Garven Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 Just now, Tycoon said: What are they making for ED? Think they did the Syria map that was recently released.
NO.20_W_M_Thomson Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 1 minute ago, Tycoon said: What are they making for ED? Probably another map. Does anyone know how many copies of FC were sold? When looking on the forum I can see a lot have FC.
BraveSirRobin Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 20 minutes ago, Tycoon said: Sure, but on the flip side I'm not going to assume that player count is the only factor that is preventing FC2 from being made, it's pure speculation. It's obviously not the only factor, but what do you think 1C is going to do if no one who owns the game is playing it when Jason asks for more money for FC2? 1
Guest deleted@83466 Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 3 hours ago, US93_Talbot said: But if no one likes the game they won't recommend it to anyone new, correct? Ultimately affecting sales. So making the game enjoyable is in their best interest for more sales. You can be replaced by a machine. At least that's what she said...
J99_Sizzlorr Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 (edited) 10 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said: Every day I come in here I'm more convinced that they should dump any plans for FC2 and just cut you loose. We are not broken you just don't like us... 8 hours ago, SeaSerpent said: Piss off the 30 or 40 WW1-only fanatics (who seem to never be happy anyway) Yes we might be hard to please but we are a very loyal bunch of players. And we are passionate and not toxic. I doubt they are even looking at active player numbers why should they? They have their money already. The only numbers they look at are the ones of their bank accounts and sales. 6 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said: They can't stop buying a game that they already bought. Well I can as the store lets me and I did buy FC more than one time already. So that argument isn't valid. Edited October 3, 2020 by J99_Sizzlorr 7
ST_Catchov Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 29 minutes ago, J99_Sizzlorr said: 11 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said: Every day I come in here I'm more convinced that they should dump any plans for FC2 and just cut you loose. We are not broken you just don't like us... Does he like anyone? Well, perhaps himself, lukeff and serpent. Who always back him and upvote his absurd comments. For me, yes I've said it's over. I wish it wasn't so. FC had so much potential. 3
Dutch2 Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 (edited) On 10/2/2020 at 8:01 AM, =RS=Stix_09 said: Steam reviews , that's funny , hahaha, funny joke.... they only give an idea of how many ppl own it... (bugger all) also FYI , dif ppl work on dif projects, 3rd parties did most of FC and TC work REF link Dude, I guess you like me, wanting to write down “I do hope” the Steam negativities are wrong. ? Right now there is not any indication for this, FC is not an money maker for 1C and excluding the RoFforum, sponsored and fanbased websites, I do read on other sites, similar mixed opinions like in the Steam review. But besides, IF all the negativity reviewers are lying, or using Jasons words are “whiners”, you can not deny about something needs to be done to keep the 1C-FC reputation on a higher level. This can only be done by making the buyers satisfied, how, has already been discussed here and on other forums. Keep in your mind I’m not saying FC is a bad game that needs to be avoided, the base is still very good to overrule every negative review on Steam. About the Ugramedia group, OOOOH, I did not know a 3rd party made FC, thats great info from you ? and yes, I have already put in my remarks about Ugramedia and its leazy RoF copy/paste job, a looooong time ago. Edited October 5, 2020 by Dutch2
BraveSirRobin Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 6 hours ago, J99_Sizzlorr said: We are not broken you just don't like us... All of the above.
NO.20_W_M_Thomson Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 Guys just do what I do, Have the green goblin and Ursula on ignore, You don't need to be insulted by narcissistic chumps like that. Something I should have done years ago. Their just not worth it at all. 1 6
Guest deleted@83466 Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 Grahamshear reads every word I write. Just not very well.
