Jump to content
danielprates

The Rheinland map

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, -=-THERION said:

 

Ridiculous - it's like saying: "Produce low/medium quality and stay in business?" Pft...

 

 

Yes, but we don't know what their situation was - what sort of deadlines they were under, their manpower constraints, who actually constructed the map, were there any trade-offs and if so, what and how? what else was going on?, etc. etc. - we don't have perfect knowledge. We also don't know whether this is the final end product of the map either. Perhaps more was planned as add-in's later. Perhaps something came up, or a hard choice had to be made, or a reallocation of resources to do X instead of Y, etc.  -- it is not like they are a massive mega company with lots of resources and finances to spare. 

 

Maybe things will improve on the map (admittedly I think it is the weakest so far in of what we have)...but I also get the feeling that a whole lot of issues and turmoil went on behind the scenes this past while (and we are not simply entitled to know all the behind the scenes issues and decisions and situations). I for one am happy we have a solid WW2 combat flight simulator that does keep improving and has given me hours and hours of enjoyment and will continue to do so. It is not like the garden is plentiful in this area, and I am grateful we have this wonderful fruit to eat, be it not as shiny as perhaps we hope, but it still tastes pretty decent...

 

...and the map may indeed improve...or maybe it won't...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People have short memories 

 

Every map has seen big improvements after initial release

 

Both Jason and Han have stated there will be updates

 

Overall their track record is first class in this regard, they have not suddenly morphed into a multi million tripple A studio.. A little patience is needed. 

 

Moscow and Kuban were pretty rough at this stage and are now acceptable,  Moscow forests got a huge shake up. 

Kuban has multiple improvements and Stalingrad a big texture overhaul... All this "I won't support them further until they fix the map" seems a bit hysterical 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -=-THERION said:

 

Ridiculous - it's like saying: "Produce low/medium quality and stay in business?" Pft...

 

That doesn't answer the question.  Do they keep adding content to make you happy until they go broke?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As what we got is what we got and being unhappy about it doesn't change it - what I've been wondering since the start is if we can do something to improve the map on our own? Nothing is really keeping us from going into the mission editor to for instance turn the Ruhr valley into the urban, industrial area it was. A city could be spread through the community as a group, and if the devs think that what's been done is good, it could find its way into the map as such.

If everyone who took issue picked and solved one, we'd have a great map by the end of the month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dakpilot said:

 

Moscow and Kuban were pretty rough at this stage and are now acceptable,  Moscow forests got a huge shake up. 

Kuban has multiple improvements and Stalingrad a big texture overhaul... All this "I won't support them further until they fix the map" seems a bit hysterical 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

 

It's astonishing that people think what BOBP map needs is just couple of fixes. Kuban already had several types of ground textures, all buildings present and naturally looking shores/riverbanks. As far as I recall, they added a few port textures and some minor fixes. Let's not forget they have to work on the new map now, so I wouldn't expect much of an improvement.

 

I don't see anything histerical about not supporting product that doesn't meet the same quality standards as previous ones.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JtD said:

As what we got is what we got and being unhappy about it doesn't change it - what I've been wondering since the start is if we can do something to improve the map on our own? Nothing is really keeping us from going into the mission editor to for instance turn the Ruhr valley into the urban, industrial area it was. A city could be spread through the community as a group, and if the devs think that what's been done is good, it could find its way into the map as such.

If everyone who took issue picked and solved one, we'd have a great map by the end of the month.

All this tremendous job would work in mods mode on if done properly (new objects, work with new and old textures) , which is  almost dead  in multiplayer environment  and the need to restart the game  to see the emptiness is depressing. History repeats nobody took lessons..  same story was with Arras area remade by Paf in ROF. His masterpiece was never used as it was deserved.

Edited by 1PL-Husar-1Esk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/6/2019 at 6:07 AM, BraveSirRobin said:

 

That doesn't answer the question.  Do they keep adding content to make you happy until they go broke?  

 

"Less is more" is my credo, something that seems unknown to younger generation, especially the "I want it all, I want it now!" generation.

