Jump to content

Petition for better realism than IL-2:COD


Recommended Posts

Earlier I was playing this game and I suddenly realised something is missing. Back in the old COD or some people call it IL-2 MkII, the game had things like Fuel pumps and fuel tank selections. But we don't have them in this game.

Now I know the developer is not going to make this sim into an DCS, but still, can't we at least have better realism in all aspect than the old IL-2 MkII? Because this IS IL-2 Mk 3 you know.

 

Therefore, I am here to started a petition to have better realism than IL-2 COD in all aspects.  :)
Hope you will agree with me and support me  :)

For people who don't really play in realism mode, it doesn't matter, all you have to do is to switch it off, so you have nothing to worry about  ;)


Plus: even better if we can set radio frequencies ourselves. You know, the radio chatter from all channels is annoying. ;)

  • Upvote 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

You know there is already a game in development that should be adequate for you needs, do you? No need for the BoS team to take this figurative 180° turn while in the middle of the development process

 

180° turn? What are you talking about?? More realism can be introduced in future patches.

 

Edited by HarbingerFlanker1985
Link to post
Share on other sites

You're not just asking for fuel pumps, you're asking for a more realistic model than CoD.  That requires a compete rewrite of the game engine.  It's not going to happen.

Well, in that case, as much realism as they can get then.

Pump and fuel tank selection and possibly radio frequence controller, Gun sight marker and so on.

 

BTW, I thought this game was originally aiming to achieve better realism than the COD. That was the first topic I posted before this game's alpha release. Everyone was telling me to forget about COD because this game is going to be much more realistic than the COD. So today I just realised that don't have pump and selector.

Edited by HarbingerFlanker1985
Link to post
Share on other sites

The fuel pump thing probably isn't going to happen, either.  That would involve having to retrofit the change into previously built aircraft, which probably means a complete rebuild of their flight models.  Not going to happen.


BTW, I thought this game was originally aiming to achieve better realism than the COD. That was the first topic I posted before this game's alpha release. Everyone was telling me to forget about COD because this game is going to be much more realistic than the COD. So today I just realised that don't have pump and selector.

 

You can run into trees in this game.  Is that more realistic than COD?

 

Not particularly rude, but barbed enough to irritate any CloD fliers. Unneccessary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To preserve at least some of your dignity here I suggest you take a break to think about what you are writing. I further suggest you buy DCS WW2 if you want to switch between tanks.

 

The gameplay concept of BoS was clear from the beginning, I absolutely don't understand why you demand this from the developers. And I don't understand at all why you do this while being at 45% game readiness.

 

Many people worked day and night for months to give us (still unfinished) features like QMB and multiplayer that were planned right in the beginning. How long do you think it will take to include the unplanned features you want, for "realism"?

 

Sorry to disappoint you, but wrong sim buddy. Simple as that.

 

 

 

 

[FSM:] Uncalled for. The OP posted in a very polite manner about something he felt would be reasonable.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

To preserve at least some of your dignity here I suggest you take a break to think about what you are writing. I further suggest you buy DCS WW2 if you want to switch between tanks.

 

The gameplay concept of BoS was clear from the beginning, I absolutely don't understand why you demand this from the developers. And I don't understand at all why you do this while being at 45% game readiness.

 

Many people worked day and night for months to give us (still unfinished) features like QMB and multiplayer that were planned right in the beginning. How long do you think it will take to include the unplanned features you want, for "realism"?

 

Sorry to disappoint you, but wrong sim buddy. Simple as that.

 

I think you are the one who need to take a break to think about what you are writing:

Since freaking when did I make a demand to the developing team? I was just trying to make a petition and see if many people who felt the same way. Which part of the forum's rule indicated that I am not allowed to do so?? If there are many people who felt the same, then there is a possible market effect to encourage the developing team to do so.

And since when have I been disrespect to developing team's day and night's work. Who said so??

And who exactly said that I can't post this, when the readiness is 45%?? They can introduce more realism gradually over time after the full release, just like the old IL-2, which is now version 4.12+

 

I have met plentiful people like you, who have low self esteem issue. So much that they have to make an issue out of everything so they can "critisis" other people. Because critisis others makes them feel great. Feel like man. Feel like judging something.  lol

 

Take a hike buddy.

 

[FSM:] Understandable in the face of provocation , but just hit the "Report" button next time.

Edited by FlatSpinMan
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

From WIkipedia: "A petition is a request to do something,..."

 

So the "demanding" was maybe not 100% correct, I will give you that much, apologies for my misinterpretation (Break taken). However your your writing style and persistace gave me that impression. And please keep in mind there is a language barrier for me to overcome, maybe even for both of us.

Of course there are thousands of people with the same ideas about what should be in a flight sim, and of course those people are being served. For example by the DCS sim family. Sorry to sound like a broken record.

 

I never said you were not allowed to start your "petition" and neither do the rules (probably, but who cares about them anyway ;) ), but you miss the point. I was simply stating my opinion about the matter, which you obviously did not acknowledge and did not take time to think about. I did get your point, but apparently you did not get mine. There are always advantages and disadvantages, and i didn't think you completely realized the sheer size of the latter, that your idea comes with.

 

 

 

And since when have I been disrespect to developing team's day and night's work. Who said so??

 

That is a question I have no answer for. I was trying to remind you of the work required to make your dream come true, if that is what you are refering to. Wrong interpretation. I was trying to help you keep your feet on the ground. Firmly.

"Gimme that feature, and that extra and, that one too" simply will not bring us to our main goal of having a nice game in time and budget. I trust in the developers, who probably gave it more thought than I ever will. That's why I already paid 90$.

 

It is possible that I am a bit oversensitive about this topic of "realism" in BoS. It is going on since this forum existed. Seeing the "realism" party strongly resisting sound advice for ages and trying to change this game into what it definately is not is quite unpleasant.

 

 

The "low self esteem issues" don't seem worthy a reply, sorry to keep you in your darkness. Just seems like some half-a**ed insult that will remain uncommented by me to avoid offending certain people.

 

But anyway, I will keep in the background of this very productive discussion from now on. Have fun!

 

 

[FSM:] Helpful. Appreciate the awareness. of earlier actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A request for more realism on this board is just a request for abuse by the usual suspects. Seems that at least two of them haven't yet discovered this topic.

But no matter the ignorance of a few loud ones, it's a waste of time, the team has frequently illustrated it has other priorities than improving realism. So far, we've got shiny aircraft, not realistic ones, unlockables, not a historic campaign (or at least the second half of it), 1 minute engine explosions, not a realistic engine model, full past stall control authority, not a realistic flight model, hollywood effects, not realistic ones, ... the list goes on. They guys are working hard to give us a good air combat game, which sounds good, looks good, feels good, but if you want a remotely realistic simulation game, you need to look elsewhere.

And, while I'm all for a little bit of realism, I think a couple of extra buttons to push doesn't really add realism if the basics are off. It's just a little bit more to play with.

 

 

[FSM:] Missed this one. Unhelpful.  Inflammatory invective about the devs and the sim in the first couple of lines. Any possible reasonable comments obscured by the contemptuous tone of first lines.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

A request for more realism on this board is just a request for abuse by the usual suspects. Seems that at least two of them haven't yet discovered this topic.

 

No one is being abused.  He's just been told that the things he wants are not going to be added.  Coincidentally, you said exactly the same thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

.................. So far, we've got shiny aircraft, not realistic ones, unlockables, not a historic campaign (or at least the second half of it), 1 minute engine explosions, not a realistic engine model, full past stall control authority, not a realistic flight model, hollywood effects, not realistic ones, ... the list goes on. 

 

 

All of that is already in the War Thunder, so I would like that in the future the simulator evolve to greater realism. Everyone is free to comment and suggest on what you really would like, no one should feel attacked by it.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

For people who don't really play in realism mode, it doesn't matter, all you have to do is to switch it off, so you have nothing to worry about  ;)

 

it does matter for all, because priceless dev time will be spent on something only absolute minority wants. And in my opinion it'd be better spent on something more people would enjoy. And the stuff you are asking for is quite hard and time-consuming work.

The devs invested quite much time in flight models and physics already, so the focus is obviously there and not on the whole fuel systems and stuff.

Edited by Tab
Link to post
Share on other sites

it does matter for all, because priceless dev time will be spent on something only absolute minority wants. And in my opinion it'd be better spent on something more people would enjoy. And the stuff you are asking for is quite hard and time-consuming work.

The devs invested quite much time in flight models and physics already, so the focus is obviously there and not on the whole fuel systems and stuff.

Tab your video shows no relevance to the topic.  The OP wants as much realisim in the title as can be.  Doesn't have to be now, it could be in a patch down the road.  Flight Models and Physics are only a part of the overall equation of  a well dont sim.  Switching fuel tanks has already been implmented in sims 3+ years ago, so naturally it wouldn't be asking for the stars to have it in these aircraft.

Edited by jarhead2b
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me get this stright,

 

So are there not as many "interactive" cockpit components as in Cliffs Of Dover?

We are not able to adjust sight brightness, emergency power, mixtures ect.?

 

(Have not purchased the game yet).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me get this stright,

 

So are there not as many "interactive" cockpit components as in Cliffs Of Dover?

We are not able to adjust sight brightness, emergency power, mixtures ect.?

 

(Have not purchased the game yet).

 

You can adjust stuff like mixture and radiator settings.  You can't control fuel tanks.  Not sure whether sight brightness can be adjusted in final version.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You might want to check the answer from the first developers diary published after the game was announced.

 

13) Can we expect the clickable cockpits?
 
No. We create a simulation of air combat (this includes attacking ground targets). The pilot will only receive critical systems, propeller pitch, boost, altitude control, different mechanization, weapons and more. Procedural training device it will not be, it will be a game simulator. We would like to return to the original idea of the "IL-2 Sturmovik", because we believe that it was great.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tab your video shows no relevance to the topic.  The OP wants as much realisim in the title as can be.  Doesn't have to be now, it could be in a patch down the road.  Flight Models and Physics are only a part of the overall equation of  a well dont sim.  Switching fuel tanks has already been implmented in sims 3+ years ago, so naturally it wouldn't be asking for the stars to have it in these aircraft.

yep, that's what I was saying. The devs apparently went the other road regarding realism by putting more effort in physics and flight models, than in systems management. Apparently one cannot do a full hardcore sim commercially successful (except it's some military flight simulator for pentagon).

In business it's about weighting the outcome and time/money needed to reach it. The sims, that have the features implemented, cannot really be called successful business models now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly, asking the developers to do something because it is done that way in CloD seems bizarre - nobody in their right mind will make commercial decisions based on comparisons with a project that lost so much money. There may well be good arguments for 'more realism' (I don't think anyone is in favour of less realism), but 'CloD did it' certainly isn't one. 

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

FM is already much better than all alternatives. If there were scripted spins like in CloD or missing slipstream, flying through woods, no ground model, grass in the cockpit or through the wings, AI flying drones etc I would cry for more realism, but I dont care for fuel pumps. 

Edited by Quax
  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly, asking the developers to do something because it is done that way in CloD seems bizarre - nobody in their right mind will make commercial decisions based on comparisons with a project that lost so much money. There may well be good arguments for 'more realism' (I don't think anyone is in favour of less realism), but 'CloD did it' certainly isn't one. 

Andy I don't know you personally, or your RL experience in flying, but switching fuel tanks is one of the most basic skills in aviation operation for a majority of aircraft(As important as engine mgtmt.) If you don't manage E in a fight you loose, if you don't manage fuel you loose your engine.  Not asking for the stars here, its been in MFS since the 90's I'm sure so CLOD or not is irrelevant.  lt'd easily be implemneted without changing a flight model, it is a switch not a wing.  Doesn't need to be clickable either and could be turned off if someone isn't looking for that level of realism.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You might want to check the answer from the first developers diary published after the game was announced.

 

13) Can we expect the clickable cockpits?

No. We create a simulation of air combat (this includes attacking ground targets). The pilot will only receive critical systems, propeller pitch, boost, altitude control, different mechanization, weapons and more. Procedural training device it will not be, it will be a game simulator. We would like to return to the original idea of the "IL-2 Sturmovik", because we believe that it was great.

