Jump to content
Daff

New information regarding PTO in GB Series

Recommended Posts

 

 

I really enjoy the honesty and transparency. Setting correct expectations.

 

PS. I would buy a Zero collector plane just for fun.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why we needed a thread to point out the other thread...but ok.

  • Haha 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is good that there is honest news on this speculative topic. Highly appreciated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

Not sure why we needed a thread to point out the other thread...but ok.

 

I'm guessing OP wanted a discussion on the matter, though I imagine there isn't that much to discuss. If they can't make the planes they can't make the planes

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Truly a great post from Jason. I see no issues with not going to the Pacific if it's simply not viable. 
I can't even begin to imagine how hard it is to find usable data on these aircraft and ships, especially in another language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to hear the Zero is at least possible one day. Dropping it into the game in a way similar to the Macchi would still be welcome.  

Share this post


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

Truly a great post from Jason. I see no issues with not going to the Pacific if it's simply not viable. 
I can't even begin to imagine how hard it is to find usable data on these aircraft and ships, especially in another language.

Its very difficult.  I was able to find some stuff, though the issue is all of the stuff is mostly found via photo copied .pdf files of technical documents in Japanese.  And this isn't just normal Japanese either; but rather mechanical specific stuff which is a very fringe knowledge base.  The Japanese national archives are also not the easiest things to search through as a lot of stuff has over the years been misfiled, or mislabeled as what tends to happen, or simply hasn't been added to the online database yet.  So its possible that a manual search of the national archives may be necessary for a lot of the documents that have the information needed to build a plane to the level of detail that 1C wants for its product. 

 

I posted a thread on it a while ago simply to gather interest so that some people could do some of this research on their own because its a monumental task.  I mean like i said.  We probably will eventually get a pacific theater game, but in the far future.  The work necessary will most likely be after they have exhausted the European front and also take several years of funded information gathering and would be one of those projects I think could justify a higher cost if not double due to the amount of work.  There is a ton of information for the European fronts that are easily accessible, but not much for the pacific.  And what does exist is very hard to find.  And that's just the planes.  The Japanese ships and carriers are even harder to get information on due to the fact that a lot of information on those simply no longer exists.  And the big thing about the Pacific theater is the carrier based naval battles.  Jason made a fantastic post addressing these issues but I have to say that it is very easy to underestimate the task of creating the pacific theater at the fidelity that the current Flight sim market wants.  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope materials and translations on Japs planes will pop up eventually bit by bit.

As on the Jap ships and carriers matter, they don't need to spend much time and resources on it's research and believeable modeling....they are just unplayable targets and runway, soo who cares if they are not modeled 100% accurate.

I'm sure no one would notice (except maybe few fanatics in this community 😬😁)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not interested in pto, but im quite surprised that there is no info about japanese planes. What about japanese ww2 books, manuals, museums, there must be a lot of japanese ww2 ethusiastic people with a lot of info about their planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the Japanese aircraft, I wonder what kind of information is missing? The info on engines, armament? The specs? So specs of Japanese planes say in 1946 were just some wild guess?

 

Or it's more about their specific systems, like the way you operate flaps, landing gear, bomb sights, etc?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I perfectly understand financial problems but dream is on of the key point of our Hobby ...............

 

When Jason started to make the Kuban map, it was a BIG risk and company should die if sales did not follow.......................result?  big success and great sales....

 

If I understand, docs on Japanese aircrafts is not the only trouble, making US and IJN carriers is also problematic ..........

 

May be, at a moment, risk is also a part of the challenge...

Edited by CCG_Pips

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a way, the fact that they are not currently going to make PTO, makes me respect the company and devs in the sense that, they feel that if they can't make it truly historically accurate, then they're not going to make it at all.  Many game companies would just fill in the blanks with estimated/educated guesses, but the current team isn't willing to do that.

 

Also, assuming they do make PTO one day, by delaying it for several years or more, we will theoretically get a better product in the end, as computers/hardware development, software development, technology, and research will have all progressed more than it is now, whereas if they made it now, they might have to cut more corners.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2. This forum is provided by 1C-777 Ltd. as a courtesy and its usage is a privilege and 1C-777 Ltd. reserves the right to ban any member temporarily or permanently for any reason at any time. Any penalties listed below for violations of the rules are guidelines only and forum administration may take additional action if they feel it is warranted. Use of the forum is not connected to usage of the game and access to this forum is not guaranteed to users as a consequence of purchasing the game.

 
20. False claims on future or past decisions and plans of the developers, which are not backed by hyperlinks or other facts are prohibited.
 