 

The producer and his team already know, that their resources are quite limited - budget and staff wise - so therefore it is important to do

projects they're able to manage - f.ex. like making this Rhineland map smaller (not scale wise) and divide it into let's say 2 - 3 maps?

 

I always read about content, content, content - how about fixing the known issues (the severe ones) BEFORE delivering new content?

 

God damn it! If you build a house, don't you make sure, that the basement is well done, before you build up the next upper floors?

 

Well, where I live, it is a common procedure!

 

Ciao

Edited by -=-THERION
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -=-THERION said:

 

"Less is more" is my credo, something that seems unknown to younger generation, especially the "I want it all, I want it now!" generation.

 

The producer and his team already know, that their resources are quite limited - budget and staff wise - so therefore it is important to do

projects they're able to manage - f.ex. like making this Rhineland map smaller (not scale wise) and divide it into let's say 2 - 3 maps?

 

I always read about content, content, content - how about fixing the known issues (the severe ones) BEFORE delivering new content?

 

God damn it! If you build a house, don't you make sure, that the basement is well done, before you build up the next upper floors?

 

Well, where is live, it is common procedure!

 

Ciao

Your points are quite right and I share Your opinion. 

But I guess we have to deal with the economic reality. Creating content generates revenue. Fixing bugs and aftersale services does not. 

 

So I guess they have to ride on the razors edge between generating enough income with new content to be able to improve the overall sim experience and keep the customers happy on the other side. I guess it's a balancing act not easy to maintain. 

 

As I pointed out occasionally, I'm also very unhappy with the map in its current state. Let's hope for the best. 

Edited by Blooddawn1942
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Blooddawn1942 said:

Fixing bugs and aftersale services does not.

 

I dissagree. If you don´t care about both points you are out of business faster than you can say "peep", especially if you are in a niche market.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sevenless said:

 

I dissagree. If you don´t care about both points you are out of business faster than you can say "peep", especially if you are in a niche market.

At the first glance this parts don't generate any income. They cost You money. This is a given fact. But in the long run You loose your customers for sure, if you don't pay attention to it. That's absolutely right. 

That's why I was referring to the balance between generating income and keep the product attractive and improve it to stay in business 

Edited by Blooddawn1942
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, -=-THERION said:

 

"Less is more" is my credo, something that seems unknown to younger generation, especially the "I want it all, I want it now!" generation.

 

The producer and his team already know, that their resources are quite limited - budget and staff wise - so therefore it is important to do

projects they're able to manage - f.ex. like making this Rhineland map smaller (not scale wise) and divide it into let's say 2 - 3 maps?

 

I always read about content, content, content - how about fixing the known issues (the severe ones) BEFORE delivering new content?

 

God damn it! If you build a house, don't you make sure, that the basement is well done, before you build up the next upper floors?

 

Well, where is live, it is common procedure!

 

Ciao

 

Yeah and then other vocal overly negative groups will [edited] that they produced [edited] small maps instead of one properly big ... some people can never be satisfied. Rheinland is in my opinion a very solid map, I especially like that it is big in size providing space for a span of battles. Some imperfections can be definitely tolerated and I am sure there will be improvements. There is not much constructive criticism in the thread.

Edited by SYN_Haashashin
Language

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Rudolph said:

 

Yeah and then other vocal overly negative groups will [edited] that they produced [edited] small maps instead of one properly big ... some people can never be satisfied. Rheinland is in my opinion a very solid map, I especially like that it is big in size providing space for a span of battles. Some imperfections can be definitely tolerated and I am sure there will be improvements. There is not much constructive criticism in the thread rather than the tiring DEV bashing from you and others, which adds nothing. 

Accusing someone of "Dev-Bashing" while he has some certain points isn't constructive either. 

Edited by SYN_Haashashin
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Blooddawn1942 said:

Accusing someone of "Dev-Bashing" while he has some certain points isn't constructive either. 

