from IL2 through 46 amounts to pennies using the EHPD scale...

[Finkeren]

Not only is it an unsubstantiated rumor, it's completely ridiculous.

 

I've been asked in all seriousness if I was being paid by 1C/777 to talk up the game, even as I was criticizing the **** out of the campaign mode.

[Bearcat]

Well I was accused outright of being on the payroll.. on more than one forum... I post like I always have and I post as I do because i am passionate about this hobby of mine.. nothing more. Some folks see conspiracies everywhere.

 

.. and to answer the OP which I failed to do in my initial post .. In it's current state BoS is good.. in some ways it is great .. but it has some issues.. but it is also less than a month old.. When I consider that it took slightly less than 2 years to develop it becomes even more impressive and foe me since I know what the team is doing.. they wanted to get it out.. I have not seen enough negative in it to think that it will not improve or that it will be abandoned. There is a lot I do not like about it.. but much much more that I do like and that equation works just fine for me.

[SYN_Jedders]

Time for the tinfoil pointy hat again....

[Leaf]

Same story here.

The moment you don't hop on the "yeah, I hate 777 too" train, you're accused of being a.) a blind fanboy or b.) getting paid to say nice things.

[DD_bongodriver]

Goes both ways it seems, simply by not gushing endlessly and promising first born children automatically puts you in a 'hater' category.

 

 

True to an extent.. but Bongo.. you gotta admit from some circles BoS is getting a lot of flak.. and I am not saying that some of it is not very well deserved.. but some of it is waaaay over the top..

 

seen it all before for any other game, this is not a special case for BOS

[Finkeren]

Goes both ways it seems, simply by not gushing endlessly and promising first born children automatically puts you in a 'hater' category.

Not by a long shot.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You WILL deliver that child to

us, though.....

[DD_bongodriver]

 

 

It is.. just as an example of another sims pricing.. It's pricing today is totally irrelevant.. and DCS comes with a Su-25 and a dearmed P-51.. If you want guns at the very least you will have to pay $80 for two WWII AC... just to keep things in perspective...

 

A bad example of a sims pricing because it was better value on the face of it, and yes it is irrelevant on todays pricing and that is exactly what I meant, to keep things in perspective the unarmed P-51 is still a fully modelled one, bells and whistles warts and all, tons or man hours and research to create included with the base game engine with even more man hours spent etc etc.

[Bearcat]

Goes both ways it seems, simply by not gushing endlessly and promising first born children automatically puts you in a 'hater' category.

 

 

 

seen it all before for any other game, this is not a special case for BOS

 

I was not there for that party.. perhaps if CoD had run on my PC I would have been.. and I say CoD because I was there for IL2 almost from the beginning.. and I saw the BS there too.. but CoD and BoDS seem to be the only two sims that have generated such mass hysteria.. I am glad I missed all that just based on the little joy I got from the yellowboards once BoS was announced..

 

A bad example of a sims pricing because it was better value on the face of it, and yes it is irrelevant on todays pricing and that is exactly what I meant, to keep things in perspective the unarmed P-51 is still a fully modelled one, bells and whistles warts and all, tons or man hours and research to create included with the base game engine with even more man hours spent etc etc.

 

No I think it is a fair enough example.. we can agree to disagree..