Patience and realistic expectations are what BoS and the hi-fi flight sim genre need

[Freycinet]

I am reading about BoS on quite a few different forums, and I think quite a lot of people are being way to harsh on 777 Studios and RoF and the fact that they are now in the driver's seat with BoS. 777 Studios actually got a viable economic model going for flight sim development, which is huge, and the basis for EVERYTHING.

To say - as some do - that BoS will just be WWII on a RoF map does the new 1C Studios team a big injustice. I am sure they have a lot of goodies up their sleeve with BoS, judging from the amazing improvements to RoF over the years. The important thing to remember is that the improvements to BoS after the initial release will NECESSARILY have to be rolled out INCREMENTALLY, for economic and time schedule reasons. As CoD sadly showed no company will finance a 7 year development period in this small niche sector.

I expect that BoS will be a rather bare-bones sim, with not so much content early on but with the architecture for future additions in place. The barren wastes of the Russian steppes - in winter no less - will be a perfect first place for a map that will be ONE and not four years in the making (As the RoF Channel map compared to the CoD Channel map).

The worst thing, the absolutely worst thing, the flight sim community can do is to heap criticism on BoS from the day of release. I witnessed the terrible spectacle of that with CoD and I really don't want to see it again. ...But it seems a lot of people don't learn and that it is starting again. So, please cherish the fact that some people are putting their life-blood into hi-fi sim development (instead of WoT, WoP, or whatever all the arcade games are called...). Oleg, Luthier, Loft, A. Petrovich, Jason and the many others behind the scenes are all really good people with the heart in the right place. They are passionate about flight sims and they are the ones who have actually kept a small niche genre alive in the face of mainstream entertainment.

I really really hope we are in for years of great development with the new franchise and I would be immensely sad if it is cut short in the beginning like we have just seen with CoD. People really have to scale their expectations to the economic reality of flight sim development and to the amount of work that can be possibly done by small development teams on small budgets & with limited time.

 

Don't compare flight sim visuals to blockbuster games: both because the money is FAR from the same and because blockbuster FPS's don't have to simulate all the complex under-the-hood details that go into flight sims (and don't have the huge maps either). Flight sims perhaps look less stunning but there's a lot more calculations going on while they run, and they are approximations of REALITY instead of feverish teen fantasies like Far Cry 3. Flight sims are damn' hard to make and we are all fortunate that there is a small community of superbly talented hi-fi flight sim developers in Moscow (they all know each other) working for a few small companies. Good people all of them who deserve our support and patience. Over and out.  

[Ribbs]

Perfectly said Freycinet.. it should be pinned and locked down. No other comments needed S!

[Mac_Messer]

I appreciate the optimism, as imo it is what keeps a dream about a great ww2 sim alive. Although I'd rather keep it relistic too(not sceptical). Not raising expectations too high is one thing, having no ambition is different.There is always a need for visionary ideas.

And so we ft to the question of how much of a bearbones sim BoS can be and appeal to sim flliers simultaneously.

Iam against giving BoS credit without reason. It will get reviews on the same criteria CloD/RoF were.

We should wish most thngs work out this time.

 

 

[APIKalimba]

Hello Freycinet,

 

BOS will inevitably be compared with existing WWII  flight  sims. That is how it works. 777 won't escape it. CLOD, DSC and WT have built, each in their own market, a very high quality products. 

Expectations will be based on that kind of products, already availble. The 777 client????le will be playing those games at the time of BOS release. 777 challengers are other great WWII flight sims. Not Bluckbusters FPS... 

If 777 can pull off a sim that can be as good or even better than those mentioned , and this within 14 months, BOS will be a winner...

Time will tell....

 

Salute

[Freycinet]

Compare to other flight sims by all means, but also remember how long they have been in development and how they were in the early days...

[DB605]

Well put Freycinet, agreed to every word. Can't wait to be back at east front!

[APIKalimba]

Compare to other flight sims by all means, but also remember how long they have been in development and how they were in the early days...

I agree that a "reasonable"  reception at release would be appreciated, but people forget...Both ways ...

At release, CLOD, ROF and other good sims had really bad reviews also...Now, after many updates,  they are considered "classics".

That means BOS could have the same faith at release, without being a bad sim...

And when a company puts out a product that draws attention and big hopes like IL2 brand, peolple don't care about how much it cost to build and how long it has been in development...They just expect and compare...Human nature...

