Jump to content
BlitzPig_EL

61 People Online on a Saturday.

Recommended Posts

  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.

 

 

Another line proving that you really do not know what you are talking about. Before WT, Gaijin published *drums* Il-2 Birds of Prey. It was a fairly lightweight flying game with simplified, licensed-from-il2 flight physics. And not a lot of content. Bad as a simulation, yet too difficult for casuals(unlike WT). It was marketed as a flight sim... Which it wasnt, and it more or less failed. That game later evolved into World of Planes that became the War Thunder.

 

Il-2 is brand of a simulation, not of an action game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

That game later evolved into World of Planes that became the War Thunder

 

 Evolved , so I now what I am talking about, I mentioned this word multiple times, but seems you do not like to read all that I write but refer to portions to proove  an opposition.
So you don;t know  what you really talk about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Games evolve and become better,

 

Well,I am used to like Call of Duty early games, but as they "evolve"...  :biggrin:

Edited by Sokol1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by FS_Fenice_1965

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 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 by 14./JG5CaptStubing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by AvengerSeawolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 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...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by AvengerSeawolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 ?  :lol:  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 by AvengerSeawolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...