BOK at Frooglesim

[Uufflakke]

It took some time but in today's video the upcoming Battle of Kuban is mentioned and shown.

 

[216th_Jordan]

Pretty cool!

[HagarTheHorrible]

Should have mentioned that it works and how well it works in VR.

[216th_Jordan]

Maybe he will touch his Installation again after the next update, would surely be nice to have this sim covered more often.

[ShamrockOneFive]

Glad to hear that he finally covered it. Would be good if he was a little more clear on the demarcation between IL-2: Cliffs of Dover an the IL-2: BoX titles.

[kestrel79]

Good to see this sim getting some love from Froogle. I'm sure he focuses on civil flight sims because that's where the majority of his follows are at, but it would really help get a few more people on board because the planes fly so good and from what I hear VR is the best in this sim. Hopefully someday I'll be able to experience that.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Lol I sent him a msg saying why do you never cover this game and he covered it in the next vid. Cool guy but does not really play this for some reason. I guess it is because it is not full study level.

[ShamrockOneFive]

Lol I sent him a msg saying why do you never cover this game and he covered it in the next vid. Cool guy but does not really play this for some reason. I guess it is because it is not full study level.

 

I get the sense from his commentary that he still connects this with Cliffs of Dover. From the outside... its hard to tell exactly what went down with the series. We know but we've been here on the forums interacting with the devs for a while.

[xvii-Dietrich]

Frooglesim usually covers the civil.sims a lot more, because that's where the players are (by a factor of about 10:1). That said he does occasionally mention DCS, CloD, etc.. when there is something new to report. It's a cool programme. I watch it every week.

[Feathered_IV]

Frooglesim? Never heard of it. Sounds like something from Middle Earth.

[Brano]

Frooglesim? Never heard of it. Sounds like something from Middle Earth.

Same here.Never heard of her 

[ShamrockOneFive]

Frooglesim? Never heard of it. Sounds like something from Middle Earth.

 

He actually does some pretty good weekly news updates on YouTube. Mostly about civil stuff but he occasionally ventures out into other territory.

 

Has a decent following and viewership too so it's good to see IL-2 get a good mention!

[Uufflakke]

With more than 65.000 subscribers + 20.000 views per news update (and sometimes twice a week)  it is the right spot to get the name of the sim mentioned.

According the YouTube comments Frooglesim's reviews are to be considered trustworthy.

And last but not least most - if not all - of his followers are flight sim aficionados. So is there a better place to arouse some interest for IL2?

 

I like to watch his videos just to see what's going on in flight simming world. Mainly civil planes but it is simply jaw dropping the graphics and details of cockpit and airfields.

On the other hand it is a mystery to me what the fun part is in following all the take off procedures, flying 4 hours from A to B and land safely on an airfield at the other side of the ocean.

No ground pounding, mud moving, boom and zoom, strafing, checking your six etc.

 

Oh well, every man to his taste.

[GrendelsDad]

I would think recon and JU-52 missions would appeal to these civi-sim types of flyers. A Pitomnik air-bridge evacuation mission or ferrying of troops over the Kerch Strait would all be satisfying missions. They could take the long way around the edge of the maps and many flights would take 1 hour or more depending on course and interference from enemy fighters.

[DetCord12B]

I would think recon and JU-52 missions would appeal to these civi-sim types of flyers. A Pitomnik air-bridge evacuation mission or ferrying of troops over the Kerch Strait would all be satisfying missions. They could take the long way around the edge of the maps and many flights would take 1 hour or more depending on course and interference from enemy fighters.

 

Not really. It's hard to pull the FSX/P3D/XP users over because of the systems complexity offered by the likes of PMDG, Aerosoft Airbus and others isn't available. Many like myself enjoy taking the aircraft, whatever it may be, and starting in a cold and dark pos and running the real checklists, programming the CDU/MCDU, conducting the startup procedures and so on. The problem is that this IL-2 series has done away with that altogether. No longer are interactive virtual cockpits a thing, you just press a key combo and it does it for you. While I don't really miss that aspect of IL-2 completely myself, it would still be nice to be able to run through the startup procedures of the aircraft we have. Don't get me wrong, IL-2 is by far the deepest sim I've ever encountered with regards to realistic flight dynamics, damage modeling and difficulty, but a lot of people like pressing buttons and toggling switches.