777 is aiming at a niche market and hopes that "we" , the hardcore simmers, will understand what they are building with BOS...A long term top notch sim...

Lets hope that "we" will remember all that wisdom in 2014 

 

Salute !

[-NW-ChiefRedCloud]

I appreciate the optimism, as imo it is what keeps a dream about a great ww2 sim alive. Although I'd rather keep it relistic too(not sceptical). Not raising expectations too high is one thing, having no ambition is different.There is always a need for visionary ideas.

And so we ft to the question of how much of a bearbones sim BoS can be and appeal to sim flliers simultaneously.

Iam against giving BoS credit without reason. It will get reviews on the same criteria CloD/RoF were.

We should wish most thngs work out this time.

 

There is nothing wrong with a wait and see attitude. A point that we all have to subscribe too.

 

Hello Freycinet,

 

BOS will inevitably be compared with existing WWII flight sims. That is how it works. 777 won't escape it. CLOD, DSC and WT have built, each in their own market, a very high quality products.

Expectations will be based on that kind of products, already availble. The 777 client????le will be playing those games at the time of BOS release. 777 challengers are other great WWII flight sims. Not Bluckbusters FPS...

If 777 can pull off a sim that can be as good or even better than those mentioned , and this within 14 months, BOS will be a winner...

Time will tell....

 

Salute

 

High expectations are killer but to be expected. Even with all it's remaining problems, CloD is a beautiful sim. To expect anything less is understandable but perhaps not realistic. We can but hope.

 

But IF all the doubters and those that feel that they have been done wrong, or those who have nothing better to do than "complain" (Not saying there is any complaining) keep chipping away and things, this does not make for a pleasent atmosphere to be creative in (if they but read the forums). A fine line lies between contructive critisiuem and gripping.

 

Any way, well said Freycinet and others here ....

[=BKHZ=Furbs]

I agree, its going to be tough but if they get a few key things done very well, then they have a good chance.

 

They need to grab the IL2 crowd and make them want to switch...

 

First of all it need to work out of the box and play very well...no show stopping bugs or problems

 

Single player has to be good, most flight simmers are offline, so it has to have a well written campaign that offers varied careers and good replay value.

 

AI has to be at least as good as IL2, anything less and people wont bother with SP.

 

The QMB again has to be easy to use, fun and again offer varied missions including ground attack...having played the ROF QMB i have no worries there.

 

MP has to have COOP's, if they want the IL2 crowd this is a must, one of the top must have features.

It needs to be as easy to use as IL2 but with bells and whistles added.

 

I think if they get them right and have good enough FM, DM and CEM they will at least on the right track.

 

Me quoting myself from the other forum.   (does paste not work?)

Edited December 29, 2012 by Furbs

[dburne]

I certainly agree with the OP, well said!

[=BKHZ=Furbs]

I get the feeling this is a more of a test of the engine and possible player base,

 

I dont think they will be risking too much in the timeframe they have, if it sells well and the reviews are good, then i expect they will reach further.

 

They are going for a working, upgraded IL2 that plays well.

 

If they get that right and the IL2 crowd switch over, then we can expect further theaters and upgrades to the engine...64bit DX11 and such.

[Ribbs]

Its not hard to see the avenue of approach. They are taking.. if we all start thinking of this installment as the first IL2..in the series.. and not 1946 modded, then we will all be better off. They are building the foundation right now

.... not the penthouse suites. S!

[Freycinet]

Here's part of Jasons reply in the RoF forum regarding the sound bug that appeared with the latest update:

 

http://riseofflight.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=34688

"Making over the top demands of us in a public manner does nothing to improve the situation. Bug are an unfortunate part of software development. You can still enjoy this ROF update for the most part and based on the reaction from the community you are, minus the sound bug.

After 3+ years of public development and 30+ updates there is zero need to be dramatic about this. When a nasty bug like this appears or a known bug worsens, we will obviously work to fix it as soon as we can."

 

Together with what Loft wrote in his initial BoS statement, I think it should be pretty clear to all that excessive whining and constant spamming with demands ("I will keep posting this all the time until it is changed") is NOT helpful at all to the developers. Not only that, it also totally sours the atmosphere in forums.

