A consern from an Old time player

[Bauer]

I don't pretend to be an expert evenso  I am enjoying the game but I keep sensing a potential problem.

I feel it is something that needs to be said and maybe it has already but if I dont mention this now I feel I would be negligent toward the game and its development.

 

It is pretty much recognised and agreed upon  by the flight simm community around the world that one of the best if not the best air simm game every created is IL2 Forgotten Battles. It and all its updated versions have stooded the test of time and even today thousands still play and enjoy it on a regular bases 14 years after it original creation.

 

However I remember its promised successor and I feel It would be a great shame to create another still born game like, dare I say it, Cliffs of Dover.

If we are honest wer can all remember how we all looked forward with great excitment  to release of Cliff of Dover and how  we were mostly disapointed and upset by it when it arrived. Even today dispite its great graphics it does not have the same following as its older brother Il2 FB game. So why was this? What cause this to happen?

 

In my opinion the cause was  based on two elements. One was the loss of dynamic felexability caused by the single battle concept.  The other was  the idea of  change for change sake without thought about if such changes really added anything to playability of the game or subtracted from it.

If one narrows the dynamic flexabiltiy of a game one risks a high dropout rate due to need to constantly repeating  the same missions on the same map. while mission or map variety may not affect  the individual dogfighter it is not so for group centered players, the Coop players who wish to see their play affect out comes of events in the game.

The other reason and possibly the most important was easy of playability.

Playablitiy must come first over realism and this too is where Cliffs of Dover fell down. After purchas it took three of us over two hours to figure out how to get an aircraft and start the engines to our Blenheims.Even then they  burn out before we could get off the ground. This may have been realistic but it was highly unnessessary needlessly frustrating and most importantl no fun. Even to this day I know at least 50 Simmers but none that fly it.  Imagine how great Cliffs of Dover would have been If they had just kept the basic IL2 command system, controles layout and general game structure and just improved and enhansed the graphics and game play. If they kept what worked.

 

I feel that it is important for developers to remember to try to keep the familier and not change the knowns or already learned standards. Look at what happened when  developers  revamped  layouts or changed the names of know processes of operations  from a prievious understood set of standards. Due to such changes  they  met  high user and buyer resistence. Look at the cries that came with the devopment of the Windows 7 over XP and of course Cliffs of Dover when it finaly arrived. Most complaints were about ease of operation and changes to the known understandings.

A good rule of thumb for developers is  to follow how other software developers such as those that  introduce a new versions of a Word prossesors or graphic programs try to keep as much to a standard format as possible so as to shorten relearning time  and increase the ease of use and lessen buyer resistence. A user wants to get into the action and start using the program now if not sooner.

They did not buy the program to spend days reading through thick complicated manuals and relearning everything all over again.  One does not have to change anything just to be different. Why not just call a Rudder, a Rudder or Rudder trim, rudder trim instead of Yaw  and yaw trim, we all know what a rudder is and as far as I know the word has no copywrite ?

 

Oh, but that is not realistic you cry.The real word is Yaw. Sure it is but we all use the word Rudder and Rudder pedals dont we.

Reality is just an illustion in any game and can not actually be achieved. It is a simulation, a substitue for reality, to paraphrase  someone once pointed out when discussing the concept of realism in a game setting:   In real life there is this thing called death. Death is real but we live forever in games so as long as we can hit refly and don't actually drop dead nothing can be said to be real in any game it is all just an illusion. If you don't actualy die then everything after that is just an added complication to game play.

 

 In fact when we talk of reality in a game dont we just mean a what we want is for it to have an added complication so as to make it more  complex and here lies the problem, for if we get too complicated because of the cry of "realism" one will automaticly limit the size of  the player base who will be able to use this game. We will limit it to just the  "experts" for only they will be able to understand how to make thing work to their advantage and others disadvatage.

 

In all fields of human endever the actual number of experts is low, only around 10 % of the actual numbers of individuals involved in any activity can really be said to be  an experts.That is why they are so prized. So do we want to create a game for just 10%  or even 25% of the air combat community or do we want to enlarge the player base and thus create  games that will be a success and include everyone?

