A full paying Mission Editor product for owners of BOX

[IckyATLAS]

Personally I would be ready to pay for a Mission Editor that would be a fully functional, debugged and evolutive product.

When you see how much time one has to invest to create Campaigns or missions that are rich and immersive, it would be just fair to have a Mission Editor that is fully developed, functional, debugged and evolutive with the evolution of the BOX series.

 

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

An equivalent question is "Should the Mission Editor be hidden behind a paywall?". I think the answer to that is obvious.

 

A freely accessible Editor is important because the whole community can improve the game at no cost to the developer by making a wide variety of missions. Besides, it's a terrible idea to restrict access to a feature that's been advertised as part of the product for a long time.

Edited January 8, 2020 by Mitthrawnuruodo

[AndyJWest]

A bad idea, for multiple reasons. Firstly, as Mitthrawnuruodo says above, putting content that is already supplied behind a paywall is a highly questionable proposal. Regardless of how many pay-to-make-content editors sold, the developers would still have to provide continuing support the one they have already included. Not doing that would cause an almighty stink, at minimum. And secondly, if you propose paid-for content, you then have to convince investors that it will be profitable. And you aren't going to achieve that with a forum poll. The number of participants is inevitably going to be small, and is highly unlikely to be representative of the broader customer base.

 

The mission editor isn't perfect. It has bugs. It is however capable of producing good results. As are the third-party mission generators other community members have created. I can understand the frustrations of those who've had to work with a piece of software that was originally designed for in-house use, and isn't as stable as might be desired, but divisive proposals like this really aren't the way forward.

 

 

[Trooper117]

No... would not pay a shekel!

[Leon_Portier]

Not without my IL2 sugar daddy! Because I´d not get it, but just switch games.

 

Edit:

The current mission editor is not perfect, but its a pretty good program which obviously gets a lot of care from the devs. It costing extra would be very sad.

I do not want to pay extra just to create free content for everyone.

Edited January 8, 2020 by Leon_Portier

[Alexmarine]

NO

 

And I am not voting up because as it is you are forced to still respond to the second question. Maybe OP should pay to open poll so to guarantee they actually make sense through personal support... 

[RedKestrel]

I mean, the mission editor we have is the one used by the developers themselves in their scripted campaigns and Career mode. So they are probably already making it as functional as they can. 

Putting it behind a paywall or releasing a better one in parallel for money would just put a larger barrier to entry in terms of building missions, which adversely impacts the playability value of the sim, for both MP and Single player.

[sevenless]

Nope and Nope.

[Avimimus]

I would pay for a better quick mission generation system...

[SYN_Vander]

2 hours ago, Avimimus said:

I would pay for a better quick mission generation system...

 

And what should it be able to do?

[JimTM]

2 hours ago, Avimimus said:

I would pay for a better quick mission generation system...

 

No need to pay. You can get one right here.

[Avimimus]

1 hour ago, SYN_Vander said:

And what should it be able to do?

 

Ideally have a lot of realistic & detailed ground target templates... so one can produce a variety of ground attack scenarios quickly...

 

Ideally also perhaps have a bit of randomisation... so it'd basically be like an editor for a dynamic campaign mission template... so you could quickly tweak it for what you want and then get a quick 10 minute long mission to fly... that is what would appeal most to me (if I were the audience). But mainly it is having the ground target templates...

 

Does anyone remember the quick mission generator in the original Red Baron (not Red Baron II/3d... the original... Red Baron/Aces over Europe/Ace of the Pacific)?

[SYN_Vander]

8 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

Ideally have a lot of realistic & detailed ground target templates... so one can produce a variety of ground attack scenarios quickly...

 

Ideally also perhaps have a bit of randomisation... so it'd basically be like an editor for a dynamic campaign mission template... so you could quickly tweak it for what you want and then get a quick 10 minute long mission to fly... that is what would appeal most to me (if I were the audience). But mainly it is having the ground target templates...

 

Does anyone remember the quick mission generator in the original Red Baron (not Red Baron II/3d... the original... Red Baron/Aces over Europe/Ace of the Pacific)?

Yes, I remember! That’s why I created this:

 

? 

[Feathered_IV]

If the most basic functionality was on a par with the ease of use that the old Il-2 FMB had, then yes.  Definitely.

[simfan2015]

I use SYN_Vander"s Easy Missions Generator quite a lot.

