Jump to content
Bucksnort

A question on comments by Loft

Recommended Posts

There was a really good post by Loft on the BoS Russian forum today explaining the reasons for the BoS career being different from the RoF career: 

 

Loft -

 

There are several reasons why IL-2, we did not do such a career:

1) Development of its takes at least 1 year, we did not have that time.

 

2) Statistics for the actions of the players in the period 2009-2013 showed that the REF mode uses low popularity, players quickly throw it. More 10-50 missions withstand negligible percentage of players.

 

3) The most popular players game mode mode Quick Mission was eventually mission at least 30 minutes (the vast majority). Now the average time mission in the CPB, all the players and all the missions in the world since the fall of 12 minutes (in the campaign).

 

4) Testing of this complex set as a virtual squadron in the historic sandbox = hell. Hundreds or thousands of links, the quality of testing goes low, low motivation. In ROF we realized that for quality testing needs 10 people to do it every day for several hours. And even that does not give a 90% guarantee from the absence of errors.

 

5) This campaign involves hundreds of thousands of lines of text. Created, tested, translated into several languages.

 

All of this together and separately determined our choice of the concept of IL-25: CPB.

 

Of the points above Number 2 might be the most important "The RoF campaign is not popular and players stop playing it between 10 and 50 missions."  When you view that in light of the fact that most of the other points speak to the difficulty of creating a RoF style campaign, then why do it.  I understand that.

 

But I'm hoping Jason can answer this one question that I've never seen answered on the RoF forum even though it is a recurring question by most new players of RoF.  The AI in the RoF b-Career appears broken.  It is extremely passive compared to the RoF QMB and PWCG.  And just like Loft states above, I think most players toss the RoF campaign at between 10 and 50 missions at which point the AI has become like shooting fish in a barrel and the player quits from boredom and either goes back to QMB or on to PWCG (where Pat had the same problem with the AI initially, but fixed it to give you a hell of a fight like you get in QMB).

 

And Loft has to know about the problem with the AI in the RoF career.  The big lament for every RoF player I know is that the AI doesn't work in the b-Career and how nice it would be if Jason would fix it and then we would have both PWCG and b-Career in RoF, as they both offer very different experiences.

 

The RoF b-Career will never be vastly popular with the AI in the state that it currently is.  So everybody is reading Loft's Number 2 above as "the AI in the RoF campaign is broken, so therefore it is not played, so therefore we won't build another career like it for BoS because it won't be played."  Do you see how this makes us crazy?

 

Jason, why is Loft using statistics about the RoF career not being played when he knows the AI is broken?  This question has been bending everyone's mind upside down since we started seeing this comment over the past 6 months.

 

Thank you.

Edited by Bucksnort
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm clearly in a minority here.

 

I have logged hundreds and hundreds of missions in the RoF career and have had a great time. Yes PWCG offers a thrilling experience as well, but that doesn't make the beta career bad in my book.

 

I also don't find the AI to be broken in the career. Rather I find the AI to give me a quite realistic experience in that it doesn't immediately attack any enemy it sees in the air. I quite enjoy being able to fly missions without ever engaging in combat, despite there being multiple enemy flights in the air.

RoF AI does have issues, the most glaring is the suicidal attack pattern of fighters vs. two-seaters, but it's not something that completely ruins career for me, and to this day I continue having a blast with it.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points there Bucksnort. I would be very interested to hear comments also.

 

I havent been playing RoF career very much because WW1 in general doesnt interest me. RoF career mode is has great feeling

otherwise, its a shame if its not popular. If the missions are okay I cant understand why every single player wouldnt want to play mode like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RoF's career has a fantastic GUI and is great between missions and for planning the next sortie. Really it is top notch.

 

However the missions themselves are hopelessly empty of aircraft and objects. It's just an absolute wasteland. You can pick a direction and fly off, safe in the knowledge that you won't see a damned thing.  One airfield somewhere will have some scouts set to spawn if you fly nearby. Three enemy planes somewhere else. For the rest, its a bank holiday.

 

I don't like Pat Wilson's campaign. I wish I could, but the interface is just too ugly. I'd much rather be using RoF's own beta career. And I would - if only it had any significant content in the missions.

All that effort and expense is wasted. The best career mechanics in nearly two decades and it is all for naught the second you hit the Fly button. Seriously devs. Have you nobody there to advise you on issues of gameplay?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am playing 50% career, 50% pwcg.

As one year ago, I was 75% career, we can say that I reduced my  time playing career  ;)

As to AI, I am using the mods which are greatly imporving things : not perfect, but significantly better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still playing it, almost finished. Only a few months to go until the war is over.

 

I really hope, that something similar will be added to BoS. 

At least, I want to be able to give my player a Name, and track his statistics.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My experience is also of hundreds of hours played (or at least it feels like it :)).

 

I do not find it to be too empty - there are many times more contacts available than any actual WW1 pilot would have experienced, which is why it is possible to rack up huge scores, even playing DiD. But it is true that if you pick a unit on a quiet sector of the front you may not always come across an enemy. As for AI - my biggest gripe is their balloon obsession.

 

If more of these features were under player control the experience would appeal both to players needing more action, or those into more of a slower paced hunting game. But RoF suffers from the same curse as BoS to some extent - the developers desire that players have a uniform experience, which I simply do not understand unless it is something to do with the ranking tables. All it needs is a slider called "campaign action" with a range that determines the probability of enemy spawns in the mission generator.

 

On the history campaign taking 1 year of effort.... well RoF's might have done, it contains many historic plane types, units, airfields, aces as well as a lot of unnecessary chrome, like pilot biographies.

 

A decent historical campaign for BoS would require much less research. Every element is simpler. It would not even be necessary to allow the player to join every single unit: a couple per plane type would be fine. All you need is a start date, an airfield for a given unit, a unit strength that roughly reflects the OOB, a historic skin, a pilot roster (semi-historical) and vaguely plausible mission types for each unit.

 

If that is presented as a series of simple spreadsheets, the community will fill much of it by open-sourcing. This would be enough to give a series of missions some feeling of being part of a narrative.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion coop campaign would bring success to ROF and BOS. This and some AI enhancement would pay off.

 

+1 

 

This, a dedicated server and a FMB. I'm still optimistic about the mysterious announcement that we may receive someday this week.

 

 

P.S.: But honestly I do not expect too much. I was also optimistic that the Seahawks will crush the Patriots.....  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is first, hen or egg? Or in this case - a good campaign or a popular one? I'd say not to make a good campaign because it is unpopular is the wrong angle.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All really good comments....I hope something happens from some sector, either company or private to improve the current campaign design. I tend to agree with unreasonable...who it would seem is being very "reasonable" today.

Edited by JagdNeun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fly both PWCG and the beta career. I find PWCG better because i can change how many AI i want. In the beta career there is not so much going on there. Or being forced to level bombing in 2 seaters is kinda strange as most of them didnt even have a bombsight. But i love the realistic feeling beta career gives with more facts about the squadron etc.  

 

Id love a career mode in il2 BOS. I would even buy it like a DLC or something. 

 

I am playing 50% career, 50% pwcg.

As one year ago, I was 75% career, we can say that I reduced my  time playing career  ;)

As to AI, I am using the mods which are greatly imporving things : not perfect, but significantly better

What mods do you use? 

Edited by McKvack
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed the ROF Career mode very much, until I finally gave PWCG a try. Too often in Career mode I was finding myself assigned to missions and then I would not come across any enemy ai, which was boring.

 

Once I gave PWCG a try, I did not look back, plenty of action to be had in PWCG.

This is one thing I am sure their statistics do not take into account, the single players that moved on from the Career mode to flying PWCG.

 

When BOS was being developed, I was hoping that we would have a tweaked and tuned Career mode for it based on what was in ROF, heck at this point I would have been thrilled if it just had the same Career mode that ROF currently has.

I would certainly still be flying BOS if that had been the case.

 

I am still retaining some hope that something will be done .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points there Bucksnort. I would be very interested to hear comments also.

 

I havent been playing RoF career very much because WW1 in general doesnt interest me. RoF career mode is has great feeling

otherwise, its a shame if its not popular. If the missions are okay I cant understand why every single player wouldnt want to play mode like that.

 

 

I feel the same way.. I have not flown RoF in some time because my time is limited anyway so I get more fun from the QMB in BoS and IL2 and a little DCS.. but I wonder if there have been any changes since the last few RoF updates... Does anyone know if that has made a difference... or is it just too soon to tell?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me it seemed like there was a lot more stuff going on. But it could be a coincidence.

Also I met 2 aces in, let's say the last 10 missions i was playing. 

In all the time before, which should be hundreds of missions, I only met one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RoF AI does have issues, the most glaring is the suicidal attack pattern of fighters vs. two-seaters, but it's not something that completely ruins career for me, and to this day I continue having a blast with it.

 There were several famous aces who practiced such suicidal "against all odds" tactics :biggrin:

We do not request walls of text about history of units or background of operations.Everyone interested can find tons of

info on internet and in dedicated books.

 

We want to have the same we had in old sturm:

- to choose side for which to fight

- to choose carrier of fighter or bomber pilot

- to choose specific unit.Does not have to be exhausting list of all units.Just those most significant.

- to fly semialternative campaign = you can not change flow of history,you just get generated missions with simple

templates for scramble,bomber intercept,recon,CAP,bombing etc.

Again,noone is requesting walls of text to be inserted into process.That is absolutely not necessary.

- to have own pilot avatar who can get promoted and rewarded within real ranks and awards+leadership functions

 

Basic element is allready there - mission generator used in current groundhog day concept.All that needs to be done is

insert those points above into it.

My 2 cents

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We want to have the same we had in old sturm:

- to choose side for which to fight

- to choose carrier of fighter or bomber pilot

- to choose specific unit.Does not have to be exhausting list of all units.Just those most significant.

- to fly semialternative campaign = you can not change flow of history,you just get generated missions with simple

templates for scramble,bomber intercept,recon,CAP,bombing etc.

Again,noone is requesting walls of text to be inserted into process.That is absolutely not necessary.

- to have own pilot avatar who can get promoted and rewarded within real ranks and awards+leadership functions

 

Basic element is allready there - mission generator used in current groundhog day concept.All that needs to be done is

insert those points above into it.

My 2 cents

 

I think it's a clear resume, this is all I want, I do not understand why, in 2015, this game has not a great campaign...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RoF's career has a fantastic GUI and is great between missions and for planning the next sortie. Really it is top notch.

 

However the missions themselves are hopelessly empty of aircraft and objects. It's just an absolute wasteland. You can pick a direction and fly off, safe in the knowledge that you won't see a damned thing.  One airfield somewhere will have some scouts set to spawn if you fly nearby. Three enemy planes somewhere else. For the rest, its a bank holiday.

 

I don't like Pat Wilson's campaign. I wish I could, but the interface is just too ugly. I'd much rather be using RoF's own beta career. And I would - if only it had any significant content in the missions.

All that effort and expense is wasted. The best career mechanics in nearly two decades and it is all for naught the second you hit the Fly button. Seriously devs. Have you nobody there to advise you on issues of gameplay?

 

I agree with the main points here.  I don't fly the b career as its simply empty.  I'm not too bothered by Pat Wilson's interface as the actual career missions and range of options it offers the player are far in advance of what the official career has.

 

Ideally a combination of the two would be the way to go and it can be done!  Pat is willing to turn over his code to anyone who is capable of using it.

Er.....arn't there a bunch of guys in Moscow capable of this?  I'm confused.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 There were several famous aces who practiced such suicidal "against all odds" tactics :biggrin:

We do not request walls of text about history of units or background of operations.Everyone interested can find tons of

info on internet and in dedicated books.

 

We want to have the same we had in old sturm:

- to choose side for which to fight

- to choose carrier of fighter or bomber pilot

- to choose specific unit.Does not have to be exhausting list of all units.Just those most significant.

- to fly semialternative campaign = you can not change flow of history,you just get generated missions with simple

templates for scramble,bomber intercept,recon,CAP,bombing etc.

Again,noone is requesting walls of text to be inserted into process.That is absolutely not necessary.