 

Oh don't get me wrong I am not against creating different versions or levels to chanllenge player abilities, but one has to be careful not to over emphasis the top level over the "Average" player for the majority of users are just average. The average player like me, will look at the game and decide within minutes if they will bother with it. They will look at the manual, see how thick and easy it is to understand and then continue to play or leave. If one is lucky the Experts will have had nothing to do with the writing of the Manual for they are worst ones to write  manuasl  because they write for experts  and only talk to experts who already know what

is going on and being explained. They forget the first timer who has no idea as to how to even start the game never mind understand expert jargon.

 

If we  want realism do we also want the compulsery 30 minute pre flight check lists and real time flights to targets. No, we don't and never did for very few 

want to take more than 15 miinutes to get to a target  and into action even an Expert. It is for this reason that the game included the  keys to shorten the time spans.

Do lets get on with the game testing but remember the by word to success is  Kiss!. Keep It Simple Stuped!

 

 

 

 

[Sokol1]

Good point with controls names, take me some trials with "Realism" (why not use "Difficult" instead? ) settings to understand that "Allow spectator" is, for what matter, the old "External view".

 

Sokol1

[DD_Arthur]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...............................................................................

[LG1.Farber]

Bauer try war thunder, you might enjoy it. 

[DickDong]

Sims have been becoming more and more niche, alienating the expert players would be a huge mistake. BOS will be made to be as real as possible it's a sim. Your view is the area WT can cover and draw people in.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Flexibility in options. That should do it.

[216th_Peterla]

^{With all respects, what Baur said make sense...but right now I feel the game is totally compromised with this, is an easy game to start with it and same way difficult to be a truly expert.}

^{This game remind me IL2 FB in almost all the concepts and also is a big step forward on simulation of WWII. This is for sure a truly successor of our old loved IL2.}

 

^{Sorry for my English buddies,}

 

^Pedro

[FlatSpinMan]

I hear ya, Bauer. I do this for fun. I'm not serious at all, so something like DCS doesn't appeal. With BoS I can fly around pretty easily on Normal settings, or if I feel like it, invest a bit more mental energy and fly the things properly using Expert or Custom.

[SYN_Mike77]

Bauer:  have you had the opportunity to fly the game yet?  I truly believe that this game walks the line pretty well (as did RoF) There are enough settings that you can customize your difficulty settings to be at the point you want to be.  Or if that fails, just fly the 109, it's always in easy mode

[LukeFF]

TL;DR

[LastRightsXIII]

You've a great point but I don't see how it relates with BOS. Maybe the terminology can be confusing. Nothing wrong with learning a few new words.

Edited March 30, 2014 by LastRights13

[Sokol1]

Some of this points is valid:

 

"Switch to a next free plane combat post"

"Switch to a next firing point in the current turret"

"Turret: Nestle to gunsight 

 

Seems direct from Google Translator... I believe that change on final release.

 

This kind of thing is done with text editor, dont wast "important resources", can be done include by community volunteers, like this manual:

 

Sokol1

[VR-DriftaholiC]

I disagree on most points. Please don't dumb down this game any more. More maps and battles never hurt.

[Bladderburst]

Have you flown it yet?

 

It flies nearly like the old IL2, if you were good with the 109 back then, you'll be good with it today.

 

If you want to fly without engine management you can. Just like you could. Why should this be dumbed down? So that you can say that you play at the hardest difficulty?


As for MORE PLANES MORE BATTLES!!! Today it's longer and harder to make a model (and everything that goes with it).

Take the BF109 from IL2. Just the plane without the cockpit, an artist could do it in one week. The one in IL2BOS takes at least a month and I think it would require a bit more (it's very nice), maybe it could take even 2. So that's just a comparison. Programming seems even worst. Don't expect to see the same variety as in the old IL2, it won't ever happen again. People ask for more details and realism so the big picture suffers.

A thing that John Carmack said in a conference a while ago was that at some point we would reach a limit where computer power won't be a problem for realism, it's manpower that will be. He was probably right.


My only concern with simplicity is that not only gear freaks (like here I confess) should be able to enjoy this. 

