Jump to content
SCG_Neun

The future looks better all the time.

Recommended Posts

"...but the online MP arenas are more than likely not going to garner the same type of numbers as the past generated...."

 

Because there are not the same types of MP combat flight sims now as in the past.  IL-2 1946 had co-op against AI and overall a more realistic "thinking" type of MP combat flight sim experience.  Did the customer base get old.  I don't think so.  There are young players coming of age all the time who would be interested in a next generation IL-2 1946 type combat flight sim experience.  My great nephew (he's 15) got BoS for Christmas.  I asked him how he liked it a couple of weeks ago.  He said he had quit playing it and went back to IL-2 1946 because BoS was boring.  He got hooked on IL-2 1946 when he was 12 and its still his "go to" combat flight sim.  He also likes CloD but gets tired of the one theater and time period.  Not all the youngsters coming up are airheads with a short attention span.  And eye candy only keeps any player's attention for a short time.

 

Also, there are no "next generation" single player flight sims with the same type of combat experience that IL-2 1946 has.  Both in MP and SP the "thinking" more realistic combat flight sim is the market that is ripe for the picking.  IL-2 1946 still holds the crown there and we haven't even seen this market attempted since '46 other than by CloD which unfortunately fell on its face due to the condition in which it was released.  If everyone is wondering where the players are, they are still waiting for the next IL-2 1946 type game.  And this is a different crowd than the WT players.  Build it and they will come (including my great nephew).

 

 

This topic comes up over and over again and it occured to me that while we are always looking to find a reason why IL2 was so popular maybe there was just an element of luck that came in to it. There are games out there that easily could have just been obscure projects (Kerbal) or niche markets (ARMA) but because of youtube and the viral nature of games people can switch on to something unexpectedly who are then followed by millions of others and I think that's partly what happened with IL2 way back then. I think it has proven to be the exception and not the rule among flight sims which mostly do just cater for the niche hardcore market. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In contrast to others here I doubt that 3rd party content will safe BoS/BoM. Very few of the people that own BoS actually download such work. When I look at the downloads of my mission pack, the number of players is still just around 0,5 % of the people registered in the BoS forum.  

 

3rd party work can create longterm interest for people who already own the game, but if enhancements to the games content are supposed to have a positive impact on sales numbers they must be part of the stock game. So far the developers haven't shown much interested in improving online and offline gameplay, that's why I am not optimistic about the success of BoM.

it's such a shame that not many people are downloading and using these fantastic packs. They really do enhance the SP experience tremendously. I really hope that it doesn't discourage you and the other folk who are taking time to create the missions from making anymore. Thank you for all your efforts.  

 

Regards

 

Custard

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we change the title of the thread to 'The future looks bitter all the time'?

 

As it stands the current title can be misleading :dry:

 

Agreed :biggrin: . Maybe within few years there will be no sims left to be bitter about. I think there`s good possibility for that. Everybody is happily playing War Thunder 2 :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's such a shame that not many people are downloading and using these fantastic packs. They really do enhance the SP experience tremendously. I really hope that it doesn't discourage you and the other folk who are taking time to create the missions from making anymore. Thank you for all your efforts.  

 

Regards

 

Custard

Don't worry, I am doing mission building for my personal enjoyment and don't care about download numbers.

 

I should mention, that the downloads for my BoS missions aren't significantly lower than those for my Il-2 1946 missions/campaigns, so the lack of interest isn't limited to BoS. I think the situation is the same in all kinds of games and the majority of players is only playing the stuff that comes with the stock game and doesn't download 3rd party content.

My point is, that people are on the wrong track when they think that developers can leave the creation of content solely to the community. More community content doesn't equal more sales.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

My point is, that people are on the wrong track when they think that developers can leave the creation of content solely to the community. More community content doesn't equal more sales.

 

+1 I hear what you are saying.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 If everyone is wondering where the players are, they are still waiting for the next IL-2 1946 type game.  And this is a different crowd than the WT players.  Build it and they will come (including my great nephew).