=RS=Stix_09 Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 (edited) 9 hours ago, Dutch2 said: About the Ugramedia group, OOOOH, I did not know a 3rd party made FC, thats great info from you ? and yes, I have already put in my remarks about Ugramedia and its RoF copy/paste job, a looooong time ago. Yes its and import to a very dif and highly modified engine than ROF was back when. I'd like to see more done with FC in the future , I live in hope, ww2 is more popular so its going to get the lions share of the resources. zzz studios was only working on ROF back then so 3rd parties are always going to be involved , and FC will never have the same level content as ROF does as a result IMHO unless the whole project is done by a 3rd party. Though some ww2 content updates to the core will always improve fc tho.. But if its not selling it will never happen... Edited October 3, 2020 by =RS=Stix_09
Enceladus828 Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 (edited) 9 hours ago, Dutch2 said: About the Ugramedia group, Here’s a thought. As stated by Jason, they aren’t going to make the Li-2 as originally planned, and there’s no word on whether or not Ugra is willing to come back for a FC2 or anything Sturmovik related, why not send them over to RoF to update the graphics and add VR, as the devs were able to do those last 2 things to IL-2 BoX/GBs when it still ran under the Digital Nature engine. I know it’s unlikely, but they know a considerable amount about WW1 planes and the Arras sector, and they would be a better choice than some other team (with hardly, if any knowledge about the Game engine) improving Rise of Flight. Edited October 3, 2020 by Enceladus
1CGS LukeFF Posted October 3, 2020 1CGS Posted October 3, 2020 36 minutes ago, Enceladus said: why not send them over to RoF to update the graphics and add VR, as the devs were able to do those last 2 things to IL-2 BoX/GBs when it still ran under the Digital Nature engine. There is not a chance in the world anyone is going to sink any more time or money into upgrading ROF. That game is done and complete.
Tycoon Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 40 minutes ago, Enceladus said: I know it’s unlikely, Understatement of the century. 1
Enceladus828 Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 18 minutes ago, LukeFF said: There is not a chance in the world anyone is going to sink any more time or money into upgrading ROF. That game is done and complete. One could have probably said the same thing about IL-2 1946 and IL-2 Cliffs of Dover when 1C Maddox pulled out. Fast forward to now and you have both games still being supported/updated by development teams. And both of those teams have done a fine job at making the 2 games better than they were when 1C pulled out. 2
Mitthrawnuruodo Posted October 3, 2020 Posted October 3, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Enceladus said: why not send them over to RoF to update the graphics and add VR, as the devs were able to do those last 2 things to IL-2 BoX/GBs when it still ran under the Digital Nature engine. It makes no sense to start a fork based on old ROF code for parallel development with Great Battles. Backporting the improvements since BOS would unnecessarily increase the workload. It would be easier to update ROF assets to the new standards instead of maintaining two completely separate games. Besides, the people most qualified to work with the Digital Warfare Engine and its predecessors are probably at 1C-777. Sending an art outsourcing company to upgrade the ROF code would achieve nothing. 1 hour ago, Enceladus said: One could have probably said the same thing about IL-2 1946 and IL-2 Cliffs of Dover when 1C Maddox pulled out. Fast forward to now and you have both games still being supported/updated by development teams. And both of those teams have done a fine job at making the 2 games better than they were when 1C pulled out. It's a totally different situation when the game engine is otherwise abandoned. Nobody is repeating the same work. Anyway, we've seen that adding VR and improving graphics isn't trivial for a new team. Edited October 3, 2020 by Mitthrawnuruodo 1
Dutch2 Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 Then we can now only hope there will be an satisfying solution for all WW1 combat flysimfans, right now FC1 is maybe an nice-to-have badge for the collectors of all the BoX stuff, but the signs for the real enthusiastic WW1 flysimmers that also wanting to play in VR, are not good. FC2, I’m afraid that will be another uninspired job from those students, working temporarily at the Ugramedia studio to finance their Bachelor study. Think if comparing Ugramedia to OBD, that is the big difference.