 

 

 

Edited by SYN_Haashashin
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An A6M2 Modell 21 and perhaps an A6M3 Modell 32 together with a generic south east pacific island map as a bundle - i would buy it!

 

A Grumman fighter would be nice , but we have already enough enemies wich fought these early Zeros:

Hurricane over Singapore

P-40E everywhere

Spitfire V over Darwin

P-39L everywhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, sevenless said:

It is good that there is honest news on this speculative topic. Highly appreciated. 

Yes I have not seen this. At least the issue with PTO was explained. And why we do not get the LI 2. Both just confirming my belief. 
I have no hopes to get planes I like as long people only request more power and more guns

  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, =VARP=Tvrdi said:

[edited]

 

 

Well if they had info on IJA planes they could do something like Singapore or Burma or some such with land bases for both sides and I imagine that'd be a step forward most of the Pacific fans would welcome

 

And Normandy will require a lot of ships

Edited by SYN_Haashashin
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, =621=Samikatz said:

 

Well if they had info on IJA planes they could do something like Singapore or Burma or some such with land bases for both sides and I imagine that'd be a step forward most of the Pacific fans would welcome

 

And Normandy will require a lot of ships

Very good argument, thank you. I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It goes to show how sims in general evolved in the last 10 or 20 years. At the time, I was 100% pleased with Pacific Fighters. It seems now that the info used back then was in, great part, speculative at best. Most people today would not be happy with a better looking but equally speculative Zero, Val etc.

Edited by danielprates
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

It goes to show how sims in general evolved in the last 10 or 20 years. At the time, I was 100% pleased with Pacific Fighters. It seems now that the info used back then was in, great part, speculative at best. Most people today would not be happy with a better looking but equally speculative Zero, Val etc.

 

I think there's little point retreading the Pacific if we aren't going to do it better and more realistic, if people were happy with low fidelity systems and guesswork flight models they'd still be playing Pacific Fighters, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I had to choose between no Japanese aircraft or speculative performance, I would choose speculative performance. But that might not be representative of the average consumer, so I can only hope the team has better luck going forward.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I'd be happy to buy a Pacific edition with Japanese a/c built on some speculation, but I respect that goes against the team's principles and would never ask them to change. Every edition of GB's is fantastic already, and improving with each new release. I really appreciate Jason's explanation, and the difficulty of the choices the Devs have to make.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =621=Samikatz said:

 

I think there's little point retreading the Pacific if we aren't going to do it better and more realistic, if people were happy with low fidelity systems and guesswork flight models they'd still be playing Pacific Fighters, no?

 

Yes that is what I said, viz, now our expectations are much higher and a similar guesswork on engine performance, flight model, cockpits etc. would not be acceptable to most people - nor, it seems, would be up to the standards of this game, unless there is a change in the future. A very fair and easy to understand posture from the developers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like the honest comment from Jason on that topic. Overall my fear, that the whole topic is on ice, was wrong.What makes me really happy.  And it also sounds that they already have some valid Information for some aircraft. This gives me a new hope :) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better late than never?
The first official comment after two years of silence. Basically a more elaborate, straightforward version of the post made back in 2017 after the initial postponement.

Apparently, the overall situation has not changed much since then. This makes me wonder:

Why weren't we told much earlier?

The "eventual move to the Pacific" was first announced in 2016 together with BoK. The game had to be revitalized. Ever since 2017 we have been held in suspense.
I used to be a vocal advocate of an instalment set in the Asiatic-Pacific Theatre, but would have been fine with a clear statement in 2017.
I'm thoroughly disappointed by the way this was handled over the past few years.

In addition, it's hard for me to understand why they are limiting themselves to naval battles. This has been the baseline of many of my comments in the past.
The Papua & New Guinea Campaign 1942/43 would have been a low(er)-hanging fruit and the perfect stepping stone into the theatre. For whatever it's worth, I offered my help several times after providing historical data relevant to BoBP - not one Dev ever reacted to it. I know I'm not the first Asiatic-Pacific Theatre enthusiast scared away.

Anyway, it is what it is. I wish they had posted this exact statement in November 2017.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Pacific Fighters could be ported to this graphic engine there would be large numbers of people playing it.  I firmly believe that.

My observations over the years of playing this entire series from Oleg's first edition onward is that people are like crows.  They are attracted to the shiny bits. I a lot of my friends in the BlitzPigs, and our sister squad all pretty much have said so.  They would still be playing '46 if it had updated visuals.  And no, War Thunder is not an option.  They still want plausible scenarios and not an arcade shoot em up.  What they won't do is go back to 2005 graphics.

 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont get it... Yes, I know they want historical accuracy, but I guess if they make the zero, people will buy it anyways. Im not a big fan of PTO, but I will sure buy a Zero if they make it. Even if its just to fly it over kuban, I wouldn't care.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, ME-BFMasserME262 said:

I dont get it... Yes, I know they want historical accuracy, but I guess if they make the zero, people will buy it anyways. Im not a big fan of PTO, but I will sure buy a Zero if they make it. Even if its just to fly it over kuban, I wouldn't care.

You are right!!!  Why not a "ZERO" as collector plane ????   I know already that a LOT of peoples if not the whole community will buy it!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One hopes that - with more people trained to do historical research, and more language skills, and more time - eventually some documents that were thought lost will emerge. So, there may be hope over the next decade or so.

 

It is interesting to hear that the 10 plane packages are most profitable. I often find that I'm most attracted to, at most, three aircraft out of the ten... and other people tend to find other planes more attractive than I do... so packaging them together may be the only way to get a comprehensive plane-set for a theatre... as it causes all of us to invest a bit in planes we won't fly.

 

It also allows packaging competitive high-performance aircraft for multi-player dogfighters (e.g. Spitfire Mk.XIV) with more exotic aircraft for people focussed on entirely novel experiences or historical recreation (e.g. the Ju-88C6, Ju-52).

 

Unfortunately, this realisation would also seem to work against FC being released piecemeal as collector aircraft... it might mean Vol.2 or nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I would not like just a zero "collector plane"

 

True it would be fun to fly against the P-40, Mk V etc but all that would be is ultimately frustrating, wishing for a correct map and the larger planeset. 

 

Full "pacific/far east" game release or spend the Dev time on something that expands/complements what we already have 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pacific collector's mini-pack: 

 

Zero, Wildcat, and guadalcanal map.

 

Slightly bigger Pacific mini-pack:

 

Akagi, Enterprise, Zero, Wildcat, Dauntless, Devastator, Midway Map

 

Expandable in the future via collector aircraft if resources and information come available.

 

 

Edited by J28w-Broccoli
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, CCG_Pips said:

You are right!!!  Why not a "ZERO" as collector plane ????   I know already that a LOT of peoples if not the whole community will buy it!!

 

Can't really build MP or SP scenarios that make sense for it without backing it up with appropriate units. If the IJN don't have a bomber, or any kind of attack plane you can't do any variety of multiplayer maps, and for people who like career or historical missions it's not really much value because it has nowhere appropriate for it to go

 

 

If the Zero is done it should be done properly with places to use it beyond mucking about in QMB. If they can't do it properly they should focus on aircraft that can fit into the sim, as there are dozens of interesting types we haven't covered that would do much better both to fly and as an opponent for the existing birds

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CCG_Pips said:

You are right!!!  Why not a "ZERO" as collector plane ????   I know already that a LOT of peoples if not the whole community will buy it!!

 

Does this really need to be explained? Because it would have absolutely no use for single-player gameplay, outside of quick-mission shoot-em-ups. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@LukeFF ....You have nothing to explain. I already have in mind that a lone ZERO should be usefull ONLY for Japanese planes lovers. My point of view is as good as yours. On kuban map, on quick mission, there are a lot of scenarios using P-38 / P-47 / Mustang/ Sptifires and A-20 against ZERO ....I know Kuban is not PTO but my opinion is having nothing or that for a small amount of money, i prefer this.

Edited by CCG_Pips
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the lack of informations about some aspects of japaneses planes should avoid to do a Pacific opus.

 

Follow historics datas is not always a good idea, we have the example of the P-40 motor management which forbid us 5mn combat power use, whereas we know that the russians pilots used combat power beyond the recommendation, the engines were just changed earlier than expected by the motorist, they didn't die in the air as we have in the game.

And we live with it.

 

I think we have enough informations and testimonials to create some nice planes sets to play with and create a consistent game.

Even if all is not exact in the motor management of some of the planes for example, nobody has the informations to note it and complain because the informations are inexistent. And could be updated with new discovers any way.

 

As sayed by Davesteu, New Guinea will be the good choice, to enter in Asia-Pacific area.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


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

Im not interested in pto, but im quite surprised that there is no info about japanese planes. What about japanese ww2 books, manuals, museums, there must be a lot of japanese ww2 ethusiastic people with a lot of info about their planes.

From what i've been told about the Japanese language by several people learning it/native speakers is that there's a few added complications to reading a document. First is that in Japanese there are several character sets, Katakana, Hiragana, and Kanji. Katakana and Hiragana are fairly "simple" to read and work with because they represent sounds in the language (so they'd be similar to the letters in English). Kanji; however, is where things get tricky. A single character of Kanji will often have a meaning. When multiple Kanji are put together it may mean something entirely different from what the characters mean separately making translating something without understanding the context fully a bit of a die roll.

 

On top of this the language has evolved just like English has with the meaning and origins of some words becoming unclear. A case i ran into was when i was asking about what exactly the phrases "Tori kaji ippai / Omo kaji ippai" mean (i think i spelled those correctly?). It is known that they're traditional naval commands which equate to "full left rudder/full right rudder". The portion "kaji ippai" means "full rudder" but the "tori" and "omo" portions dont mean "left" and "right" as is used in modern Japanese. Instead i asked a friend who was learning the language, he in turn asked a Japanese teacher (A teacher, in Japan, who taught Japanese) and they did not know the origin of the words. 

 

Since we know the context we know what these commands are; however, if we had read them out of context we'd read the equivalent of "rudder full to the bird." It's possible that someone involved in my question could have gone and found another person who is familiar with naval tradition in Japan to provide an answer; however, that gives a good example of further lengths which are needed to translate some documents.

 

1 hour ago, J28w-Broccoli said:

Pacific collector's mini-pack: 

 

Zero, Wildcat, and guadalcanal map.

 

Slightly bigger Pacific mini-pack:

 

Akagi, Enterprise, Zero, Wildcat, Dauntless, Devastator, Midway Map

 

Expandable in the future via collector aircraft if resources and information come available.

 

 

Personally i would like this kind of a method for easing into the pacific. From what Jason has said, it seems the devs have already put in the time (and money) to research the pacific aircraft, all that is left for some aircraft seems to be the legwork of putting all this into the game (not to imply that this is a small task!). If the developers were to take the aircraft which they could make up to their required level of quality, and then put together a "Minimum viable" expansion pricing it based off its size, i would be on board with buying it. I'm not particularly familiar with many of the non-carrier battles; however, if the devs picked battles involving pacific fighters from land bases it should hopefully reduce the hurdles for development (And my hurdles for landing!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I think holding off on the pacific theater is a respectable decision.  I know some people are just really excited to fly that zone, but the question is at what quality.  It would be kind of jarring to go from all very detailed and well modeled american planes to war thunder/1946 grade Japanese aircraft.  Now some people say they really don't care about the detailed flight model and the like, but you have to remember that you may not be representative of the population.  I personally do not care at all about graphics.  I have played il2 1946 and its not the graphics that bother me, but the flight model and damage model.  Honestly as long as the plane flies well, i could be flying greybox aircraft for all i care.  But i don't necessary speak for everyone.  The forums themselves are a vast minority of the overall il2 community so something that makes us happy or not happy doesn't necessary mean that that is true for everyone.  Perhaps a survey that could be taken in-game could help shed some light on this, but even that has problems in of itself.  I think they should keep doing what they are doing being the western front and then reconsider the pacific theater when they come to that.  I am honestly not for the collector plane idea since the planes do not make sense for the current theaters of war.  The Italian m.c.202 works because it actually saw battle in the eastern front and was a neat and fun addition, but a zero flying in those battles simply did not happen and would not make that much sense. Most of the player base is single player only and would have no way of using those outside of QMBs

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This issue raises the question as to the source materials of 1C Maddox, TD (for B5N2, Ki-45, N1K1), Gaijin Entertainment (Birds of Steel and War Thunder) for Japanese planes, mainly.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Novice-Flyer said:

This issue raises the question as to the source materials of 1C Maddox, TD (for B5N2, Ki-45, N1K1), Gaijin Entertainment (Birds of Steel and War Thunder) for Japanese planes, mainly.

 

Guess work and just simply having lower standards. A lot of WT's IJN/A planes can't stall so I wouldn't use them as a reference for performance. A Japanese speaking person also pointed out a while back that a lot of their cockpits don't have actual Japanese text in them, it's just vaguely-appropriate looking squiggles (though to be fair Japanese aircraft aren't the only ones they do that to, the F2A's "spark plugs" box was labelled "shark force" for a long time)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

During WW2, the Americans went to great lengths to discover all they could regarding Japanese aircraft.  Today, such intelligence would be long-declassified. 

 

Could it be that the answers lie closer to home?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Cynic_Al said:

During WW2, the Americans went to great lengths to discover all they could regarding Japanese aircraft.  Today, such intelligence would be long-declassified. 

 

Could it be that the answers lie closer to home?

 

The Zero is not the problem.

 

It’s the Val, the Kate, the Betty, the Pete etc etc.

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...