 

This big crowd waiting for the "next IL2 1946 type game" must be your personal dream. If this crowd would exist, it would have bought BoS just to bridge the time. The truth is, the young generation wants instant success. The learning curve of a serious flight sim is not matching their needs. At this point, you have to admit, that old IL2 was easier to access for "new" pilots, as the planes wear much easier to handle, as the FM was farer away from the real difficulties of the real thing. The nearer a flight game comes to the real thing, the less customers it will have. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry, I am doing mission building for my personal enjoyment and don't care about download numbers.

 

I should mention, that the downloads for my BoS missions aren't significantly lower than those for my Il-2 1946 missions/campaigns, so the lack of interest isn't limited to BoS. I think the situation is the same in all kinds of games and the majority of players is only playing the stuff that comes with the stock game and doesn't download 3rd party content.

My point is, that people are on the wrong track when they think that developers can leave the creation of content solely to the community. More community content doesn't equal more sales.

 

+1 to that, the enjoyment is mostly in the creation. I love working in teams to build campaigns, which also helps with the promotion of them as you use the network of all of your members, and the more multinational your team, the better!

 

I just checked downloads of our Cliffs of Dover REDUX campaigns (Battle of Britain, Sealion, Malta, Murmansk) and they are currently at 25,300 - about 5,000 per campaign though with the main Battle of Britain campaign at around 10,800. The campaigns have been around a couple of years now except for Murmansk, but downloads in the last year were 8,100 - so still about a third of the total despite the waning popularity of the sim.

 

Don't underestimate the value of PR: just like the devs post dev updates every month or so, a lot of updates as you build your campaigns are really useful for building interest and getting valuable community input. Also, spread the PR and eventually the downloads across multiple forums, in multiple languages if possible - the more sites your campaign is available on, the more languages, naturally the more attention and downloads you can attract.

 

A lot of work goes into these - it's hard work, fun work, but the payoff is the nice feedback from community members.

 

H

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This big crowd waiting for the "next IL2 1946 type game" must be your personal dream. If this crowd would exist, it would have bought BoS just to bridge the time. The truth is, the young generation wants instant success. The learning curve of a serious flight sim is not matching their needs. At this point, you have to admit, that old IL2 was easier to access for "new" pilots, as the planes wear much easier to handle, as the FM was farer away from the real difficulties of the real thing. The nearer a flight game comes to the real thing, the less customers it will have. 

 

This, unfortunately, is true. As much as it pains me, when I think back to my own childhood, starting out with SWOTL and Their Finest Hour, I would never have gotten into BoS right away. Before the original IL-2 I had never even flown with a full flight model in any sim before, and it took years of IL-2 for me to even move up to CEM.

 

That doesn't mean, that there isn't potential for a much larger player base in BoS. At least we need to get a hold of quite a few guys who fly ClOD exclusively online and convince them to at least split their time with BoS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only type of 3rd party content I can think off that can be able to increase sales and keeping the game alive on a long term are mods. Especially total conversions and additional content packs have great contribution to that.

 

Look at Arma 2 for example. Wasn't outstandingly popular either until radical mods like DayZ (which now has been made a standalone title) caused increasing interest in the game. Some people even buy games exclusively for certain mods.

 

With mod support in BoS being very narrow, nearly prohibitive, such 3rd party content is less likely to appear soon.

 

A good game however should not need to rely on mods or any other 3rd party content to succeed. A combination of solid game development, good marketing and wise inclusion of 3rd party content is what makes a game very successfull.

Edited by Stab/JG26_5tuka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least we need to get a hold of quite a few guys who fly ClOD exclusively online and convince them to at least split their time with BoS.

 

Why do you think they would do that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you think they would do that?

 

Why wouldn't they? If BoS can be made as good an online experience as ClOD, why should they want to limit themselves?

Edited by Finkeren

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't they? If BoS can be made as good an online experience as ClOD, why should they want to limit themselves?

 

Many of them see BOS as splitting their community that's why and I'm not even going to bring up some of the poisonous stuff being perpetuated on various forums by certain CLODers.  