 

Yes, you are right - sorry, I edited my reply. I just think that there is too much negativity like the map was really totally sub-par Il-2 1946 level, while it is in my opinion still much better than most other products on the market and improvement will certainly be made, but these overly negative comments won't help any further development a single bit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imho  best map in il-2 GB so far is Velikie Luki. But this map suit best for multiplayer and for scripted campaign.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rudolph said:

 

Yes, you are right - sorry, I edited my reply. I just think that there is too much negativity like the map was really totally sub-par Il-2 1946 level, while it is in my opinion still much better than most other products on the market and improvement will certainly be made, but these overly negative comments won't help any further development a single bit. 

There is a lot to like on the map. The topography is top notch for sure. Flying the Rhine upstream passing the Siebengebirge towards Koblenz is totally spot on. 

Also my own region east of Cologne with its rolling hills is absolutely perfect in regards to the topography. 

 

But there are also a lot of immersion breaking aspects which need to be spoken about and I don't recognize this as an overall negativity. 

I dearly care for this sim because I love it and I want it to succeed. 

 

But the map in its current state is not the best advertising and could harm the reputation I fear. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, -=-THERION said:

 

"Less is more" is my credo, something that seems unknown to younger generation, especially the "I want it all, I want it now!" generation.

 

The producer and his team already know, that their resources are quite limited - budget and staff wise - so therefore it is important to do

projects they're able to manage - f.ex. like making this Rhineland map smaller (not scale wise) and divide it into let's say 2 - 3 maps?

 

I always read about content, content, content - how about fixing the known issues (the severe ones) BEFORE delivering new content?

 

God damn it! If you build a house, don't you make sure, that the basement is well done, before you build up the next upper floors?

 

Well, where is live, it is common procedure!

 

Ciao

 

Obviously your priorities are different from the dev team.  You want a smaller, more detailed, map.  They want a larger map with fewer details.  They have clearly decided that their customers want a larger map.

 

As for the “fix known issues” BS, that isn’t how software development works.   Every update goes out with known issues.  Every.  Single.  One.  Content pays for fixing known issues.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

Obviously your priorities are different from the dev team.  You want a smaller, more detailed, map.  They want a larger map with fewer details.  They have clearly decided that their customers want a larger map.

 

As for the “fix known issues” BS, that isn’t how software development works.   Every update goes out with known issues.  Every.  Single.  One.  Content pays for fixing known issues.

 

 

 

 

 

Thank. You. Very. Much. "Sir".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not always been onboard with the ways devs choose to go. 
But I know by their statement that this map have taken a huge bit of budget and they are very proud of it. 
I must say I am liking it myself. One thing that has won me over is the games continuance improvement and we can agree there is a lot to desire left. 
This is why I think giving critique for lack of improvements is in fact a case of lost perspective. Compared to other developers devs here does that all the time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Dakpilot said:

 

Every map has seen big improvements after initial release

 

True.

 

I thought the Stalingrad map improvements were excellent.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shorelines, rivers and atols needs improvement and maybe throw in some industrial facility and pine trees.

 

Regarding villages and other things to populate map everybody forgets how it will affect performance.

Those big cities already cause small stutters so adding villages and stuff will make map unplayable for some (mostly VR users), so i see it as a compromise.

Having every single detail is unrealistic expetation.

Btw if devs said they'll improve it than i have no doubt about it, given to their development history.

 

Devs said they'll improve map and career!

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Normandy anounced, im more interested in how Finland players who are making that Leningrad area map will do it if it goes good maybe they can make more mod maps for game. To bad devs dont do Italy map, Kuban map is still best one in game and that south part is best place to play over.

Edited by 77.CountZero
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

With Normandy anounced, im more interested in how Finland players who are making that Leningrad area map will do it if it goes good maybe they can make more mod maps for game. To bad devs dont do Italy map, Kuban map is still best one in game and that south part is best place to play over.

 

I wouldn´t mind to see a Krim map, both for 1942 and 1944 battles.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, -=-THERION said:

 

"Less is more" is my credo, something that seems unknown to younger generation, especially the "I want it all, I want it now!" generation.

 

The producer and his team already know, that their resources are quite limited - budget and staff wise - so therefore it is important to do

projects they're able to manage - f.ex. like making this Rhineland map smaller (not scale wise) and divide it into let's say 2 - 3 maps?

