LeLv76_Erkki Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 War Thunder is not a simulation and not evolved out of one. Its genre is totally different to Il-2's and explains a major part of the population size difference; that game sure as heck is not rated high because it would be good as a flight simulation or because of good game balance between the vehicles and their Battle Ratings...
Capt_Stubing Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 That's irrelevant for praising an old simm with lots of imperfections. Games evolve and become better, or else go back and play nothing else than the old sim. The reason you present here is totally irrelevant to the subject. What imperfections and compared to what? This is a test of your vast Il2 knowledge. The topic at hand is why do we not have that many people playing BOS. It's natural for folks to compare IL2 given what this game is named after. Also Il2 for more than a decade was the top WWII sim. TW is nothing but a flying game.
6./ZG26_Emil Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 meanwhile there is 140+ people online and almost 3 full servers, there is enough for anyone who wants to fly right now. Enough moaning and get flying
Sokol1 Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 (edited) Games evolve and become better, Well,I am used to like Call of Duty early games, but as they "evolve"... Edited April 25, 2015 by Sokol1 1
FS_Fenice_1965 Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 (edited) Games evolve and become better Because there's a foundation. I hope is clear why what I was saying is relevant. Look to the past if you want to have a good future and increase the 61 players online on saturday. Sure .point is War Thunder has SIX million fans and did not use the "il2 brand" why should they, that il-2 audience is very little Because they want to catch the IL2 audience. Which is huge for a sim that makes online 1/15 of the people who where on Hyperlobby. Wrong doubt, judging from the fact that so few people online consisted from il2 worshipers, and total sales of the game does not justify that from the small il-2 audience IL2 made several tenths the sales that BOS has made. I think that this sim would think itself satisfied if will be able to catch that "small" audience. Also would be satisfied all his simmers Edited April 25, 2015 by FS_Fenice_1965
SKG51_robtek Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 Regarding IL2-1946 as obsolete, according to the steam-charts it had not long ago even more players than BoS: http://steamcharts.com/cmp/63950,307960,15320#1y
AvengerSeawolf Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 War Thunder is not a simulation What are the objective criteria that tell what is a simulation and what's not.? Where are they written , who has found them ? This is a test of your vast Il2 knowledge. I m I getting paid for that test ? What imperfections and compared to what? Imperfections already mentioned many times. IL2 made several tenths the sales that BOS has made. SO where are the data.? First year of course since you want to compare. I hope is clear why what I was saying is relevant. Look to the past if you want to have a good future and increase the 61 players online on saturday. Now you say other thing , before you commented history as a fact on praising an old game. rather than developing huge difference.
Capt_Stubing Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 (edited) I m I getting paid for that test ? Imperfections already mentioned many times. You can't answer can you? Your list was 2 things and you were incorrect they were corrected some time ago. Waste of time. You missed out playing CF3 while everyone else played Il2 for a decade. Edited April 25, 2015 by 14./JG5CaptStubing
AvengerSeawolf Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 You can't answer can you? Your list was 2 things and you were incorrect they were corrected some time ago. Waste of time. You missed out playing CF3 while everyone else played Il2 for a decade. My list was more than 2 things which you did not read that's why you want me to tell again.and were not corrected anyway. Have already tested that game 1 month ago at the same time I bought Bos and still the same lame it was. 12 years and remained a junk with just difference more planes and that was it. And yes I agree that old il-2 was a waste of time. Now do you have a problem whith what other people like more or less to play ? or are they not allowed to have their opinion ? , Cause this attitude stinks of Fascist origin
sallee Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 I sometimes ask myself if the associated "debate simulator" which is almost like a debate but lacking certain elements which might make it realistic has become the most important element of BoS.
AvengerSeawolf Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 (edited) I sometimes ask myself if the associated "debate simulator" which is almost like a debate but lacking certain elements which might make it realistic has become the most important element of BoS. A logical thought sallee, but I tell you from what it seems , it is something different,and it is only the point of some people to force others to accept their opinion or tastes of likeness to a game or to prohibit others' opinion of dislikeness to their "faithful" old product. Reminds me the old rhyme of the Nazis "mein ehre heist treu" have to "defend" their "faith" , no other reason to explain, even worse bashing everyone who hase different taste and opinion stinks as well nazi temperament. P.S> Even more strange is when asked the question if they have a problem with other people having different opinion, they change subject or they do not answer. Edited April 25, 2015 by AvengerSeawolf
Jupp Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 (edited) ~S~ Everyone, Just wanted to remind you that : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law Edited April 25, 2015 by Jupp 1
LeLv76_Erkki Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 What are the objective criteria that tell what is a simulation and what's not.? Where are they written , who has found them ? War Thunder in its level of detail for flight physics(among others) does not match even release date Il-2 FB. While being over 10 years younger. The decision to do that has been conscious; I have no doubts about its game engine being able to handle more, but Gaijin has decided not to do that. WT has other elements that appeal to a wide audience(and a lot of money used in marketing must have helped plenty) that have allowed it to sell well. When comparing WT to other late WW2 flight sim titles(DCS, BoS, CloD) that claim to be simulations, it barely hits the same continent. It is objectively less detailed in its ability to simulate the various phenomena. It ain't rocket science...