Zooropa_Fly Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 Unfortunately it looks like we're stuck with two games.. the existance of each one being detrimental to the other. 1
ST_Catchov Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 It's not all that bad Zoo. We can play dress-ups with the dolls. I'll undress them and you can dress them. And then we can swap. It'll be fun. 1
BMA_Hellbender Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 At this point dropping the idea of a fully featured FC2 isn't all that crazy. There's very few hooks left to reel in any non-hardcore WWI enthusiasts for $80. Verdun? Nieuport 17? Albatros D.III? ...maybe the Sopwith Triplane? (at least the non-gutted pre-1.034 "done and complete" version) I don't think it's good enough. Still, there's a few planes that would fit in the existing FC1 setting. Obviously the Hanriot, but not even necessarily so. Two-seaters seem like the obvious candidates (Breguet/R.E.8 and DFW). This sim still has a lot to offer in terms of historical VR enjoyment—almost like a flying museum, which is quite literally what RoF tried to be. In terms of pure dogfighting fun, especially in VR, I've seen the light since Friday. Having a game with a large active cross-platform playerbase that is under active development and is balanced around multiplayer makes all the difference, even if it's a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.
Panzerlang Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 So, it turns out starting FC the right way around (early planes first) wouldn't have made much difference at all.
NO.20_W_M_Thomson Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 2 minutes ago, J3Hetzer said: So, it turns out starting FC the right way around (early planes first) wouldn't have made much difference at all. It's not how it started that is the problem, it's the way it was finished.
BraveSirRobin Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 19 minutes ago, J3Hetzer said: So, it turns out starting FC the right way around (early planes first) wouldn't have made much difference at all. Sure, that would have made a difference. Sales would almost certainly be much worse. 1
JG1_Rotermann Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 When FC first came out everyone was happy with just about everything. I think they should turn it back to where it was in the beginning and leave it alone. 5
US63_SpadLivesMatter Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 12 minutes ago, -332FG-REDMAN said: When FC first came out everyone was happy with just about everything. I think they should turn it back to where it was in the beginning and leave it alone. I'm wondering if some of the changes are tied to the WW2 damage model in such a way that doesn't make that practical. 1
Enceladus828 Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 1 hour ago, J3Hetzer said: So, it turns out starting FC the right way around (early planes first) wouldn't have made much difference at all. I dunno. Perhaps there would have been some early, completely new planes then that may have increased sales — but if starting it in the early war was the case, it wouldn’t be appropriate to call it Flying Circus because that squadron wasn’t formed until 1917.
RNAS10_Oliver Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 (edited) 49 minutes ago, -332FG-REDMAN said: back to where it was in the beginning and leave it alone. So cease any future development into anything DM related? May as well cease developing any potential FM or etc also with that stance. What your asking is for no continued development or fixes to a game (if your fine with that prob should stick with Rise of Flight). The result of their work doesn't end up perfect, alright, roll back and never make any more changes? Nah thanks. Whether the end result is something I'm loving, hate or consider should be tweaked I would rather that any game company strive to improve and expand their product than not. Edited October 4, 2020 by Oliver88 1
messsucher Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 This is a scary thread for someone who has not yet got FC. 1
RNAS10_Oliver Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 (edited) Other than the quotation I’m not saying you‘ve said anything. It’s my thought and opinion on what going “back to where it was in the beginning and leave it alone” leads to in the end. Because going back to before and then “leave it alone” in the end means ceasing any development on DM. Because to do otherwise would not be leaving it alone wouldn’t it. And suppose there becomes some FM change In future that we don’t like, roll back, leave it alone, no more development on FM. In the end equals no fixes or continued development. And check rule 7 on the forums Redman? I’ve not got any problem but I believe this is not the first time you’ve taken something I’ve said so personally so maybe you do? Edited October 4, 2020 by Oliver88
NO.20_W_M_Thomson Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 47 minutes ago, Enceladus said: it wouldn’t be appropriate to call it Flying Circus because that squadron wasn’t formed until 1917. Then they probably would have called it something else. 12 minutes ago, messsucher said: This is a scary thread for someone who has not yet got FC. Get it and see for your self. Would help the developers, Hell I got all or most of the modules to support the developers and I hardly fly il2 and a lot of others did the same. 1 hour ago, -332FG-REDMAN said: When FC first came out everyone was happy with just about everything. I think they should turn it back to where it was in the beginning and leave it alone. Unfortunately I don't think they can unless they separate FC from il2 completely. 1
Enceladus828 Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 22 minutes ago, NO.20_W_M_Thomson said: Then they probably would have called it something else. Yeah. I think something like Dawn of Aces would be a better title for the series as a whole (if there are even more volumes) as when doing an early war or another Front like the Eastern, Italian, Gallipoli; JG 1 (the Flying Circus squadron) never operated in those areas, so it wouldn't make sense to call a pack in one of those areas Flying Circus Vol.X That's just my view.