- to have own pilot avatar who can get promoted and rewarded within real ranks and awards+leadership functions

 

Basic element is allready there - mission generator used in current groundhog day concept.All that needs to be done is

insert those points above into it.

My 2 cents

 

This!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm clearly in a minority here.

 

I have logged hundreds and hundreds of missions in the RoF career and have had a great time. Yes PWCG offers a thrilling experience as well, but that doesn't make the beta career bad in my book.

 

I also don't find the AI to be broken in the career. Rather I find the AI to give me a quite realistic experience in that it doesn't immediately attack any enemy it sees in the air. I quite enjoy being able to fly missions without ever engaging in combat, despite there being multiple enemy flights in the air.

RoF AI does have issues, the most glaring is the suicidal attack pattern of fighters vs. two-seaters, but it's not something that completely ruins career for me, and to this day I continue having a blast with it.

This.

 

I found the career in RoF very interesting and the most likable feature is the dead is dead for the player, also AI isn't broken i had really good dogfights with AI

 

RoF's career has a fantastic GUI and is great between missions and for planning the next sortie. Really it is top notch.

 

However the missions themselves are hopelessly empty of aircraft and objects. It's just an absolute wasteland. You can pick a direction and fly off, safe in the knowledge that you won't see a damned thing.  One airfield somewhere will have some scouts set to spawn if you fly nearby. Three enemy planes somewhere else. For the rest, its a bank holiday.

 

I don't like Pat Wilson's campaign. I wish I could, but the interface is just too ugly. I'd much rather be using RoF's own beta career. And I would - if only it had any significant content in the missions.

All that effort and expense is wasted. The best career mechanics in nearly two decades and it is all for naught the second you hit the Fly button. Seriously devs. Have you nobody there to advise you on issues of gameplay?

 

Yes the planning of the mission and a big YES to the lifeless aspect, I know that, that was a choice made, to make everybody able to play

the career, but there is where we need an option to increase the size of the flights and ground action as we used to have in the conf.ini on 1946

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

curious... I'm also a minority here and RoF's b-Career made me purchase almost all aircraft of the game and I still play it to this day.

 

Although I find myself enjoying b-Career, I can fully understand why players give up from the mode. As mentioned above, the world feels bland. I thought with myself: well, it's BETA career, things will improve, and went into PWCG a percentage of time.

 

This data from RoF beta career, wich is incompleted and has no persistency for the player, really serves to take down the possibility for a BoS career on similar lines?

 

 

 

We want to have the same we had in old sturm: - to choose side for which to fight - to choose carrier of fighter or bomber pilot - to choose specific unit.Does not have to be exhausting list of all units.Just those most significant. - to fly semialternative campaign = you can not change flow of history,you just get generated missions with simple templates for scramble,bomber intercept,recon,CAP,bombing etc. Again,noone is requesting walls of text to be inserted into process.That is absolutely not necessary. - to have own pilot avatar who can get promoted and rewarded within real ranks and awards+leadership functions

 

That's the vast majority of things I could ask. +1

 

 

I found the career in RoF very interesting and the most likable feature is the dead is dead for the player, also AI isn't broken i had really good dogfights with AI

 

 

Same here. Really epic stuff happened to me in the b-career no matter which plane I've chosen.

Edited by FeliusCzar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the more advanced career they had in ROF was not popular, who thought it's a good idea to force everyone play a crappy one?  The QMB is the most used part of the game for many reasons, and it's not only in ROF. You go in qmb to check out a new patch, to setup your controls, to test the graphics settings, check out a new skin, fly a bit when you don't have time to go online and a thousands other reasons. It doesn't mean you have to turn the career into another aimless qmb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RoF's beta career is the only reason I came back to it after putting it down for a couple years. The initial career, though substantially better than what we have here, was lackluster. And like MP here now, MP then was also rather weak. That updated career mode resulted in me buying nearly every plane for it and playing RoF as my main CFS for several years straight, I wouldn't have bought more than the first few planes without it. That said, the AI was rather passive in it and that is a problem. But since the AI is aggressive in the QMB, I don't see why it couldn't be made more aggressive in the career.