 

My philosophy is not to bother, if people prefer certain sims then leave them to it like I would like to enjoy the things I like about BOS. If I was asked to join CLOD to help get the numbers up I wouldn't do it either because I don't particularly enjoy that sim and want to spend my time doing the things I like.

 

Emil

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

That doesn't mean, that there isn't potential for a much larger player base in BoS. At least we need to get a hold of quite a few guys who fly ClOD exclusively online and convince them to at least split their time with BoS.

 

The problem is the player numbers for both titles are about equally split and as said previously CLOD flyers are not going to want to lose their player base to Bos flyers. Indeed there are plenty of posts throughout this forum extolling the virtues of CLOD and in the same breath telling us just how "awful" Bos is. Something which I don't agree BTW. 

The problem is if we lose Company developed WWII flight sims all we will be left with is progressively aging sims with no further hope of improvement unless its via the modding community who I have respect for but who answer to no one but themselves.       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It works both ways it would appear.....I see guys that chastise others for criticizing this game who have never even played the campaign, which let's face it.....is very lacking....and now with Jurii's download figures guys more than likely who complain about the SP not even trying a good mission Pak. It just gets down to whatever floats your boat I suppose.

 

All I can say is thanks to the mission builders...because you made the game enjoyable for me again. But I think we can all agree, this game needs the updates and the third party contributions to keep on coming.....Can we all agree that the game has gotten better with time?

 

I hope the Devs are listening to the suggestions that you guys come up with and giving some serious thought to implementing some positive changes because I really want this game to evolve...And believe me I understand the frustrations posted, but I personally believe that the guys that have not tried some mission oaks and are still complaining.....are just missing out....

Edited by JagdNeun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

It works both ways it would appear.....I see guys that chastise others for criticizing this game who have never even played the campaign, which let's face it.....is very lacking....and now with Jurii's download figures guys more than likely who complain about the SP not even trying a good mission Pak. It just gets down to whatever floats your boat I suppose.

 

It does indeed, but if you check out the main CLOD forums its nowhere near as prevalent than it is on this forum. I am completely in agreement with you regarding the criticism because constructive criticism is a good thing. There is plenty about BoS I'm not happy about but I truly don't think its as bad as some folks seem to think it is. If they really think that then it's probably time to exit stage left?

 

 

 

All I can say is thanks to the mission builders...because you made the game enjoyable for me again
    

 

Ahem to that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My philosophy is not to bother, if people prefer certain sims then leave them to it like I would like to enjoy the things I like about BOS. If I was asked to join CLOD to help get the numbers up I wouldn't do it either because I don't particularly enjoy that sim and want to spend my time doing the things I like.

 

I think you misunderstood me. When I said we needed to 'convince' the ClODers to spend some time with BoS, I didn't actually mean 'go and talk to them'. Rather, we should examine, what has made ClOD a relatively succesful online sim, despite its disasterous development history, and work to make BoS an even better alternative.

 

I'm not out to 'split' any community, I want them all to thrive. Once I find the time to properly set up the newest TF edition of ClOD in a way that runs acceptable on my machine, I'll propably return to ClOD and play that alongside BoS/BoM. Who knows, I might even dig into DCS, which I have yet to fire up despite owning the P-51.  

 

Compared to 5 years ago, we are indeed fortunate to have 3 modern sims all trying to create a WW2 experience at the same time. Why would I want to see any of them go down in flames?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you misunderstood me. When I said we needed to 'convince' the ClODers to spend some time with BoS, I didn't actually mean 'go and talk to them'. Rather, we should examine, what has made ClOD a relatively succesful online sim, despite its disasterous development history, and work to make BoS an even better alternative.

 

I'm not out to 'split' any community, I want them all to thrive. Once I find the time to properly set up the newest TF edition of ClOD in a way that runs acceptable on my machine, I'll propably return to ClOD and play that alongside BoS/BoM. Who knows, I might even dig into DCS, which I have yet to fire up despite owning the P-51.  

 

Compared to 5 years ago, we are indeed fortunate to have 3 modern sims all trying to create a WW2 experience at the same time. Why would I want to see any of them go down in flames?