[334th_L0C0]

 

In all fields of human endever the actual number of experts is low, only around 10 % of the actual numbers of individuals involved in any activity can really be said to be  an experts.That is why they are so prized. So do we want to create a game for just 10%  or even 25% of the air combat community or do we want to enlarge the player base and thus create  games that will be a success and include everyone?

 

Do lets get on with the game testing but remember the by word to success is  Kiss!. Keep It Simple Stuped!

 

 

Firstly.. Do you even own the sim yet?

 

You obviously haven't seen the percentage of people flying BOS that is joining the "Expert" servers vs the "Normal" servers.  The numbers you speak of are quite the reverse.  I see roughly 25% in "Normal" and the 75% being in "Expert".

 

And the fact that the game is made with easy and hard settings totally blows your essay out of the water.  If it's too hard for you, just set the settings to an easier setting.  It's quite simple.

[=IRFC=SmokinHole]

Much of the terminology is translated. Even so it still makes sense to the average English speaker. Yaw, pitch and roll denote motion and therefore might be clearer to some than "rudder", "elevator" and "aileron". We, as non-Russian speakers (most of us anyway) should perhaps better appreciate the difficulty in coding a product for several languages including English, yet making the meaning consistent across localizations. To me, this game is walking a well thought out path between complex and simple with stunning results.

[VBF-12_Gosling-71]

Bauer try war thunder, you might enjoy it.

Harsh. But I sympathise. Some of Bauer's points are relevant, but I don't think the developers are making a WT or HIS here.

 

I hate getting into combat with less than 10 mins. It just means airfields being pinned down by enemy cap etc.

 

As for controls, to be able to utilise more control methods (keyboard, mouse, bought controls, home made controls) the control interface needs to develop and be more flexible.

 

I also agree in variety but it has taken over a decade to spread 1946 to cover the entire world of WWII. Let's take things in man able steps.

 

Hmmmm. Flight Simulator. Not model plane. I agree KISS is a good adage in life but this "game" is trying to to "simulate" flight. It's not simple and those that want to play at flying can play other games. Those players will play for a while and move on to the next best thing. Flight simmers want to play at flying including all it's facets and thus it's rarely "simple" so KISS misses the point. These players are far more dedicated and will remain the loyal game community supporting the game as it develops over the years. Just like they did with 1946.

 

I could go on but I can see I'm becoming boring already so I'll stop.

[Brano]

 I see roughly 25% in "Normal" and the 75% being in "Expert".

I will correct this - It means that only one Expert server is always full and the rest of unlucky pilots has to live with Normal   

[Stray]

I somewhat agree with Bauer's arguements. Somewhat.

 

Seeing the development of the game I am concerned with few issues. We know nothing of the Dev team's plans of game development. We post  suggestions that are not addresed by the team and we don't know if they read them or discuss them ( well the Dev answers are just a drop in the ocean of unanswered questions ), same with polls - therefore I fear our "part in game development" is simply nothing else but our "support" ( $$$ to get acces to early stage and report problems with performance ).

 

As a hard core 1946 fanatic, I would love to see dynamic campaigns in BoS, co-operative; servers released to the public so we could host our games on our machines just like we do in 1946. Even if we got only one map in BoS - it is huge; so I'd welcome dynamic front line shifting. For starters. 

 

1946 means hundreds of flyable aircraft; here we're gonna deal with a handful of flyable aircraft. It's gonna get old real soon unless we get more aircraft. With RoF "buy a plane" system this may be truly expensive title to maintain our addiction of flight. I would be very happy to have all Russian aircraft removed from my account and added few more German planes. I haven't touched one - they will be collecting rust in my hangar. What a waste of money.Just like buying cable or satellite tv: companies force packages on you, so if you want to watch movies, you gotta pay for sports also, even though you don't want sports. It's a "package". 

 

I agree on all points regarding CLOD but won't add anything to it, as I see any form of criticism is not welcome here. 1946 lives on, that's something to think about.