 

I always read about content, content, content - how about fixing the known issues (the severe ones) BEFORE delivering new content?

 

God damn it! If you build a house, don't you make sure, that the basement is well done, before you build up the next upper floors?

 

Well, where is live, it is common procedure!

 

Ciao

 

These metaphors are sure fascinating. But it's an entertainment product and not a building. Or a work of art either.

 

That aside, I'm 100% with you on wishing and dreaming of smaller scale/denser maps with more accurate details. Just gotta be careful about such declarations when that BSR feller is around.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Blooddawn1942 said:

There is a lot to like on the map. The topography is top notch for sure. Flying the Rhine upstream passing the Siebengebirge towards Koblenz is totally spot on. 

Also my own region east of Cologne with its rolling hills is absolutely perfect in regards to the topography. 

 

But there are also a lot of immersion breaking aspects which need to be spoken about and I don't recognize this as an overall negativity. 

I dearly care for this sim because I love it and I want it to succeed. 

 

But the map in its current state is not the best advertising and could harm the reputation I fear. 

 

Seems like the map has solid foundations, but needs some improvements (right type of trees, another textures at some locations, more villages...). I believe the devs focused on the big cities (which look quite good IMO) and ran out of time before they could polish the remaining objects. I hope they somehow find the time/resources to fix those, at least some of them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, OpticFlow said:

 

Seems like the map has solid foundations, but needs some improvements (right type of trees, another textures at some locations, more villages...). I believe the devs focused on the big cities (which look quite good IMO) and ran out of time before they could polish the remaining objects. I hope they somehow find the time/resources to fix those, at least some of them...

Sounds reasonable. 

Those are definitely things which can be achieved post-release. 

At the end I'm confident, that we will see the desired improvements. Just think about improvements done in the past to the Moscow and Stalingrad maps. The team is always willing to go above and beyond if possible. They've proven that several times. 

 

But it's important for the community to raise the voice, if something is just not right, so that the developers are going to address the issues. 

 

Just remember when the Fw 190 A3 has been released and the cry out the cockpit  generated. But they listened and improved things. The bar and armored glass frames. You remember, right? This had nothing to do with unreasonable expectations from the community. Something was wrong, we adressed and proofed it and on this base they reworked the cockpit. Just perfect. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blooddawn1942 said:

But it's important for the community to raise the voice

 

I agree.  That way the developers can see which way the wind is blowing. 

 

The Normandy maps will require many new features that are also common to the Rhineland map, so I would suggest that we will see some of these additions backdated to the BoBp map as things progress.  

1 hour ago, OpticFlow said:

 

Seems like the map has solid foundations, but needs some improvements (right type of trees, another textures at some locations, more villages...). I believe the devs focused on the big cities (which look quite good IMO) and ran out of time before they could polish the remaining objects. I hope they somehow find the time/resources to fix those, at least some of them...

 

Add to that a 1944/45 depiction of the cities, airfields and landscapes.  Currently it is more a representation of peacetime 1938/39.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the rate dedicated Sim Pilots pour out their money for DCS modules is proof people will pay for what they want.  No one said if it takes more resources to put out a little more detailed map that people wont pay more for it. I would pay more than the going price for a fully operational DC3, B-25, B-26, A-20G, Tu-2, if it takes more work, charge more for it.  People are going to bitch and moan but will shell out the money because they want it.  From the badges on the left you can see I have everything offered and don't touch 2/3rds of it.  The price of these games is a pittance to what I have shelled out for new computer builds, headsets, head tracking, flight controls just to get the most out of what 1C/777/DCS have put out on the market since 2001.  And if any of you tell my wife I'll hunt you down......   So in a nutshell Jason if it takes more resources to produce something the way you would really like it to be then do not be afraid to charge more for it.  Besides I love hearing the whining and crying while I'm flying something shiny and fast................................ :)

 

Cheers

Hoss

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Feathered_IV said:

 

 

 

The Normandy maps will require many new features that are also common to the Rhineland map, so I would suggest that we will see some of these additions backdated to the BoBp map as things progress.  