 

Another issue is the lack of third-party and user generated content. FSX and P3D are awash in community and professionally created aircraft (that's a big one), scenery, applications, weather and a myriad of other payware and freeware addons. The devs here have limited that. It's one of the primary reasons why those sims are so popular. Unless those barriers are removed and the developers here cultivate a rich, open modding scene and third-party partnerships, its unlikely our WWII sim will ever expand beyond its current base, at least not exponentially. 

 

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go fly a CAT III approach. 

 

[Jade_Monkey]

Not really. It's hard to pull the FSX/P3D/XP users over because of the systems complexity offered by the likes of PMDG, Aerosoft Airbus and others isn't available. Many like myself enjoy taking the aircraft, whatever it may be, and starting in a cold and dark pos and running the real checklists, programming the CDU/MCDU, conducting the startup procedures and so on.

I imagined that would be the fun part for those sims. Do people actually fly the 2+ hours flights or do they fast forward the boring cruise time? I'm actually curious.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I used to spend hours doing dumb stuff like trying to fly under the Eiffel tower on the Extra 3000 or trying to land a fully loaded 747 on tiny runways like Santos Dumont in Rio or the neighbourhood aeroclub in Jacarepaguá. Lots of flights ended in that frozen time screen with YOU HAVE CRASHED in FS2002.

[sergio_]

I imagined that would be the fun part for those sims. Do people actually fly the 2+ hours flights or do they fast forward the boring cruise time? I'm actually curious.

 

In a typical hardcore session, those 2+ hour flight may be the least fun time. Most of the action would take place in the 20 minutes (to say something, it depends on the flight) it takes for the pilot to set up the route according to real charts, contact the online controller network they are using, etc before actually taking off. After the take off and until the approach, that's probably the boring part. I say 'probably' because it means the least workload compared to the pre-flight, take off and landing phases. Yet many pilots sit in their desks for a complete transoceanic flight, which is a bit more than 2 hours

 

Oh, and I'm not suggesting it is boring. It is simulation, and I bet most of us have problems making people around us understand where the fun is...

[DetCord12B]

I imagined that would be the fun part for those sims. Do people actually fly the 2+ hours flights or do they fast forward the boring cruise time? I'm actually curious.

 

I don't do the long flights across the pond as so many do, and those that do them do them do it in real time. So an actual UK to NY flight for example takes the 12+ hours to complete. It's done in real-time. Thanks but no thanks. With my VA I run short hauls only. None of that international nonsense for me. I run my procedures and checklists (sometimes in multi-crew MP), startup, taxi, do my thing and have a flight that lasts 30 minutes to few hours at most.

 

But to answer your question, yes. Real-time flight hours are accrued. Fast forwarding doesn't work. Which is why I have nothing to do with it and let the hardcore simmers and actual pilots (retired) within the VA do it. Honestly, who the f%$k wants to spend hours on end in a virtual cockpit anywhere? Not me.

 

But it can be fun!

 

Edited August 23, 2017 by detcord12b

[Jason_Williams]

Hey guys,

 

Can we save videos for competing products for the Free Subject section?

 

Thanks,

Jason

[JAGER_Batz]

I don't do the long flights across the pond as so many do, and those that do them do them do it in real time. So an actual UK to NY flight for example takes the 12+ hours to complete. It's done in real-time. Thanks but no thanks. With my VA I run short hauls only. None of that international nonsense for me. I run my procedures and checklists (sometimes in multi-crew MP), startup, taxi, do my thing and have a flight that lasts 30 minutes to few hours at most.

 

But to answer your question, yes. Real-time flight hours are accrued. Fast forwarding doesn't work. Which is why I have nothing to do with it and let the hardcore simmers and actual pilots (retired) within the VA do it. Honestly, who the f%$k wants to spend hours on end in a virtual cockpit anywhere? Not me.

 

But it can be fun!

 

 

Wonderful game, very good physics 

Edited August 24, 2017 by JAGER_Batz

[Flitgun]

Ha ha. Here we are again. 'Combat flight simmers' expressing curiosity at the activities of 'civil flight simmers'. I can see why combat simmers might wonder where the civil simmers get their adrenaline kicks. You may be aware there is a lot of satisfaction and a wealth of interesting knowledge to be gained from using civil sims. I suppose if civil aviation is your day job, then sure, you may disregard my previous point. However, I hold civil simmers close as brothers. It's the many millions playing League of Legends, Hearthstone and similar for which I reserve my horror and dismay.

 

I'm surprised Froogle has not produced more dynamic BoX + VR vids. I know it has been mentioned, but I would have thought it deserves more than a mention given his position.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Ha ha. Here we are again. 'Combat flight simmers' expressing curiosity at the activities of 'civil flight simmers'. I can see why combat simmers might wonder where the civil simmers get their adrenaline kicks. You may be aware there is a lot of satisfaction and a wealth of interesting knowledge to be gained from using civil sims. I suppose if civil aviation is your day job, then sure, you may disregard my previous point. However, I hold civil simmers close as brothers. It's the many millions playing League of Legends, Hearthstone and similar for which I reserve my horror and dismay.

 

I'm surprised Froogle has not produced more dynamic BoX + VR vids. I know it has been mentioned, but I would have thought it deserves more than a mention given his position.

 

One of Froogle's things is that he will not cover early access, which is basically what BOS is all about. Also, he sees this as more of a game which is sad. Unless it is full click pit and 100s of bindings it is not worth it. Shame as the FM here is really good

Edited August 24, 2017 by AeroAce

[sergio_]

Well I guess civil simmers tend to see combat simulation as a game, as combat simmers tend to find civil simulation as boring.

 

I know it's not everyone, there is a good bunch who like everything, but those tendencies do exist, and that is where the shame is, because simulation is already enough of a niche to, in addition, divide us because of some irrelevant details.

[Dutchvdm]

Well I guess civil simmers tend to see combat simulation as a game, as combat simmers tend to find civil simulation as boring.

 

I know it's not everyone, there is a good bunch who like everything, but those tendencies do exist, and that is where the shame is, because simulation is already enough of a niche to, in addition, divide us because of some irrelevant details.

 

I don't know how the current gen civil sims are, but back in the day of MSFS98 these sims had absolutely no immersion. Just some dry missions and boring scenario's. 

 

Flying a Cessna 182 in the Grant Canyon for 20 minutes against flying a long and immersive campaign in a P-38 in European Air War. I chose the latter.

 

How is that today? Are there campaigns of sort. Something like a transport plane in Alaska or Canada. That would be awesome. 

 

Grt M

[sergio_]

The immersion you refer to may well come from the idea of virtual airlines. No matter what is your taste, for sure there is one for you. Bush flying in Alaska, transoceanic, regional, fictional or real airlines reproducing routes and timetables, you name it. There are also 3rd party utilities like FSEconomy that introduce you in a world of air transport.

 

However, I don't quite agree about the level of immersion. 

 

Back around 1984 I discovered the simulation with Fighter Pilot in a Spectrum. And since you only saw an ugly dashboard, half screen blue for the sky and half green for the ground, all the immersion features had to come from your imagination. Also, simmers cared about the serious stuff which was more important than those 'arcade' graphics that games had. Since then until today, everything has been improving in all departments. However, have you noticed the more perfect it gets, the more we talk about immersion? Today we see a smoke column a bit too dense and we are not happy with it. We see a wheel not rotating at the speed it should, and our immersion is broken. One day we'll realize we don't have g-forces in our chair and we won't feel like flying, if you know what I mean.

 

EDIT to complete: My point is, the immersion should come from us, not entirely from the simulator.

Edited August 25, 2017 by Amnesic