 

I don't expect the hardcore "complainers" to change their behaviour, because it is obviously a part of their genetic make-up. But if the rest of us would refrain from jumping on the bandwagon immediately whenever over-the-top demands are made, then I definitely think it could be helpful. It is really just a case of thinking of the developers as being "on our side", which they clearly are, because if they weren't huge fans of hi-fi flight simming they'd certainly find an easier way to earn a buck. And treat them like actual people, fellow simmers, instead of viewing them as evil capitalist scammers. 

 

A couple of years ago many people spent the waiting time for CoD working themselves into a frenzy over The Second Coming of Il-2. The expectations were sky high and with the buggy release the mood soured instantly, helped along by all the back-stabbing you-know-who-they-are clamouring for prophet status. If we can manage expectations for BoS - with the help of Lofts straight-talk developer diary - then we can hopefully avoid similar hysterics in 2014... 

[=BKHZ=Furbs]

The big thing for me, i trust Jason and his team to do what ever they set out to do.

If they say it will be in...it will be, if they cant do it...they will say so and most often why they cant.

 

Straight talking in regard to the product and the public go a long way in my book.

 

If problems or bugs appear, they fix them ASAP.

 

Jason+Loft play their own product with their own customers...the PR is top notch.

 

Do i think BOS will be the third coming? no, will it work and be enjoyable out the gate? yes....after that, anything is possible.

[GOAT-ACEOFACES]

The worst thing, the absolutely worst thing, the flight sim community can do is to heap criticism on <insert name of flight sim here> from the day of release. I witnessed the terrible spectacle of that with CoD and I really don't want to see it again. ...But it seems a lot of people don't learn and that it is starting again.

Fixxed that for ya!

 

And agree 100%

[wiseblood]

Good post.  There are really two things operating at the same time -

 

* unrealistic demands placed on the product pre-release, which can tend to push it towards being another "noble failure" flightsim

 

* shrieking, hysterical intolerance of any failure of any kind in any component

 

Not really something that can be sustained as a model for development, I think.  It's an interesting experiment to take a look at the "you should make it like feature X in game Y" posts and then ask "what happened to developer Z who made that one, then?"

 

One thing I would disagree on - you are never going to hold back the tide of people who aren't satisfied with the product for whatever reason (who have every right to post their impressions), or the semi-pro trolls trying to stir shit up.  The former are easy enough to deal with just by decent, clear communication.  But the latter - really, the kind of person who is unreasonable enough to make post after bloviating post month in month out about some imagined slight or issue, isn't the kind of person you are going to reason out of doing it by pointing out that it's stupid and damaging.  I think the key factor is making sure that the group of people with something positive to say are larger and more vocal than the guy with 4 forum accounts posting the same old nonsense daily.

Edited December 30, 2012 by wiseblood

[nynek]

Don't compare flight sim visuals to blockbuster games: both because the money is FAR from the same and because blockbuster FPS's don't have to simulate all the complex under-the-hood details that go into flight sims (and don't have the huge maps either). Flight sims perhaps look less stunning but there's a lot more calculations going on while they run, and they are approximations of REALITY instead of feverish teen fantasies like Far Cry 3. Flight sims are damn' hard to make and we are all fortunate that there is a small community of superbly talented hi-fi flight sim developers in Moscow (they all know each other) working for a few small companies. Good people all of them who deserve our support and patience. Over and out.  

 

Dear Freycinet

I'm just tired reading about this "niche" stuff.

Look at this link  http://www.fspilotshop.com/software-fsx-add-ons-c-2_70.html  and then tell me how the hell they survived to this day. Personally I spent there around 500 CAD on soft only.

The moment new game will be BETTER in MOST aspects than anything on the marked it WILL sell. Thing is the base has to be right. After that they can sell ammo in kilograms and You know what ? We will buy it.

Time and again across all the simms genre makers of games always know BETTER what we need. Effect is like with SH5 which I can finally play after 2 years but with a HUNDRED plus mods. So don't tell me about

complication of mathematics game code because over and over again I can see that after a year or two I can fully enjoy a simm thanks to not even hackers but in most cases .txt file editors.

We need platform. Period. If it will look and feel like it was made in 2013 then we will be in.

Thanks for the movies on YT

[wiseblood]

Couldn't demonstrate my point better -

 

Dear Freycinet

I'm just tired reading about this "niche" stuff.

Look at this link  http://www.fspilotshop.com/software-fsx-add-ons-c-2_70.html  and then tell me how the hell they survived to this day. Personally I spent there around 500 CAD on soft only.

The moment new game will be BETTER in MOST aspects than anything on the marked it WILL sell. Thing is the base has to be right. After that they can sell ammo in kilograms and You know what ? We will buy it.

Time and again across all the simms genre makers of games always know BETTER what we need. Effect is like with SH5 which I can finally play after 2 years but with a HUNDRED plus mods. So don't tell me about

complication of mathematics game code because over and over again I can see that after a year or two I can fully enjoy a simm thanks to not even hackers but in most cases .txt file editors.

We need platform. Period. If it will look and feel like it was made in 2013 then we will be in.

Thanks for the movies on YT

 

"please follow the example of defunct developer Z, I spent a tonne of money on their product, about <20% of which actually went to them".  Do you understand that from the point of view of the development team this is a good business case study in failure?

[sop]

Fixxed that for ya!

 

And agree 100%

i disagree 100% 07

sop

gunner of AOA and malchiel in rof, p-38 ace in il2

 

This verison of il3 is going to be awsome and we wont be all playing pacman 2014

Edited December 30, 2012 by sop

[Freycinet]

Nynek, you are definitely not a mainstream player, with all your investments in software and mods. They don't need to attract you, but the mainstream gamers...

[Panzerlang]

Personally I'd be happy if BoS was just Il2 with proper full-screen. The only reason I never came back to Il2 after I went wide-screen was all the jiggery-pokery involved in getting it to run full-screen, and that at the cost of losing the top and bottom of what I should have been able to see.

 

Anything on top of that will be a bonus. WW2 RoF? The only reasons I stopped flying RoF were the missing planes for SP and lack of online wars for MP. Will I sink as much money into BoS as I did with RoF? Oh yes.

[Kling]

First of all I want to point out that im a huge fan of ROF and a not so huge fan of CLOD although i played Il21946 almost daily from 2001-2011.

 

I have to say that i dont agree with the rumour that all the negative posts and all the whiners killed CLOD. I have read this here and on the banana forum. That is rediculous! Most game owners never even visit the official game forum.

Second, there would not be so many negative posts if the developer used common sense and were honest with the community. Some clear comunication is vital here.

Something that Jason and his crew are very good at!!

I can live with bugs as long as I know that the developer is aware of it and said they will look into it.

But what i cannot stand is complete silence and ignorance. Even the simplest bugs and fixes were ignored and the after a year of posting bugs on 1C official website we were told that they were unaware of the buglist and that they cannot read english. Honestly, if you are passionate about your own creation, you would at least look at the official bug list once!

 

This being said, its sad that CLOD stoped. It had plenty of potential although a very buggy graphics engine and lacking AA etc etc. Its nothing which could not be fixed with a team who listened to the community and understand that although the community is a small part of all the players, their opinions most likely reflect the average players opinions.

 

Im very happy about 777 steering the boat when is comes to BOS! They have very good immersion ideas and im sure it will be great just as ROF is!

Edited December 30, 2012 by Kling

[dkoor]

Personally I wouldn't mind one bit if BoS turns out to be RoF with WW2 map and new planes.

 

Why expecting something so much better than this?

 

Is that realistic?

 

I don't want to wait for (years) another CLoD that in the end turns out to be [EDITED BY FSM TO DOUSE POTENTIAL FLAMES] LESS THAN OPTIMAL that doesn't live up to minimum expectations.

Even worse, I find RoF to be visually in some aspects even better.than CLoD.

Edited December 30, 2012 by FlatSpinMan

[SR-F_Winger]

Absolutely agree to the OP!

 

Winger

[Zorin]

I am reading about BoS on quite a few different forums, and I think quite a lot of people are being way to harsh on 777 Studios and RoF and the fact that they are now in the driver's seat with BoS. 777 Studios actually got a viable economic model going for flight sim development, which is huge, and the basis for EVERYTHING...

 

It is all a question of scale. Getting all that IL-2 is now (2012) in terms of game mechanics, woulc make the sim VIABLE, nothing more nothing less. The basic ROF DM and FM with the limited systems they want to simulate is OK, but not hi-fi, simply because we all know that the system and damage mechanics of CloD were hi-fi. As we were told, more or less, CloD failed because of a less than streamlined coding effort by too many different and differently skilled coders, yet the knowledge for ALL features still remains with the 1C/777 team, so why not do it right this time round and implementing the featues properly?

 

I certainly agree that in terms of countable content, planes, maps, objects, we have to keep our expectations low, as 1946 had a decade to accumulate its huge library of content, yet playing it as save as it has been hinted so far in terms of hi-fi features is not the way to go for a team that basically has done it all before already and is now simply afraid of themselves not getting it finally right.

[falstaff]

The important thing to remember is that the improvements to BoS after the initial release will NECESSARILY have to be rolled out INCREMENTALLY, for economic and time schedule reasons. As CoD sadly showed no company will finance a 7 year development period in this small niche sector.

 

I'm not sure it really is that much of a 'niche sector'...it must fluctuate given the rising and falling popularity of certain types of flight games and genres. There's a fairly sizeable chunk of people (many of them older, with disposeable income?) who form a bedrock layer. Look at how many people buy flight-sim hardware, gizmos and paraphernalia - they wouldn't make this stuff if there wasn't a decent market for it. Equally, they wouldn't make flight games for one man and his dog, even if the dog was very nice.

 

I expect that BoS will be a rather bare-bones sim, with not so much content early on but with the architecture for future additions in place.

 

Let's hope so. They can add more later. But it also has to work...i.e. have a heart.

 

The worst thing, the absolutely worst thing, the flight sim community can do is to heap criticism on BoS from the day of release.

 

I disagree. It boils down to the game. If it deserves praise, by all means heap it on, and spread the word. If it isn't so good or has glaring faults, then let it be treated to a diversity of opinion, good and bad. Either way, you want the truth, not molly-coddling. You also want balanced criticism, and a chance for the devs to put it right, where possible. It is fundamentally about being both honest and fair. The broader question of supporting a supposedly dying niche, or what the future may bring, only become important once the immmediate details are sorted out. Concrete before abstract....

 

I witnessed the terrible spectacle of that with CoD and I really don't want to see it again.

 

Amen, let's not go there. See above...truth telling.

 

...But it seems a lot of people don't learn and that it is starting again.

 

Can we avoid criticising the criticism? Dead and gone. Things should be judged on merit, this will too. It's about bringing a level head, not a prior set of views.

 

So, please cherish the fact that some people are putting their life-blood into hi-fi sim development (instead of WoT, WoP, or whatever all the arcade games are called...). Oleg, Luthier, Loft, A. Petrovich, Jason and the many others behind the scenes are all really good people with the heart in the right place. They are passionate about flight sims and they are the ones who have actually kept a small niche genre alive in the face of mainstream entertainment.

 

Passion is great, but doesn't make a game by itself. The passion both for and against Clod was err...well-developed.

 

I really really hope we are in for years of great development with the new franchise and I would be immensely sad if it is cut short in the beginning like we have just seen with CoD.

 

It depends on the game. If it's good, or ok, or meets expectations, I think most will be extrenely happy. If it's not good, people will say so. The game determines the opinion, not the other way round - you would hope. I am cautiously optimistic.

 

People really have to scale their expectations to the economic reality of flight sim development and to the amount of work that can be possibly done by small development teams on small budgets & with limited time.

 

Agreed. Time is big factor here. I dont think the dev team will be that small, though, or the audience a mere 'niche'. This isn't a back-bedroom start-up.

 

Good people all of them who deserve our support and patience.

 

Agreed. And our (collective) honesty, tempered by experience.

Edited December 30, 2012 by falstaff

[=IRFC=Jorri]

If the developers wanted to make big money, they would be developing something else.

 

In stead, they are developing flight sims.

[DD_bongodriver]

If the developers wanted to make big money, they would be developing something else. In stead, they are developing flight sims.

 

Yes, agree totally, to make big money they would have a console portable game in mind, I see no reason why software development companies like 777 or 1C would want to make money.

[slm]

 I see no reason why software development companies like 777 or 1C would want to make money.

 

I thought all companies try to make money.

[nynek]

Yes, agree totally, to make big money they would have a console portable game in mind, I see no reason why software development companies like 777 or 1C would want to make money.

Good one bongodriver...I am with You on that one... investing in developing flight sim is charity and tax loophole escape....Yea...

Edited December 30, 2012 by nynek

[DD_bongodriver]

I thought all companies try to make money.

 

Clearly not, 1C spent years and millions developing a sim only to bin it before it could make a return on investment (I believe this is a clear case of the lack of patience Freycinet has eluded to in the OP), and 777 just like making nice sims for us to play.

[slm]

Bongodriver:

Notice the word *try*.

In my country they are building a nuclear power plant. It seems building will take 3 times as long as was planned.

I don't think the expensive delay is intentional.

[DD_bongodriver]

Bongodriver:

Notice the word *try*.

In my country they are building a nuclear power plant. It seems building will take 3 times as long as was planned.

I don't think the expensive delay is intentional.

 

Never mind...., but on another not have you ever noticed how most major engineering projects go over budget and over time......thats because somwhere in the process someone is making money from it.

[slm]

Yes, there have been many such budget failures.

Another big reason why those things happen is that who gets the deal may be decided based on who makes the cheapest offer. Even if it isn't realistic.

The client probably tries to make the contract so that if things don't go as planned, they don't lose as much money.

Edited December 30, 2012 by slm

[Bearcat]

Hello Freycinet,

 

BOS will inevitably be compared with existing WWII  flight  sims. That is how it works. 777 won't escape it. CLOD, DSC and WT have built, each in their own market, a very high quality products. 

Expectations will be based on that kind of products, already availble. The 777 client????le will be playing those games at the time of BOS release. 777 challengers are other great WWII flight sims. Not Bluckbusters FPS... 

If 777 can pull off a sim that can be as good or even better than those mentioned , and this within 14 months, BOS will be a winner...

Time will tell....

 

Salute

Yes but each of those you mentioned have their own issues that have rendered them for all intents and purposes moot and hopefully BoS will not fall into that category.. I'd rather have a sim that runs well on rigs that are current to 4-5 years old decently with the potential to run on more powerful next gen systems than have one that is cutting edge but only runs on top of the line systems.. because that means that the number of people who can support it - because let's face it, if people have to upgrade to run a product you have lost a large segment of your market right off the bat- will be much smaller and without adequate support, no matter how great a sim is.. it's developers will be forced to either compromise or abandon it..

[wiseblood]

My understanding of it is that they intend to make it run acceptably well on a decent-to-good gaming laptop spec.  But that spec will be the decent-to-good gaming laptop spec of 2014.  I would encourage you to look at the spec of $750-1500 laptops right now and project what that's going to be in 18+ months - probably not too far away from an average to good really nice desktop now. 

 

I mean, the CPU recommended for the game on the RoF site is 5 years old now.  I doubt that is going to be a factor in the min spec for BoS.

[APIKalimba]

Yes but each of those you mentioned have their own issues that have rendered them for all intents and purposes moot and hopefully BoS will not fall into that category.. I'd rather have a sim that runs well on rigs that are current to 4-5 years old decently with the potential to run on more powerful next gen systems than have one that is cutting edge but only runs on top of the line systems.. because that means that the number of people who can support it - because let's face it, if people have to upgrade to run a product you have lost a large segment of your market right off the bat- will be much smaller and without adequate support, no matter how great a sim is.. it's developers will be forced to either compromise or abandon it..

Hello Bearcat,

 

CLOD's bad coding and flaws in its design were the prime cause of technical issues ...Not because it was technically too advanced. Even top machines can not run it smoothly...

It is possible, and even desirable to have a cutting edge technology at release,  that can be toned down for lower systems, and still having good performances on a large spectrum of rigs. This way, a longer lifespan for the engine can be achieve with fewer upgrades. For those who have powerful machines, they will enjoy the game at its best. Movies will be done and screenshots taken so people will see what the game can do when ran at top settings. It is good marketting. Crysis series are a good exemple of that.

 As for WarThunder, it  already has superb graphics ( terrain, clouds, weather, etc...)  and acceptable FM/DM  and can run on average machines at very good FPS without any hiccups or slowdowns with settings high enough to enjoy its beauty..... So it is possible to achieve. 

It will be interesting to see how much of eye candy and photorealism will be needed  for BOS in 14 months to satisfy the crowd. By that time WT will be gold and upgraded for the 50 th time and maybe CLOD will have new mods and a second life like IL2 1946...The bar will be quite high still for BOS. Can they compete with an "old" engine ? I don't know....

 But 777 and 1C have a LOT of expertise by now...They've been thru hell of their own. They know better. I am convinced BOS will be the foundation of a future masterpiece. 

 

SAlute !

[Bearcat]

Hello Bearcat,

 

CLOD's bad coding and flaws in its design were the prime cause of technical issues ...Not because it was technically too advanced. Even top machines can not run it smoothly...

It is possible, and even desirable to have a cutting edge technology at release,  that can be toned down for lower systems, and still having good performances on a large spectrum of rigs. This way, a longer lifespan for the engine can be achieve with fewer upgrades. For those who have powerful machines, they will enjoy the game at its best. Movies will be done and screenshots taken so people will see what the game can do when ran at top settings. It is good marketting. Crysis series are a good exemple of that.

 As for WarThunder, it  already has superb graphics ( terrain, clouds, weather, etc...)  and acceptable FM/DM  and can run on average machines at very good FPS without any hiccups or slowdowns with settings high enough to enjoy its beauty..... So it is possible to achieve. 

It will be interesting to see how much of eye candy and photorealism will be needed  for BOS in 14 months to satisfy the crowd. By that time WT will be gold and upgraded for the 50 th time and maybe CLOD will have new mods and a second life like IL2 1946...The bar will be quite high still for BOS. Can they compete with an "old" engine ? I don't know....

 But 777 and 1C have a LOT of expertise by now...They've been thru hell of their own. They know better. I am convinced BOS will be the foundation of a future masterpiece. 

 

SAlute !

I agree.. the thing that I disliked the most about WT was the YP system.. and I think it will cost too much.. but it looks good.. I always had issues with it .. and WoP in the berginning.. I liked WoP but that YP system was a big minus for me.. I thought the GFMs were decent enough.. and graphically it is PDG.. Did they ever fix the skinning system from WoP? Even now when I boot up WT I get a black screen.. I just got tired of messing with it..

[Bearcat]

I have to say that i dont agree with the rumour that all the negative posts and all the whiners killed CLOD. I have read this here and on the banana forum. That is rediculous! Most game owners never even visit the official game forum.

 

I think less than the forum posts are the online store site reviews .. Just go to Amazon for one example.. and read the reviews on CoD. That did more to hurt the sim than any forum troll could ever do becase more people will see tha review and act accordingly based on it than will see the troll.

 

Personally I'd be happy if BoS was just Il2 with proper full-screen. The only reason I never came back to Il2 after I went wide-screen was all the jiggery-pokery involved in getting it to run full-screen, and that at the cost of losing the top and bottom of what I should have been able to see.

 

Anything on top of that will be a bonus. WW2 RoF? The only reasons I stopped flying RoF were the missing planes for SP and lack of online wars for MP. Will I sink as much money into BoS as I did with RoF? Oh yes.

 

 I believe WS is due in the soon to be (hopefully) 4.12 patch from TD.

[falstaff]

...morals...next to ethics...next to Sussex...sorry (English in-joke)

 

I get what you are staying Raaid but I think it's over-stated. Devs and programmers have professional pride and are accountable to their own team, their manager/s and financiers, never mind the consumer.

 

Personal comments and grievances are to be found aplenty in most dev houses (I have worked in them) but where programming is concerned it tends to be in the form of code 'comment', not deliberately bad coding, or even subconsciously bad coding. I think it is unlikely, both in flight-sims and elsewhere.

 

Besides, most programmers I know are so insecure about their jobs, that their code is their 'shop window'...they want it to do well to act as an advert for other potential employers.

 

I hear what you're saying (and the implication of what it does to existing or recent games) but I think there's more than a 'love thing' involved. Less group hug and emoting, and more rational calmness and competence is what's needed, especially in this genre..

 

....a lot of the comment I see in all flight-sim forums is off the wrong foot...not through any fault of the poster/'s or lack of intelligence...but simply because the poster/s do not understand the fundamental design principles or the technical side of coding and what is involved in the various operations, and how they relate to eachother. I think flight-sim devs would have a far easier time generally if they posted a few 'stickies' about the fundamental design principles and coding heirarchies. Then a lot of things would be much clearer, and a lot of the emotion would be taken out. Equally, what *is* possible in certain scenarios, would also be clearer.

Edited December 31, 2012 by falstaff