So in essence a polished WT on sim battles?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy I don't know you personally, or your RL experience in flying, but switching fuel tanks is one of the most basic skills in aviation operation for a majority of aircraft(As important as engine mgtmt.) If you don't manage E in a fight you loose, if you don't manage fuel you loose your engine.  Not asking for the stars here, its been in MFS since the 90's I'm sure so CLOD or not is irrelevant.  lt'd easily be implemneted without changing a flight model, it is a switch not a wing.  Doesn't need to be clickable either and could be turned off if someone isn't looking for that level of realism.

 

How exactly does that relate to what I've just written? It doesn't....

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It relates to the op and your opinion that anything implemented from other il2 interations is not feasible. Its been implemented in sims for years, so where was the oversight on this? This isnt BOS vs anything. Its why cant these be implemented since they've been around in sims forever. Sorry for the grammar on my cell.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It relates to the op and your opinion that anything implemented from other il2 interations is not feasible. Its been implemented in sims for years, so where was the oversight on this? This isnt BOS vs anything. Its why cant these be implemented since they've been around in sims forever. Sorry for the grammar on my cell.

 

If that was my opinion, It would relate. Since I expressed no such opinion, it doesn't.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please reread your post then re read the op. He never asked to do anything like CLOD, he just referenced it. He wants it improved with tanks and pump which are modeled in many sims besides cliffs, so you thinking its bizarre is sorta bizarre.

 

Im all for fuel tanks but pumps maybe a little too much in scope for the current community.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So are there not as many "interactive" cockpit components as in Cliffs Of Dover?

We are not able to adjust sight brightness, emergency power, mixtures ect.?

 

CloD complex engine management is more myth than reality, is something partial... you can switch magnetos... but this dont have effect for start the engine  - they are really useful for turn off the engine, for what can be used the fuel cock...

Most these "how start engines" videos on Youtube are full of fantasy.

 

Comparing, the only difference between start CloD Spitfire and BoS Yak is that in the first is need open the fuel cock first and only this. Dont help much the "procedures simmers" but dont hinder the "hit I, slam the throttle" crowd...

 

@OP - Use CloD here for reference other than "disaster" is "political incorrect".  :)

 

You can use as reference, for example the optional CEM that MS CFS have early in this century - some 90's sim's have options like set bombs salvo, delay... that il-2(2001) dont have - IMO this game on release are very "gamey" in controls - have include Autopilot Speed...

 

People continue use CloD features as excuse to negate features request is empty - his "disaster" is not due this or that feature.

Other games use some (and more)  then without disaster. BTW - trees on CloD are optional item, one have option to "harvest" the England woodlands, anyway the BoB happen above England soil, not on England soil. ;)

 

"Realism" - I can be wrong, but the use of infamous word relative to flight simulation is "invention" of OM. Should be banned,  instead ask for more "realism" ask for more "simulation", e.g. simulate turn fuel cock, magnetos... :)

Every time that dam*** world  is used, result in the same dumb arguments... :(

 

I support OP request, but  I'll be happy just with some... trim wheels. :lol:

 

Sokol1

Edited by Sokol1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been stated quite clearly; BOS will be an air combat game/simulator. It will not, and never will be, a systems simulator. There are other titles for this. The emphasis will be on physics, flying, combat and smooth game play. If your requests are directed at these you will be heard. If not then you are likely barking up the wrong tree and your frustrations will mount. Read the Update pages. The final vision for the dev's is likely not set in stone but the overall direction of the game is crystal clear and well documented in these forums.

 

IBTL

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, the developers initially promised us (and still do on the home page) a "continuation of the legendary Sturmovik series and for more than 10 years it has been the standard for the combat simulation genre". It didn't become obvious until about a year down the road that they were producing a continuation of the RoF series air combat game instead of an Il-2 series simulation game. So requests for more realism, while a lost cause, are justified.

 

Btw, I don't see why selecting fuel tanks would require dealings with the flight model because of different weight distribution, last time I checked fuel state had no effect at all on weight distribution in game. So adding fuel selection doesn't require anything WRT flight model that shouldn't be required anyway, or be ignored anyway.

Edited by JtD
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...