Hopefully, one fine day, it (similar functionality) can somehow be implemented into IL-2 GB itself !?

In DCS we also have the Quick Mission Ediror and Full Mission Editor kinda integrated into DCS World.

I read that in DCS 'MAC' (future more 'relaxed' flight sim) a more full featured, yet accessible Mission Generator would get implemented. 

Anyway, the DCS Full Mission Editor now is (to me) still quite difficult to use and so I am real glad something like SYN_Vander "IL-2 EMG" does exist

 because IMHO the integrated IL-2 QMB is not really sufficient (for my -coop-flying setup purposes).

 

[Pict]

On 1/8/2020 at 4:03 PM, Mitthrawnuruodo said:

An equivalent question is "Should the Mission Editor be hidden behind a paywall?"

 

Almost.

 

Last time I checked the Mission Editor was only accessible to someone who payed for one of the BOX series*. So it's not free to start with, and therefore could be argued to be behind a paywall from the start.

 

*or had it gifted to them.

 

On 1/15/2020 at 9:29 AM, Feathered_IV said:

If the most basic functionality was on a par with the ease of use that the old Il-2 FMB had, then yes.  Definitely.

 

If that would even be possible?, as the main feature of the old IL-2 FMB, at least in the way I used it, was that it was accessible from within the game. This way you could build and test missions without closing IL-2.

Edited January 16, 2020 by Pict

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

9 hours ago, Pict said:

Last time I checked the Mission Editor was only accessible to someone who payed for one of the BOX series*. So it's not free to start with, and therefore could be argued to be behind a paywall from the start.

 

As far as I remember, there is no login/DRM for the editor exe. In theory, someone could easily use it without ever paying for the game. Of course, that hardly matters because I would assume that only people that are interested in the game itself would want to develop missions for it.

[J99_Himmelhund]

I fluctuate between yes and no.
Actually, the editor with all functions is already part of the product.
But, if there was a stable working editor, that from the manufacturer! would be completely and understandably documented, I am considering spending money again.
The programmers should know what they did and then be able to write it down.
It shouldn't be the case that customers sit down and try to explore every function, discuss them in the forums and then have to put together a documentation themselves.

[Gambit21]

On 1/21/2020 at 2:18 AM, J99_Himmelhund said:

I fluctuate between yes and no.
Actually, the editor with all functions is already part of the product.
But, if there was a stable working editor, that from the manufacturer! would be completely and understandably documented, I am considering spending money again.
The programmers should know what they did and then be able to write it down.
It shouldn't be the case that customers sit down and try to explore every function, discuss them in the forums and then have to put together a documentation themselves.

 

The original producer had an unfortunate, dysfunctional, bass ackward idea of what the community needed and wanted.

Jason has gone through a lot of trouble and expense to correct as much of this as he can, however some 'legacy' problems will continue to exist, and with regard to the editor he doesn't have the latitude/resources to devote as far as I'm aware.

[J99_Himmelhund]

On 1/24/2020 at 2:17 AM, Gambit21 said:

 

The original producer had an unfortunate, dysfunctional, bass ackward idea of what the community needed and wanted.

Jason has gone through a lot of trouble and expense to correct as much of this as he can, however some 'legacy' problems will continue to exist, and with regard to the editor he doesn't have the latitude/resources to devote as far as I'm aware.

All of this may be true. But half a product grade can sometimes score more with good documentation than the better product with incomprehensible or no documentation.
You can read this at any time in the online reviews.

[CanadaOne]

Compared to what we have now anything would be an improvement.

 

Absolutely yes I would pay. It would make the hundreds of dollars I've already spent on BOX products much more fun to use.

[timothy55]

Absolutely I would welcome and pay for a considerably improved Mission Editor.

 

I remember IL2 1946 with mods and what the editor became, which certainly matched many of my needs.

 

 

[Gambit21]

9 hours ago, CanadaOne said:

Compared to what we have now anything would be an improvement.

 

What we have now is the most powerful editor that I've used, and I wouldn't trade it for the easy but weak editor of 1946 which I used extensively.

 

 

8 hours ago, timothy55 said:

Absolutely I would welcome and pay for a considerably improved Mission Editor.

 

I remember IL2 1946 with mods and what the editor became, which certainly matched many of my needs.

 

 

 

Have you used the current editor enough to make an assessment of what "improved" would mean? 

What needs do you have that the current editor does not meet?