 

I'm not putting words in your mouth I am just stating a fact that there are people who think like that and it's not just a few and they are the ones you see trolling the SIMHQ forum for example or leaving particularly bad reviews on Steam etc. CLOD and BOS actually have more or less the same number of people who fly online contrary to what gets stated repeatedly on this forum so I would say neither is more successful. If people have time to fly 3 sims that's great but as an onliner I'd prefer to stick to one WW2 sim despite owning CLOD, DCS, ROF and BOS...it's partly a time constraint of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing that makes Clod successfull in MP is simply big missions with 100 players, a huge map and comunity organized events.

 

The later two are very possible in BoS as well. We already have a big map (which has jet to be fully utilized) and seen some small events in BoS by now. Whats ultimately lacking is the player limit of 45, not even half of what is possible in Clod.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5tuka there are the same amount of people flying both sims so neither is more 'successful'. CLOD can host bigger player numbers but both have almost identical numbers online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5tuka there are the same amount of people flying both sims so neither is more 'successful'. CLOD can host bigger player numbers but both have almost identical numbers online.

 

yep.  On Saturday evening, around 9.30 BST there were more people flying BoS online than either CoD, RoF, DCS or hyperlobby.

 

The idea that thousands are just awaiting a top class, high fidelity flight sim to start flying again simply isn't true.  It's a real niche these days.  However, I have no idea how many thousands were online with War Thunder at the time.

 

I was online too - playing golf on the Xbox against my eldest son who's at Uni. a hundred miles away! :wacko:   Times have changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This big crowd waiting for the "next IL2 1946 type game" must be your personal dream. If this crowd would exist, it would have bought BoS just to bridge the time. The truth is, the young generation wants instant success. The learning curve of a serious flight sim is not matching their needs. At this point, you have to admit, that old IL2 was easier to access for "new" pilots, as the planes wear much easier to handle, as the FM was farer away from the real difficulties of the real thing. The nearer a flight game comes to the real thing, the less customers it will have. 

The first thing i noticed was how difficult it was to taxi onto the runway . Im sure many of young new pilots gave up try to take off , even today as a veteran flyer i still dont use the tail wheel unlock , personal i think to  taxi is way too sensative.

Lets get them off the ground first then consentrate on FM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DD_Arthur thats only one occasion. You can't tell which game is more popular without statistical data.

 

Anyway, I did not originally state it to be more ppular and it wasn't even the main point. I said that those 3 elemts make Clod MP popular (at least to me) and compared it to BoS. No need.to draw conclusions which game is ultimately better/more popular.

 

Again, you can't build big amd exiting missions with various objectives utilizing a large terrain and host big comunity events without high enought player limits in MP.

 

And having players spread across various servers doesn't solve a anything. Even BoS servers were full every day player limit would just not allow for diverse, fun mission based servers with frequent actions.

DD_Arthur thats only one occasion. You can't tell which game is more popular without statistical data.

 

Anyway, I did not originally state it to be more ppular and it wasn't even the main point. I said that those 3 elemts make Clod MP popular (at least to me) and compared it to BoS. No need.to draw conclusions which game is ultimately better/more popular.

 

Again, you can't build big amd exiting missions with various objectives utilizing a large terrain and host big comunity events without high enought player limits in MP.

 

And having players spread across various servers doesn't solve a anything. Even BoS servers were full every day player limit would just not allow for diverse, fun mission based servers with frequent actions.

DD_Arthur thats only one occasion. You can't tell which game is more popular without statistical data.

 

Anyway, I did not originally state it to be more ppular and it wasn't even the main point. I said that those 3 elemts make Clod MP popular (at least to me) and compared it to BoS. No need.to draw conclusions which game is ultimately better/more popular.

 

Again, you can't build big amd exiting missions with various objectives utilizing a large terrain and host big comunity events without high enought player limits in MP.

 

And having players spread across various servers doesn't solve a anything. Even BoS servers were full every day player limit would just not allow for diverse, fun mission based servers with frequent actions.