 

I can understand not spending the resources to replicate the RoF beta career here, but there is something between that glorious masterpiece and BoS's steaming pile of crap. I don't think anyone likes the campaign here, we all play it some to get the unlocks, but that is the only reason. And no one likes the unlock system either. Some say it isn't that bad, but no one actually likes it. I think a good short term solution is to insert a semi-historical campaign similar to RoF's, but without being a stickler for accuracy. Simply having the player choose a squadron with its associated plane type would be far better than what we currently have. The squads could even be fictional for all I care, so long as they have a single assigned airfield, the player has some sort of rank/award progression and advances within that unit. It would take a few days to retrofit our current campaign to do that and would be a massive improvement. Scrap the unlock system alongside it, and that should solve 2 out of 3 major complaints with BoS atm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are several reasons why IL-2, we did not do such a career:

1) Development of its takes at least 1 year, we did not have that time.

2) Statistics for the actions of the players in the period 2009-2013 showed that the REF mode uses low popularity, players quickly throw it. More 10-50 missions withstand negligible percentage of players.

3) The most popular players game mode mode Quick Mission was eventually mission at least 30 minutes (the vast majority). Now the average time mission in the CPB, all the players and all the missions in the world since the fall of 12 minutes (in the campaign).

4) Testing of this complex set as a virtual squadron in the historic sandbox = hell. Hundreds or thousands of links, the quality of testing goes low, low motivation. In ROF we realized that for quality testing needs 10 people to do it every day for several hours. And even that does not give a 90% guarantee from the absence of errors.

5) This campaign involves hundreds of thousands of lines of text. Created, tested, translated into several languages.

All of this together and separately determined our choice of the concept of IL-25: CPB.

Thanks for posting this, Bucksnort. I believe, we should share more facts about the development on both forums so you could understand why this or that decision had to be made.

 

For those who haven't read further there, we're considering a possiblity to apply additional features to improve immersion in the campaign. Not to mix with "making a ROF-like campaign".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this, Bucksnort. I believe, we should share more facts about the development on both forums so you could understand why this or that decision had to be made.

 

For those who haven't read further there, we're considering a possiblity to apply additional features to improve immersion in the campaign. Not to mix with "making a ROF-like campaign".

 

But why did you force it on us? That decision, messed up the multiplayer as well because you can't use skins in a lot of servers because of the lock.

Edited by Jaws2002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this, Bucksnort. I believe, we should share more facts about the development on both forums so you could understand why this or that decision had to be made.

 

For those who haven't read further there, we're considering a possiblity to apply additional features to improve immersion in the campaign. Not to mix with "making a ROF-like campaign".

 

He also had some very valid questions regarding the beta Career?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This data from RoF beta career, wich is incompleted and has no persistency for the player, really serves to take down the possibility for a BoS career on similar lines?

 

I've seen comments by Loft on a number of occasions that the numbers are not there for the RoF campaign, so then why recreate it for BoS?  I guess many players try it, but most stop playing it early on.  I think there are several huge reasons why this is the case, and I don't think it is because players are not interested in historical campaigns.

Edited by Bucksnort

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But why did you force it on us?

Forced what? Forced buying the game, or forced anyone to expect to get the sim of their dreams?

He also had some very valid questions regarding the beta Career?

I'm not sure I understand the question. Who had/did what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess many players try it, but most stop playing it early on.  I think there are several huge reasons why this is the case, and I don't think it is because players are not interested in historical campaigns.

 

+1.. I gave up pretty quickly on careers in both ROF and PWCG as the fights with AI were so dull. Just endless fights of the AI doing never ending turning circles lower and lower to the ground until they totally ran out of energy and altitude. Maybe mods have changed this for the better in the meantime. Haven't played in a good while.

 

Anyway just make something like the old Il-2 career and I'd be happy enough. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who haven't read further there, we're considering a possiblity to apply additional features to improve immersion in the campaign. Not to mix with "making a ROF-like campaign".

 

That is in russian. I dont understand it. Is it possible to get it in english also here for us to read?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this, Bucksnort. I believe, we should share more facts about the development on both forums so you could understand why this or that decision had to be made.

 

For those who haven't read further there, we're considering a possiblity to apply additional features to improve immersion in the campaign. Not to mix with "making a ROF-like campaign".

Sorry Zak but that thread/post is not understandable through Google Translate. So yes, it would be great if a Russian/English speaker could take the answers from the Russian forum and post them here in an understandable language.

 

H

Edited by heinkill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is in russian. I dont understand it. Is it possible to get it in english also here for us to read?

I just told you in English (or what I believe to be English) what he said about it.

we're considering a possiblity to apply additional features to improve immersion in the campaign

 

He's also saying that:

- we're not removing the graphical presets

- we're still planning to share the roadmap this week, and it takes a lot of time because that's a serious thing

- the mission editor is coming soon

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just told you in English (or what I believe to be English) what he said about it.

we're considering a possiblity to apply additional features to improve immersion in the campaign

 

He's also saying that:

- we're not removing the graphical presets

- we're still planning to share the roadmap this week, and it takes a lot of time because that's a serious thing

- the mission editor is coming soon

 

Okay, thanks for the translation!

Its good that you are considering campaign improvements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- we're not removing the graphical presets

 

 

@Zak, Hi mate, could you tell us, what's the importance in development to keep the Graphics presets???

Edited by Erg./JG54_Potenz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fly both PWCG and the beta career. I find PWCG better because i can change how many AI i want. In the beta career there is not so much going on there. Or being forced to level bombing in 2 seaters is kinda strange as most of them didnt even have a bombsight. But i love the realistic feeling beta career gives with more facts about the squadron etc.  

 

Id love a career mode in il2 BOS. I would even buy it like a DLC or something. 

 

What mods do you use? 

http://www.checksix-forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=436&t=188520 : it is the french C6 mod pack

It includes a lot of mods, including :

05MOD IA v8.034beta (Criquet Richy gavagai J.j. Avinimus)

 

 

- the mission editor is coming soon

:biggrin:  :biggrin:  :biggrin:  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Zak, Hi mate, could you tell us, what's the importance in development to keep the Graphics presets???

Hey Potenz. I'm gonna simply quote Loft, if you don't mind:

1) There's a number of combinations of video settings that can cause serious performance issues, which always serves as a ground for very agressive feedback. We prevented the possibility of such combinations;

2) There's no one who knows our own technology better than us. And we are offering optimal variants. A PC that doesn't run the game on presets well won't perform better without the presets;

3) Comes from p.1 - we would need to find out all possible week points that could crash the game, cause memory to leak, etc. It would have taken very long to test the project, but as you know we didn't have much time.

- the mission editor is coming soon

Yeah, I think it'll be public in March. TBC.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Potenz. I'm gonna simply quote Loft, if you don't mind:

1) There's a number of combinations of video settings that can cause serious performance issues, which always serves as a ground for very agressive feedback. We prevented the possibility of such combinations;

2) There's no one who knows our own technology better than us. And we are offering optimal variants. A PC that doesn't run the game on presets well won't perform better without the presets;

3) Comes from p.1 - we would need to find out all possible week points that could crash the game, cause memory to leak, etc. It would have taken very long to test the project, but as you know we didn't have much time.

Yeah, I think it'll be public in March. TBC.

Thanks for the answer mate, i just asked you cause a bounch of friends of mine are always asking me to ask you this.

 

Thanks again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the interesting thing here is how bleedin hard it is to do a proper career. This is backed up by looking at other companies flight sims. Is there any company/franchise that put their heart and soul into a campaign, and then did it again? Many people talk about the campaing in Red Baron 3D but I have heard that the time and money they put into that broke the company and they certainly didn't ever do another flight sim. IL 2 often gets talked about as a good campaign but did they even do a campaign in CloD? ( I can't get passed the plastic feeling of the FM in that game to move on beyond quick missions to find out!). We now hear that 777 has no interest in throwing the vast time and money into redoing the career style that they did for RoF. Jet sims do nothing for me but I have feard that the campaing in Falcon 4 was great, did they do a follow up with as much in the career? So when people say why can't we have more in 2015? Perhaps the answer is that there are no successful examples from a business standpoint in the past?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...