[CanadaOne]

2 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

What we have now is the most powerful editor that I've used, and I wouldn't trade it for the easy but weak editor of 1946 which I used extensively.

 

 

Yeah, but you're smarter than the rest of us. Aren't you a computer guy and an artist?

 

As stated, I've used ___________ ____________ in all kinds of flightsims for the past 20 years. Literally thousands of times. I don't use this one at all. Even with the patience and help you and others have shown, I just can't get into it. It's no fun, it's overly complex, and you have to turn the game off to use it. C'mon, it's 2020, they drive robot cars around on other planets, and I think next week they're going to land a couple of Russians on the sun. There is no excuse for a __________ _________ that requires you to exit the sim in order to use it.

 

Maybe for the first few iterations of the game, I can understand. There are other concerns. But look at all the ribbons under your avatar and mine. The years are going by, ma man.

[Gambit21]

2 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

 

Yeah, but you're smarter than the rest of us. Aren't you a computer guy and an artist?

 

As stated, I've used ___________ ____________ in all kinds of flightsims for the past 20 years. Literally thousands of times. I don't use this one at all. Even with the patience and help you and others have shown, I just can't get into it. It's no fun, it's overly complex, and you have to turn the game off to use it. C'mon, it's 2020, they drive robot cars around on other planets, and I think next week they're going to land a couple of Russians on the sun. There is no excuse for a __________ _________ that requires you to exit the sim in order to use it.

 

Maybe for the first few iterations of the game, I can understand. There are other concerns. But look at all the ribbons under your avatar and mine. The years are going by, ma man.

 

Well if I lived closer I'd come over and we could talk chainsaws and mission editors.

As I said before it's like the difference between the old Microsoft "Paint" and Photoshop. Sure "Paint" was easier, but pretty limited.

Photoshop takes some time to learn, but once you do you don't notice, you just work. Same with the editor "most" of the time...I'm not saying it doesn't have it's moments.

 

 

Russians on the Sun....lol

 

 

[CanadaOne]

4 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

Well if I lived closer I'd come over and we could talk chainsaws and mission editors.

As I said before it's like the difference between the old Microsoft "Paint" and Photoshop. Sure "Paint" was easier, but pretty limited.

Photoshop takes some time to learn, but once you do you don't notice, you just work. Same with the editor "most" of the time...I'm not saying it doesn't have it's moments.

 

 

Russians on the Sun....lol

 

 

 

Yeah, Russian on the sun. They're going to land at night. But you knew that already.

 

Chainsaws and __________ ____________. I'd open a bottle of good whiskey for that.

[Gambit21]

23 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

 

Yeah, Russian on the sun. They're going to land at night. But you knew that already.

 

 

They land on the dark side, that's how they keep on the down-low. 

[Lusekofte]

DCS got a even better FMB than old IL 2 and COD (that require coding in more advanced settings)

DCS mission builder is so easy to build and change existing missions but require a lot of learning if you want more. Still the learning curve is way more intuitive than my small and old experience with ME. I think if we do not want to miss advanced settings DCS model is the way to go. Because it let everybody in. But still only the few devoted will ever make good stuff

[1/JSpan_Wind75]

On 2/4/2020 at 2:28 AM, Gambit21 said:

 

Well if I lived closer I'd come over and we could talk chainsaws and mission editors.

As I said before it's like the difference between the old Microsoft "Paint" and Photoshop. Sure "Paint" was easier, but pretty limited.

Photoshop takes some time to learn, but once you do you don't notice, you just work. Same with the editor "most" of the time...I'm not saying it doesn't have it's moments.

 

 

Russians on the Sun....lol

 

 

 

Gambit21, I don't know what kind of missions or events can be done in the current editor that could not be done in the Oleg IL-2 editor.

I personally created a whole campaign of The Battle of England with hundreds of airplanes coming out of many airfields and airplanes that appeared at the stipulated time. That is to say, not by simple it is less powerful. And it also gave no mistakes and allowed hundreds of fans and professionals to do scripted campaigns that we have never seen in this new editor. In fact there are only a few campaigns with decent script to buy them.

 

There is a phrase that is used in the development profession:

 

"Don't make me think and less is more"

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, 1/JSpan_Guerrero said:

 

Gambit21, I don't know what kind of missions or events can be done in the current editor that could not be done in the Oleg IL-2 editor.

 

This sums up your entire post, and really you should have stopped typing after this.

 

Your whole post is written out of ignorance. That’s not a put down - you simplify have no knowledge of the new editor’s capabilities. 

 

Quote

I personally created a whole campaign of The Battle of England with hundreds of airplanes coming out of many airfields and airplanes that appeared at the stipulated time

 

I created campaigs with the old editor it or as well - this why I know of what I speak.

 

Quote

That is to say, not by simple it is less powerful.

 

It iwas FAR less powerful. The ability to place MORE units in 1946 has nothing to do with one editor vs another. I was constantly wishing that I could trigger one event with another event in the old editor, or randomize events - I can do all of that and more now.

 

Quote

And it also gave no mistakes and allowed hundreds of fans and professionals to do scripted campaigns that we have never seen in this new editor.

 

Yes there was tons of mediocre missions and campaigns, and a few very good ones.

We haven’t given up that much from where I sit.

 

Quote

In fact there are only a few campaigns with decent script to buy them.

 

There is a phrase that is used in the development profession:

 

"Don't make me think and less is more"

 

 

Of the two of us I think I’m in a better position to speak about content development for this sim.

 

When you’ve built a entire campaign  with the current editor then come back and try to tell me that the old editor is just as powerful or what phrases should be applied.  Until then...

Edited February 10, 2020 by Gambit21

[1/JSpan_Wind75]

 

21 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

This sums up your entire post, and really you should have stopped typing after this.

 

Your whole post is written out of ignorance. That’s not a put down - you simplify have no knowledge of the new editor’s capabilities. 

 

 

I created campaigs with the old editor it or as well - this why I know of what I speak.

 

 

It iwas FAR less powerful. The ability to place MORE units in 1946 has nothing to do with one editor vs another. I was constantly wishing that I could trigger one event with another event in the old editor, or randomize events - I can do all of that and more now.

 

 

Yes there was tons of mediocre missions and campaigns, and a few very good ones.

We haven’t given up that much from where I sit.

 

 

Umm,,..that’s not the phrase.

When you’ve built an entire campaign with the current editor then come back and try to tell me that the old editor is just as powerful. Until then...

 

I will not answer an answer in this tone. So ... No comments

Edited February 10, 2020 by 1/JSpan_Guerrero

[Gambit21]

25 minutes ago, 1/JSpan_Guerrero said:

 

I will not answer an answer in this tone. So ... No comments

 

I don’t think anyone is waiting on the edge of their seat for more of your comments.

Anyone saying the new editor is more difficult to learn has a fair point.

 

Going beyond that and trying to re-write history claiming both editors are just as capable is pure bunk. Learn the new editor - then comment about what is or isn’t possible . Otherwise put a sock in it. There’s your “tone” 

Edited February 10, 2020 by Gambit21

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

I can agree with complaints about ease of use and stability, but it's silly to ignore the crucial difference between the two editors.

 

The old editor lets you place waypoints and adjust parameters, but all behaviour is fixed and you have zero control once the mission starts.

 

With the new editor, you can define your own behaviour and make dynamic missions controlled by logic that reacts to events.

 

That's really significant.

[1/JSpan_Wind75]

6 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

I don’t think anyone is waiting on the edge of their seat for more of your comments.

Anyone saying the new editor is more difficult to learn has a fair point.

 

Going beyond that and trying to re-write history claiming both editors are just as capable is pure bunk. Learn the new editor - then comment about what is or isn’t possible . Otherwise put a sock in it. There’s your “tone” 

 

Do you know what a "Gambita21" is in my country? A small prawn with a small brain. ?

 

As I see you are:

History, Aviation, Design and Illustration, 3D modeling, texturing and rendering.

You should move on from the mission editor and do them as a programmer would, by typing the entire code by hand with the SublimeTex.

 

 

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Gambino ? I hope it's not your family.

Edited February 10, 2020 by 1/JSpan_Guerrero

[Gambit21]

32 minutes ago, 1/JSpan_Guerrero said:

 

Do you know what a "Gambit21" is in my country? 

 

 

Yep - a person who’s smart enough to learn the BoX editor instead of whining crying about how great the old, weak editor was. 

[Lusekofte]

18 hours ago, 1/JSpan_Guerrero said:

Do you know what a "Gambita21" is in my country? A small prawn with a small brain. ?

Kind of fun with a International forum. 
Foreign names and word can many times mean genitals or parts of it in my language. 
But I never point it out