sallee Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 A logical thought sallee, but I tell you from what it seems , it is something different,and it is only the point of some people to force others to accept their opinion or tastes of likeness to a game or to prohibit others' opinion of dislikeness to their "faithful" old product. Reminds me the old rhyme of the Nazis "mein ehre heist treu" have to "defend" their "faith" , no other reason to explain, even worse bashing everyone who hase different taste and opinion stinks as well nazi temperament. P.S> Even more strange is when asked the question if they have a problem with other people having different opinion, they change subject or they do not answer. If everyone adhered to "de gustibus non est disputandum" not much would be going on on these boards.
AvengerSeawolf Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 War Thunder in its level of detail for flight physics(among others) does not match even release date Il-2 FB. While being over 10 years younger. The decision to do that has been conscious; I have no doubts about its game engine being able to handle more, but Gaijin has decided not to do that. WT has other elements that appeal to a wide audience(and a lot of money used in marketing must have helped plenty) that have allowed it to sell well. When comparing WT to other late WW2 flight sim titles(DCS, BoS, CloD) that claim to be simulations, it barely hits the same continent. It is objectively less detailed in its ability to simulate the various phenomena. It ain't rocket science... That did not answer my question so here I go again Can you tell me which are the objective criteria that tell what is a simulation and what's not.? Where are they written , who has found them ?
SKG51_robtek Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 What a simulation is is described, i.e. here: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/simulation By that definition WT is also a simulation, just not as good as BoS, IL-2 1946 or CloD regarding to simulate the real world. The definition of 'good' here is, how many aspects of the real world are simulated as good as possible.
AvengerSeawolf Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 (edited) What a simulation is is described, i.e. here: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/simulation By that definition WT is also a simulation, just not as good as BoS, IL-2 1946 or CloD regarding to simulate the real world. The definition of 'good' here is, how many aspects of the real world are simulated as good as possible. Now that makes sense .In the terms of "aspects of the real world are simulated as good as possible" which I agree, we have to add the environment graphics, atmosphere and physics and to that aspect WarThunder is 1000 times better than the old il2. The rest are very relative to put to the table since control failure depending on damage are simulated more or less on all. So the statement that War Thunder is not a simulation is not valid. Edited April 25, 2015 by AvengerSeawolf
SKG51_robtek Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 Now that makes sense .In the terms of "aspects of the real world are simulated as good as possible" which I agree, we have to add the environment graphics, atmosphere and physics and to that aspect WarThunder is 1000 times better than the old il2. The rest are very relative to put to the table since control failure depending on damage are simulated more or less on all. So the statement that War Thunder is not a simulation is not valid. Sorry ,there you are wrong, the graphics are the only thing that WT does better! Atmosphere is a very subjective thing and has nothing to do with simulation and the physics of WT are waaaay behind IL2-1946. Eye candy doesn't make a good simulation, it can only support it.
Capt_Stubing Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 My list was more than 2 things which you did not read that's why you want me to tell again.and were not corrected anyway. Have already tested that game 1 month ago at the same time I bought Bos and still the same lame it was. 12 years and remained a junk with just difference more planes and that was it. And yes I agree that old il-2 was a waste of time. Now do you have a problem whith what other people like more or less to play ? or are they not allowed to have their opinion ? , Cause this attitude stinks of Fascist origin How would you know? you never played it. You never played with Mods did you? And it's obvious you have no clue what you're talking about. Have a great day
AvengerSeawolf Posted April 25, 2015 Posted April 25, 2015 (edited) Sorry ,there you are wrong, the graphics are the only thing that WT does better! Atmosphere is a very subjective thing and has nothing to do with simulation and the physics of WT are waaaay behind IL2-1946. Eye candy doesn't make a good simulation, it can only support it. Physics in WT on the sim mode are IMO ( and that's what counts for me cause I will play the game or not, I will enjoy it or not) waaaay better than the old il-2, so do graphics as well , cause as said "aspects of the real world are simulated as good as possible" and aspect of the real world is also the environment. You can't climb up to 5000 meters and the environment to look like you are in 100000 meters high and even behave that way in some short of ... as in il2 did. At the other hand have you ever flown a real Bf 109 or other plane simulated in il2 to be able to judge it's accuracy presented in any sim ? How would you know? you never played it. You never played with Mods did you? And it's obvious you have no clue what you're talking about. Have a great day Make up your mind , did I play it , did I played it not , didn;t played it enough ? It doesn;t matter anyway cause you are not in a position to tell what anyone else has played and for how long. Finnaly you did not answer to me do you have a problem with what other people like more or less to play ? or are they not allowed to have their opinion ? Edited April 25, 2015 by AvengerSeawolf
Recommended Posts