BMA_Hellbender Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 Regarding the name, the only problem is they called it "Volume 1" which kind of implies a "Volume 2". Would have been better to call it "1917-1918" or "Aces over Arras" or "Hanriot not included". Regarding the FM/DM: it was always going to be highly controversial. The first major controversy is that the Camel was reverted to its pre-nerf state and the Fokker Dr.I wasn't. At least this was before the full release of the game so no surprises there (plus the parachutes sort of even things out). The second controversy and probably the final nail in the coffin for multiplayer is that weak wings are the "more complex" DM. Whether you think this is accurate or not, it was a major gameplay change that happened AFTER release. I'm still cautiously optimistic about a possible FC2 in the future. As in: there's a non-zero chance of it happening, perhaps after COVID. 1
messsucher Posted October 4, 2020 Posted October 4, 2020 1 hour ago, NO.20_W_M_Thomson said: Then they probably would have called it something else. Get it and see for your self. Would help the developers, Hell I got all or most of the modules to support the developers and I hardly fly il2 and a lot of others did the same. Unfortunately I don't think they can unless they separate FC from il2 completely. Yeah, I should, but I dislike this silence by devs about FC. So my wallet stay silent too. 1
Thad Posted October 5, 2020 Posted October 5, 2020 21 hours ago, messsucher said: This is a scary thread for someone who has not yet got FC. Relax. The developers have a history of again and again listening to the players and making changes and continual improvements to all of their products. I respect that. So much so that I purchased FC even though I have no interest in the WWI period. I just wanted to support the developers. 3
Feathered_IV Posted October 5, 2020 Posted October 5, 2020 6 hours ago, Thad said: Relax. The developers have a history of again and again listening to the players and making changes and continual improvements to all of their products. I respect that. So much so that I purchased FC even though I have no interest in the WWI period. I just wanted to support the developers. Set yourself up an 8x8 mission in QMB just to see how it goes. I think you will be very pleasantly surprised.
J2_Oelmann Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 I might be odd, but I like the current DM. Even the controls getting stuck is fun. It is better the rof and thats what matters for me. You will never have the perfect simulation. I'll just wait what comes next and hope it will be a Pfalz XII and / or another map. If I get bored I fly a Stuka or a Ka50 in DCS. On 10/3/2020 at 5:23 AM, Tycoon said: What are they making for ED? They did the syria map. Quite nice looking map.
No.23_Starling Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 12 minutes ago, J2_Oelmann said: I might be odd, but I like the current DM. Even the controls getting stuck is fun. It is better the rof and thats what matters for me. You will never have the perfect simulation. I'll just wait what comes next and hope it will be a Pfalz XII and / or another map. If I get bored I fly a Stuka or a Ka50 in DCS. They did the syria map. Quite nice looking map. Out of interest, which plane do you usually fly? Do you do much MP? 1
J2_Oelmann Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 Considering my limited free time I would say quite often. Mostly on sundays. I fly whatever is there. Favourites are the dr1 and the se5.
No.23_Starling Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 13 minutes ago, J2_Oelmann said: Considering my limited free time I would say quite often. Mostly on sundays. I fly whatever is there. Favourites are the dr1 and the se5. The Dr1 is a tough bugger. Do you suffer from se5 wing issues?
Recommended Posts