 

The frustrating part - which many people forget/dont know about this - is that we had all that appearing back in Oct before MP was cut down to 33 players per server. It's not an issue of the game or clients that big servers with fun missions arent possible in BoS. If more people recognized this and voiced their opinion about it may have had a chance to chang, but they don't.

Edited by Stab/JG26_5tuka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need a lobby system.

 

That said, the online numbers are getting better and maybe even healthy now. I can fly with more people, much later in the US timezones, on more days of the week now. There are two Expert servers and one Normal server which are often near capacity. Summer maps and BOM should have a further positive effect.

 

Mission builders on those and other servers should see an increase in players over time as well. Mission makers make the game more interesting with varried missions. I love a good furball but I find maps with lots of ground objects and ways to complete those missions the most interesting now.

 

That said, LOBBY PLEASE!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can completely understand the appeal of wanting maximum server slots but when you consider that the average squadron in the allied and LW had around 12 to 14 aircraft 48 is a fair few slots to have. The only way that it seems possibly to properly coordinate really large scale air battles is within organised squads. Casual players tend to just end up in a fir ball   I can understand the desire for large scale air battles if you fly in CLOD.The BOB (Luftschlacht um England) was a different affair from the eastern front as it was fought over a much smaller area but was of course the first major campaign to be fought entirely by air forces.

 

 

 

That said, LOBBY PLEASE!

 

We have one after a fashion http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/12832-bos-launcher/  you can chat in a lobby PM folks and checkout who is in what server.  What is a real shame is it seems as though very few people use it. It's not HL, but thanks to Schmalzfaust  it's the best we have ATM. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea that thousands are just awaiting a top class, high fidelity flight sim to start flying again simply isn't true.  It's a real niche these days.

 

No game like IL-2 1946 with immersive SP campaign and MP play has been attempted since IL-2 1946, so we really don't know.  CloD doesn't count because it was released in such poor condition it flopped coming out of the gates.  By the time TF resurrected it, it was off the radar commercially.

 

I agree with Juri.  Some really excellent content has got to be "in game" to grab the customer.  Then they may go looking for more from the community.  But you've got to wet their appetite first.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread makes me laugh.

Well at least we have brightened your day, so I guess something positive have been achieved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes 48 slots can be enought but only for small, dumped down servers with less variety (example: Dogfightserver). Which on the other hand is a waste of great potential of the giant map scale and talented mission designers trying to find ways to include more fidelity in their server missions.

 

Yes, you are right about people behaviour. But being a player yourself you sure know that sth like that will not happen.

 

Thats why we need more people, to compensate for the lone wolfs, afks, useless vulchers and teamkillers. Otherwise no mission ever will run it's destinated course.

Edited by Stab/JG26_5tuka
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes 48 slots can be enought but only for small, dumped down servers with less variety (example: Dogfightserver). Which on the other hand is a waste of great potential of the giant map scale and talented mission designers trying to find ways to include more fidelity in their server missions.

 

Yes, you are right about people behaviour. But being a player yourself you sure know that sth like that will not happen.

 

Thats why we need more people, to compensate for the lone wolfs, afks, useless vulchers and teamkillers. Otherwise no mission ever will run it's destinated course.

 

Or you do coops where a smaller number of people can make a far more interesting mission compared to any size DF server. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or you do coops where a smaller number of people can make a far more interesting mission compared to any size DF server. 

 

Then why not give us proper coop hosting like ROF offers without the need for dedicated server and what not just to get everyone take off at same time. It's simply too much hassle for average Joe to do a coop in BOS. Since it worked quite well in ROF (hosting coop mission on own PC), why can't it be at least same or better in new evolved and upgraded engine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When people mention team killers here it confuses me. I know it happens a lot in FPS games - I used to play them quite a bit in the day.

 

I honestly didn't have it happen much in the original Il2 series and have never had it happen in this series. Not even once. And I've been flying since day one of EA.

Edited by HerrMurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or you do coops where a smaller number of people can make a far more interesting mission compared to any size DF server.

I think DF servers may be the future of flight simming. It's where the average Joe goes to learn.