 

 

That's my best guess too and my hope. Patience is a virtue we simers are very practiced with. ;)

6 minutes ago, 361st_Hoss said:

At the rate dedicated Sim Pilots pour out their money for DCS modules is proof people will pay for what they want.  No one said if it takes more resources to put out a little more detailed map that people wont pay more for it. I would pay more than the going price for a fully operational DC3, B-25, B-26, A-20G, Tu-2, if it takes more work, charge more for it.  People are going to bitch and moan but will shell out the money because they want it.  From the badges on the left you can see I have everything offered and don't touch 2/3rds of it.  The price of these games is a pittance to what I have shelled out for new computer builds, headsets, head tracking, flight controls just to get the most out of what 1C/777/DCS have put out on the market since 2001.  And if any of you tell my wife I'll hunt you down......   So in a nutshell Jason if it takes more resources to produce something the way you would really like it to be then do not be afraid to charge more for it.  Besides I love hearing the whining and crying while I'm flying something shiny and fast................................ :)

 

Cheers

Hoss

Your absolutely right. I would pay 60 bugs for a B-26 without hesitation. 

But alas, I fear that such an endeavor is not profitable because we passionate people here on the forum are not the majority of the customers. 

Edited by Blooddawn1942

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, Picchio said:

That aside, I'm 100% with you on wishing and dreaming of smaller scale/denser maps with more accurate details. Just gotta be careful about such declarations when that BSR feller is around.

 

No you don't.  Just play Warthunder.  It's my understanding that they have much smaller, but more detailed, maps.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No need to be polemic. While I appreciate the sheer size of the map, I would certainly trade the size against more details. Each to his own so it is said. Btw. What is this Warthunder? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Blooddawn1942 said:

Each to his own so it is said. Btw. What is this Warthunder

 

He is messing with ya - if friendly or not, I can't tell. Warthunder is an arcadish game. I personally would take offense if someone told me "go play warthunder".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Blooddawn1942 said:

No need to be polemic. While I appreciate the sheer size of the map, I would certainly trade the size against more details. 

 

I know.  But the devs appear to feel that most people want larger maps.  The devs for Warthunder appear to feel that people want smaller maps.   So maybe go with Warthunder.

 

I have no idea why you think this suggestion is "polemic".

1 minute ago, danielprates said:

 

He is messing with ya - if friendly or not, I can't tell. Warthunder is an arcadish game. I personally would take offense if someone told me "go play warthunder".

 

Why?  It has the map size/details that he wants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, danielprates said:

 

He is messing with ya - if friendly or not, I can't tell. Warthunder is an arcadish game. I personally would take offense if someone told me "go play warthunder".

Hey mate. I was just some kind of sarcastic. Of course I'm aware of this stupid flight game. ;)

2 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

 

 

I have no idea why you think this suggestion is "polemic".

It is. Opposing a different opinion with this bollocks is nothing but polemic. But I'm sure You know this very well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Blooddawn1942 said:

 

It is. Opposing a different opinion with this bollocks is nothing but polemic. But I'm sure You know this very well. 

 

There is absolutely nothing “bollocks” about what I posted.  You want smaller maps.  Warthunder has smaller maps.  Play Warthunder.  No “bollocks” needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

I know.  But the devs appear to feel that most people want larger maps.  The devs for Warthunder appear to feel that people want smaller maps.   So maybe go with Warthunder.

 

I have no idea why you think this suggestion is "polemic".

 

Why?  It has the map size/details that he wants.

 

And crap all else.

 

7 minutes ago, Blooddawn1942 said:

Hey mate. I was just some kind of sarcastic. Of course I'm aware of this stupid flight game. ;)

 

Oh. Hehe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BraveSirRobin said:

 

There is absolutely nothing “bollocks” about what I posted.  You want smaller maps.  Warthunder has smaller maps.  Play Warthunder.  No “bollocks” needed.

Man, You write way faster than You think. Always gives me a good time to read Your sermons. 😄

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Blooddawn1942 said:

Man, You write way faster than You think. Always gives me a good time to read Your sermons. 😄

 

No, I don’t.

  • Haha 1

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...