 

BoS looks great, but despite having the sun stare at us all the time, we're still in the dark. Some Q&A with the devs would help. Good looks won't cut it... We know it's only 45% ( supposedly ) done, but I do hope Multiplayer is not gonna remain the way it is and we shall not have "catch a flag" circus here. RoF still has no competition but this title will have at least a couple in near future.

 

Having said all that, I truly hope for BoS to replace 1946. But it's gonna be bloody tough.

[capt_awesome]

i dont wanna do prop, mixture, radiators, ect......i fly real airplanes for a living i dont wanna spend off time doing it here.  I wanna go in and shoot people down.

[Creepermoss]

Simply stick to "regular" difficulty servers.

Edited August 2, 2014 by [JG2]Creepermoss

[SharpeXB]

Bauer

Amazingly you wrote a page long rant and from your observations it's obvious you haven't tried BoS or its predecessor Rise of Flight (which has a free demo)

BoS does not have complex systems like CloD or DCS and like every other flight sim has different levels of difficulty and pilot assistance for players that don't desire complexity.

As for learning controls? Welcome to flight sims.

[GunnyHighway]

I fly the Bleinheim and I am happy to know how to start and taxi it.

 

For me, the fun resides in the reproduction of reality, not into an Arcade dynamic.

 

They are plenty of Arcade games, and vey few sims.   

[GOAT-ACEOFACES]

Bauer try war thunder, you might enjoy it. 

 

Allot of truth there..

 

Put it this way

 

A game with an 'OK' flight model but a FULL server is funner than a game with the 'BEST' flight model but an EMPTY server

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/15712-war-thunder-or-world-xxxxx/

[SharpeXB]

That's funny. An "old time" player who doesn't know the definition of "rudder" and "yaw" or that they're the same axis?

Edited April 18, 2015 by SharpeXB

[[KWN]T-oddball]

S!

 

 Flexibility in options. That should do it.

 

 

+1

 

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...............................................................................

 

unhelpful defense league gibberish.

 

 

p.s bauer your points are valid but will fall upon deaf dev ear's, and only draw the attention of DL to denounce you.

Edited April 18, 2015 by T-oddball

[6./ZG26_Custard]

Bauer try war thunder, you might enjoy it. 

It's enjoyable but it's not a sim.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

p.s bauer your points are valid but will fall upon deaf dev ear's, and only draw the attention of DL to denounce you.

 

The sheer amount of updates that the devs are coming out with puts most other sims to shame, are there problems with the sim, sure but  that goes for every other title in this genre.

 

I think some people would just love to see this title fail. We do have a development team and a producer who do seem to be listening and making regular steady improvements. The choices are limited we have this, DCS, and several other sims  where we have  small communities of modders, who effectively have absolute control  over what goes into the content of the game with little or no influence from the wider community. Oh and there are plenty defence league advocates for those titles too.

[DD_Arthur]

+1

 

 

unhelpful defense league gibberish.

 

 

p.s bauer your points are valid but will fall upon deaf dev ear's, and only draw the attention of DL to denounce you.

 

What are you talking about?  Read the op again - properly.  This hasn't got anything to do with BoS.  This was a droning, ill-informed and badly written rant made about CoD from a year ago. 

 

Lets hope he's managed to find a copy of Pacific Fighters to go with his copy of Forgotten Battles.

[Cybermat47]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...............................................................................

TL;DR

If you have nothing worthwhile to post, why post anything at all?

[[KWN]T-oddball]

What are you talking about?  Read the op again - properly.  This hasn't got anything to do with BoS.  This was a droning, ill-informed and badly written rant made about CoD from a year ago. 

 

Lets hope he's managed to find a copy of Pacific Fighters to go with his copy of Forgotten Battles.

 

No, it's warning that Say's " if it ain't broke don't fix it" they [Edited] it up with CLOD and now their doing it here as well, as for you last comment.....try not to be a $%#$

I fly the Bleinheim and I am happy to know how to start and taxi it.

 

For me, the fun resides in the reproduction of reality, not into an Arcade dynamic.

 

They are plenty of Arcade games, and vey few sims.   

 

you should be shot for necroing this post.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Bearcat
Profanity

[DD_Arthur]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz #2