Jump to content
Mysticpuma

TFS and thoughts on a slow tentative step to the Pacific Theatre

Recommended Posts

I think a lot of people would be interested, especially as Jason isn't going there any time soon. 

 

Would players be willing to take a leap of faith though on a basic expansion start? 

 

So TFS will already have the P-40 and there currently is a fictional Islands map.

We know the timeline of activity is so far 1939-(early) 1942. 

 

What if they created as a start point either an A6M or Ki-84 to fight against. 

 

This would give players a Pacific Scenario (maybe add palm trees to the Islands maps). 

 

Then players would wait for TFS to create a Burma map, a Bomber from the Allied and a Bomber from IJA. 

Finally while this is being done, the map team create a Burma map for a Flying Tigers campaign? 

 

Depending on the success, each side then gets a carrier. 

 

All small steps but TFS take on (albeit slowly) the Pacific Theatre. 

 

I do already appreciate we haven't got v5.0 yet.... but would people pay an extra £10 for a Ki-84 or A6M as a collectors aircraft to use on the fictional Islands map? 

 

Just musing, cheers, Mysticpuma 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TFS already indicated that *if* they went for a version 6 it would be ... VR.

IMHO DCS World (new map and planes ?) and maybe the new Microprose (???) might be the better bet at this time ... at least if we hope to get any pacific scenario before 2030 !?

However, I would, of course, be interested in knowing what the TFS Devs think about your suggestion.   

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see VR implemented, if only to quit the incessant requests by all eleven pilots who own a set in Cliffs.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that Jason has made clear that at least one of the reasons he isn't "going there any time soon", despite his obvious wish to is the lack of adequate documentation to model Japanese aircraft to the standards necessary, why would TFS be in any better position to do so? 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, AndyJWest said:

Given that Jason has made clear that at least one of the reasons he isn't "going there any time soon", despite his obvious wish to is the lack of adequate documentation to model Japanese aircraft to the standards necessary, why would TFS be in any better position to do so? 

Because I would expect Jason wants to create an entire theatre as a one drop sale. Finding information one every aircraft to create that one package must be incredibly challenging. However making one aircraft (whichever is chosen) and then adding others for which there is enough or significant detail available would be the the track taken. 

 

Appreciating that super detail is the be all and end all for most, let's not forget there was a huge amount of enjoyment had from IL2 1946 and their Pacific Theatre. The systems would have been incredibly simple by today's standards but most was ignored at the sake of gameplay? 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Given that Jason has made clear that at least one of the reasons he isn't "going there any time soon", despite his obvious wish to is the lack of adequate documentation to model Japanese aircraft to the standards necessary, why would TFS be in any better position to do so? 

Because there is know truth that when one  says it's not possible , other came  and do it. I know that he not said that it's not possible but just not yet. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

MP, even if i also would like to see something like the PacificTheatre coming alive in Cod, you have to remember the difficulty to obtain documents TFS could base the work on.
There is not only the performance documents that's an issue, the technical documents are also hard to find.Jason Williams has a very valid point about that.
You know (i hope you still remember) how the 3D models are made for CoD, all the structure parts, all the mechanical parts, all the sytem parts have to be created, not only to be used by the player but also for the DM.
You know how the CoD's DM works. All systems and all strcutural parts are build in the aircraft model. There is no "virtual" mechanisme in Cod, if something can be broken, it's created in 3D and system management for the player. The DM goes far beyond what the other combat sim's do.
Now, this won't be such an issue for a Zero or any american plane, but it will be for almost any other Japanese plane. what means that you'll get just one Japanese plane and few americans?
Would it be fun to have the pacific without the Val/kate and other japanese stuff?
For me not, a personal opinion.
For my part, and it's a second personal opinion, i'd like to see some further devloppement of the european theatre and the med theatre with some obscure planes like the italians, the french, the polish and especially i'd like to fly the wurger,  typhoon with it's crappy engine, a nachtjager, a flyingboat, a Lanc or a B-17 in the CoD game engine before having to fly above the pacific's endless water...but that's just my opinion/hope/dream...

ps: sorry for breaking the ambiance...:cray:

Edited by JV69badatflyski
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mysticpuma What makes you so certain that TFS can obtain the necessary resources to build Japanese aircraft, ships, and so on, considering the fact that for 2 1/2 years, Jason has been trying very hard, but unable to obtain them himself and has been forced to take on other projects like Bodenplatte, Normandy, and so on? I mean, yes the P-40, Blenheim, Spitfire, and other planes in/planned for CloD saw action in Burma, South East Asia, but after Midway, how significant were Japanese Carrier Ops, and is it really worth making for CloD when we could have Sicily, Crete and perhaps Scotland, and a whole bunch of new planes instead? Doing something outside of South East Asia could come into conflict with Jason's plans and perhaps lead to the exact reason why Jason doesn't want to go to the Med (at least for now). For now I'd say that TFS going to the Pacific is more of a fantasy than reality.

8 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

but would people pay an extra £10 for a Ki-84 or A6M as a collectors aircraft

I recall Buzzsaw explaining that TFS doesn't do pre-orders or Collector planes (Maybe for a large plane, but for a small plane, NO).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Mysticpuma.

IL-2 1946, (folks still play it), has them all, so it's hard to believe a Pacific Theater is still not a happening nowadays..

Adjustments could be ironed out as time goes by, like, nothing is ever set in stone,  besides, I'd pre-order Japanese aircraft at the drop of a hat.

A P.T..  Certainly my all time favorite theater of the bunch/s. 🙂

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2020 at 5:40 AM, simfan2015 said:

and maybe the new Microprose (???)

 

Is there a new Microprose sim in the oven?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, danielprates said:

 

Is there a new Microprose sim in the oven?!

Yes, they have recently posted screen shots of a B-17's interior and and 109's cockpit.

Edited by US93_Furlow
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, US93_Furlow said:

Yes, they have recently posted screen shots of a B-17's interior and and 109's cockpit.

 

Oh my! Please post a link to that here for me, I looked for this and didn't find it.

 

Edit: nevermind, here it is. Well, by the looks of it, it is more on the arcadish side of things.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.golem.de/news/warbirds-2020-flugsimulationsspezialist-microprose-wird-neu-gestartet-1902-139533.amp.html

Edited by danielprates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Threads like this are useful for increasing forum traffic. Now all that is needed is for someone to insist that the TFS PTO expansion must include VR.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean what is not to love about the Pacific?

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Threads like this are useful for increasing forum traffic. Now all that is needed is for someone to insist that the TFS PTO expansion must include VR.

 

I insist on PTO in VR!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always preferred Japanese army planes over Japanese  navy s,except the ground based late fighters like George and jack.

 

CBI is the most interesting imho,japanese planeset there is rich.

just my opinion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I wouldn’t pay anything for something with just two planes.  I want carrier ops or it isnt the pacific. Just another desert with a few more trees on it, And any new sim must have VR. Tired of hearing the “Flat  earthers” claiming theres a couple of VR guys around.  They need to move out of 1980 into 2020, we are the future of Flightsims and I suspect if they are not the minority in Flight sims now, their day is coming soon.

 

TFS has done a fantastic job with whats coming in TF5. But to me, the desert is just brown snow.  Their resources and already committed projects have done a magnificent job with the team and commitments they all have. It will be something they no doubt are and will be very proud of. But TF5.0 will not reach its full potential without VR and if the stipulation is that VR introduction hinges on TF5 success in new subscriptions, I would question why anyone flying VR now would go to a non VR sim?  That’s a big potential playerbase untouched and likely to lack the patience waiting another year if other offers are available with more aircraft.

 

Its a challenge for them and I wish them every success.  I hope they aren’t listening to some tired old “Flat earther” monologue constantly advocating their old tired ways. VR is not the future, it is now.  Flat earther technology is yesterday and their population declines with the sun rising every day. Ours is large and continues to grow and thats where the money is for those wanting to succeed. 