 

That said, to improve the experience for the rest of us, ground objects need to be increased and considerably more valuable points wise. (Task v Reward). There needs to be a team bonus for the winning team to encourage playing to the goal. Or better yet, losing team gets 10% of their points. Plenty of guys are playing for points round these parts. I think both of these would considerably enhance the team aspect we old timers are hoping for in the long run. There will always be lone wolfs, however. It is the nature of gaming. So says the FPS sniper of old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nevertheless I hope the 64 limit is still high on the priority list.

Would be nice if they could move the backbone of the game to something like Microsoft azure cloud hosting...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think DF servers may be the future of flight simming. It's where the average Joe goes to learn.

 

That said, to improve the experience for the rest of us, ground objects need to be increased and considerably more valuable points wise. (Task v Reward). There needs to be a team bonus for the winning team to encourage playing to the goal. Or better yet, losing team gets 10% of their points. Plenty of guys are playing for points round these parts. I think both of these would considerably enhance the team aspect we old timers are hoping for in the long run. There will always be lone wolfs, however. It is the nature of gaming. So says the FPS sniper of old.

 

i think another way to go would be more condensed MP missions.

One larger Battle at the front line for Ground attack, and two Airfields, one near the Front and one farther behind the lines as targets for Bombers. 

And if possible only give Points to fighters if they get kills in the immediate mission area.

 

But the again I have no experience with hosting/making Missions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very true.. if you look at CoD, BoS, DCS and HL combined they do not equal the numbers that we saw nightly in the old days of IL2.. For MP in any sim to be successful it needs.

 

  • Easily run Coops
  • Some kind of lobby
  • A friendly FMB so that user made content can grow at a reasonable pace.
  • Being able to host peer to peer - Not an absolute necessity.. but that was one of the things that made IL2 online so great. As long as they had the mission and a decent ping anyone in the coop could host. I can't tell you hopw many times for whatever reason I have been in Coops where the host has issues and someone else grabs the mission from the TS file room and hosts it. All in under a few minutes.

I keep saying it and I think it bears repeating often.. IL2 got so much right. That sim should be the template (as far as options, features, scalability etc)  from which any sew sim starts and then alter and modify as resources and technology allow. I think that some of that stuff is probably being worked on as we speak and I have learned to take the silence of this team not so much as dodging the issue but playing their cards close to the vest. I have no doubt that at the end of the day these folks just want to make a sim that people will buy and enjoy.. for a long time.

 

 

 

 

 

Hmm... that sounds like something that many folks are complaining about as far as it missing from the Campaign.

They must of gotten the hint by now Bearcat hehehe.

 

This game has incredible promise no one can deny that look at the old IL-2.

 

At least Veteranen is entertaining the hell out of me when I do play.

Hope he makes more campaigns for offline.

 

C.U.P. has done the same thing for me for playing offline with incredible historical detail possibilities.

 

You  have not lived until you have attacked Gaddafi in your F-18 while covering your A-7E bombers against MiG-21's subed for 23's

and AAA over tripoli hehe. 1986 was a good year  :biggrin:

 

Good imagination and when you have the game hardware its fun.

 

Always had a good imagination and database for coops.

Edited by WTornado

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm tired of the comparisons between bos and the original il2. This is 2015 not 2001. Why should we have to wait 6+ years before the basics that made 1946 such a classic are introduced? The only similarities between bos and the original are the name and it's ww2 setting. I don't play because it's boring. It's dull. This could have been a classic right out of the box unfortunately the selling points of the original were left out in favour of unlocks. Those have been removed which has left the developers short on ideas or so it would seem. shiney planes won't sell a game when the competition move onto dx11 and 12.

I definitely agree with that statement. I judge BoS in comparison to what other sims can provide. I fly the vast majority of them. Comparisons are inevitable.

 

The future would look brighter had there been a clear willingness to innovate on a template that works. This is the difference between a franchise that fades away and a franchise that survives and gains momentum.

Edited by 71st_AH_Chuck
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It takes a technician to make a game engine. It takes an artist to design gameplay. It's tricky when a technician tries to do both.

  • Upvote 3

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...