Edited by TWC_Sp00k
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, TWC_Sp00k said:

I wouldn’t pay anything for something with just two planes.  I want carrier ops or it isnt the pacific. Just another desert with a few more trees on it, And any new sim must have VR. Tired of hearing the “Flat  earthers” claiming theres a couple of VR guys around.  They need to move out of 1980 into 2020, we are the future of Flightsims and I suspect if they are not the minority in Flight sims now, their day is coming soon.

 

TFS has done a fantastic job with whats coming in TF5. But to me, the desert is just brown snow.  Their resources and already committed projects have done a magnificent job with the team and commitments they all have. It will be something they no doubt are and will be very proud of. But TF5.0 will not reach its full potential without VR and if the stipulation is that VR introduction hinges on TF5 success in new subscriptions, I would question why anyone flying VR now would go to a non VR sim?  That’s a big potential playerbase untouched and likely to lack the patience waiting another year if other offers are available with more aircraft.

 

Its a challenge for them and I wish them every success.  I hope they aren’t listening to some tired old “Flat earther” monologue constantly advocating their old tired ways. VR is not the future, it is now.  Flat earther technology is yesterday and their population declines with the sun rising every day. Ours is large and continues to grow and thats where the money is for those wanting to succeed. 

I do not recall a history of voluntary references to VR by the Team. I think that that in itself speaks volumes. Consider that a NA campaign would sell more easily to casual Great Battles customers if a CloD/NA interface and game controller options could be made "workalike"  to GB format. I don't see that happening. If it were possible I would think that it should have been done for CloD already to increase it's accessibility for new players. CloD ought to be just about bulletproof by now if it is to be the base for a popular new theater. It is easy from our current vantage point to see why the RoF engine was chosen as basis for BoS . It was a solid platform to start with. Why wasn't the CloD engine used? If I boot up CloD and later boot up RoF the reason becomes pretty clear. That is why the CloD engine got left for dead and had to be resurrected by TF. Unfortunately, its' interface problems are still there and baked in. Of course the Team would love to give you CloD/NA VR if they could. Realistically though, there is no assurance that they could do so no matter how successful their new project might turn out. Also, MP interest seems to have kept CloD alive thru the years so why not place loyal flatscreen MP acceptance as the most important segment of NA customer base rather than worry what VR potential customers (likely mostly SP) might demand?

Edited by Dagwoodyt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have original documentation for every single Japanese aircraft ever made together with complete english translation, PayPal me $5 if you're interested.

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

I mean what is not to love about the Pacific?

 

4 hours flight time and all you see is water 😒

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Long flights over water... does not float my boat at all.

Fighting over a land mass, Malaya/Singapore, Burma, and my favourite, Guadalcanal, would be a definite buy from me though!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, ACG_Onebad said:

I have original documentation for every single Japanese aircraft ever made together with complete english translation, PayPal me $5 if you're interested.

 

And what original documentation would that be?

 

Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, ACG_Onebad said:

I have original documentation for every single Japanese aircraft ever made together with complete english translation, PayPal me $5 if you're interested.

 

Hmmmmm, every single? Even without proof, just how did you come by this amazing stack of documents and how long did it take to acquire such a treasure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

 

Hmmmmm, every single? Even without proof, just how did you come by this amazing stack of documents and how long did it take to acquire such a treasure?

 He paypal'd me $4.99 for it....

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even assuming for the moment that 'every single Japanese aircraft ever made' means every aircraft type, rather than every individual aircraft, I'd have to ask how anyone could be sure they hadn't missed one? Aviation in Japan seems to date back to 1910 or so, and that's a long time for some obscure prototype or other to get lost from the records, even without the ravages of WW2.

Share this post


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

 He paypal'd me $4.99 for it....

 

At least someone got Onebad's joke:salute: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/10/2020 at 8:43 PM, TWC_Sp00k said:

I wouldn’t pay anything for something with just two planes.  I want carrier ops or it isnt the pacific. Just another desert with a few more trees on it, And any new sim must have VR. Tired of hearing the “Flat  earthers” claiming theres a couple of VR guys around.  They need to move out of 1980 into 2020, we are the future of Flightsims and I suspect if they are not the minority in Flight sims now, their day is coming soon.

 

TFS has done a fantastic job with whats coming in TF5. But to me, the desert is just brown snow.  Their resources and already committed projects have done a magnificent job with the team and commitments they all have. It will be something they no doubt are and will be very proud of. But TF5.0 will not reach its full potential without VR and if the stipulation is that VR introduction hinges on TF5 success in new subscriptions, I would question why anyone flying VR now would go to a non VR sim?  That’s a big potential playerbase untouched and likely to lack the patience waiting another year if other offers are available with more aircraft.

 

Its a challenge for them and I wish them every success.  I hope they aren’t listening to some tired old “Flat earther” monologue constantly advocating their old tired ways. VR is not the future, it is now.  Flat earther technology is yesterday and their population declines with the sun rising every day. Ours is large and continues to grow and thats where the money is for those wanting to succeed. 

If TF want to hop on to a new theater of war, mmm, great but some points needs to be considered. 

 

The need of VR: Already well written down about VR. 👍🏽

 

Long Development Time:  Another point how long is TF5.0 in development and still not being released? So let me guess after the release of TF5.0 next year, 5y later TF-PTO will be released. 😒 

 

New phase in FS: I did buy RoF/Clod DVD in an very early state and for that time RoF and Clod (and still are) were in my noble opinion, the benchmarks in combat flysims. After that nothing did change that much. Now there is finally something that will effect all the Combat flysimmers, the release of MS fly simulator 2020, this will be after 10y, the new benchmark in flysimming, we only have to wait for an publisher that is using that game engine for an combatfly sim.  Sorry but I think all others would after that, have a very difficult time, if not going for a real improvement that you can see without the use of an magnifying glass, they could be focusing on an unique selling point like WOTR/WOFF campaign mode, but eventually if not leveling to MSFS2020 standards, fading in a very deep niche of the FS market.  🛩

 

just my thought on this idea of moving to PTO by TF.  🤔

 

Edited by Dutch2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what will MS FS 2020 offer to a CFS audience? Not even sure that VR support for the product is a given. MS CFS's got laughed off the planet after Oleg's first IL-2 demo was released.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Dutch2 said:

Long Development Time:  Another point how long is TF5.0 in development and still not being released? So let me guess after the release of TF5.0 next year, 5y later TF-PTO will be released.

Something to mention here to all who don't know is that in 2015 TFS stated that TF 5.0 would be released in Late 2016. We have to remember that back then they were still an amateur mod team, they didn't have the source code, the content for TF 5.0 was nothing near as what's now planned, as well Blitz wasn't planned, it would be TF 4.312 to TF 5.0. Then in 2016 when they got the source code the first goal was to re-release the game with some fixes/improvements like DirectX 11, Tree collisions, etc. TFS has stated that they're taking their time releasing 5.0 as well know that it's better to be late and good, than early/on time and dead.

They stated that if they go on to TF 6.0, it will be released much shorter than 5.0 as they'll have many of the bugs fixed and the main thing they'll be doing as making the map(s), planes, and ships necessary.

Hope this helps anyone.

 

Maybe in 5 or so years the necessary documents on Japanese planes and ships will be found and a Guadalcanal/Midway, etc. and Burma/Singapore will be made by both teams.

49 minutes ago, Dagwoodyt said:

So what will MS FS 2020 offer to a CFS audience? Not even sure that VR support for the product is a given. MS CFS's got laughed off the planet after Oleg's first IL-2 demo was released.

With MS FS 2020 and CloD, the only thing that they'll do to IL-2 GBs is make the devs realize that they need to step up their game.

 

Yes with CFS3 (which I played last summer), crashes weren't very realistic. In fact, the crashes in the original IL-2 are more realistic than in CFS3.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing MS FS 2020 is designed for is draining flight sim budgets as quickly as possible. What I would expect to happen should a TFS NA campaign become available is that those new to CloD would start to complain that visuals are not on par with then current GB products. In the same breath they would complain that the NA user interface is inferior to those same Il-2 GB offerings. As for unearthing a monumental stash of Japanese aircraft documents, expect that after release of TFS 6.0 VR Edition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dutch2 said:

 

New phase in FS: I did buy RoF/Clod DVD in an very early state and for that time RoF and Clod (and still are) were in my noble opinion, the benchmarks in combat flysims. After that nothing did change that much. Now there is finally something that will effect all the Combat flysimmers, the release of MS fly simulator 2020, this will be after 10y, the new benchmark in flysimming, we only have to wait for an publisher that is using that game engine for an combatfly sim.  Sorry but I think all others would after that, have a very difficult time, if not going for a real improvement that you can see without the use of an magnifying glass, they could be focusing on an unique selling point like WOTR/WOFF campaign mode, but eventually if not leveling to MSFS2020 standards, fading in a very deep niche of the FS market.  🛩

 



Apples and oranges.....The tech used in FS2020 can ONLY be applied to modern (ACTUAL) era.
The tech is based on high resolution sat pictures (up to 10cm/pix) with automatic objects extrusion (like google maps).
What means unless if you have High Res Satellite pictures of the planet between 1939 and 1945, this engine can't be used for WWII.
If you use it, you'll have to remove one of it's primary "innovation", the objects extrusions, having to place objects manually like it's done in Cod/BoX/46.
another point, and what is essentially the most important point : FS series do not have such a position precision like the one in combat sims as FS do not have to compute the trajectory of a 2cm object (like a bullet) and the result of it's traject intersection with another object depending on dozen of parameters. Balistics are not to be underestimated as a load in a combat sim.
On a Planetary engine, you come across the double float position error what means the error in calculation get bigger when the distance between the player and the object get bigger.
PS: Objects in FS do Not have any collision boxes what means that even a modern combat sim won't be able to use this engine as  in the word combat you have "destruction" hidden 😁
 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 in the FS2020 moving objects like cars as a sample are being generated by AI in the FS2020 Bing maps, I can imagine the AI algorithm can also do its job in making the map give an more 1939-45 look. Just generate AI to delete skyscrapers and box shaped office buildings to start with, ok my home town would have a modern 1955 shaped rail-station and we see a modern bridge at Rotterdam, but its much better then the “actual WW2 looks” I see right now in BoBpl. Sorry to write this down but all the auto generated German style houses in the low countries are making the BoBpl map hilarious, but players seems to accept this, non historical aspect. 

It could also remove all towns and fill it inn with auto generated houses and use only the terrain, but I’m not an game developer. Sure there will be an algorithm to make the perfect looking old WW2 lookalike map. And luckily it does not have the generate the whole world like in FS2020. 

 

About the game engine has an option to combat flysims, just like you, we can only guess or in my case hoping, because nobody does have the information from that French made game engine.  But I’m sure some studios are keeping an eye on this flysim and will be influenced by this. I see only the results from Youtube and from what I did see, there is finally a new standard in flysims that can not be neglected  by other sim makers. 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MS FS 2020 is no more a reality than TF 5.0. Why posit a hypothetical CFS derivative of a "civvy" sim that has yet to be released? Right now all that's out there to see is MS hype. If you've bought into the hype fine, but don't expect that everyone will readily accept glossy promos for a product MS has "farmed out". MS can just as easily drop FS again if FS 2020 doesn't garner favorable product reviews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Dagwoodyt said:

What I would expect to happen should a TFS NA campaign become available is that those new to CloD would start to complain that visuals are not on par with then current GB products.

They would complain because the visuals in CloD are better? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can anyone debate visuals for products that might become available in the future? If current CloD has better visuals than current offerings from Il-2 GB I am not observing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Dagwoodyt said:

How can anyone debate visuals for products that might become available in the future? If current CloD has better visuals than current offerings from Il-2 GB I am not observing that.

Well, I'm observing that just fine, with graphics settings maxed out in both games, but I guess it's quite subjective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Arthur-A said:

Well, I'm observing that just fine, with graphics settings maxed out in both games, but I guess it's quite subjective.

I reckon so.

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...