Developer Diary, Part 66

[Jason_Williams]

@Jason

 

  Thank you for the clarification, it seems that finally things are becoming more clear on the matter of the mission editor and the fact that it is coming and is not so much a matter of "if" but "when" is heartwarming news as I have been concerned that I may have invested in something before knowing all the facts that I needed to know, knowing that we WILL get one is enough to ease my mind on that matter.

 

  As far as getting the community to help with a editor, it might help to do something as simple as make a official announcement style post (the ones that everyone tends to notice more than posts inside existing topics) to let the community know that there is a opportunity for them to make the process go a lot faster, perhaps even adding some sort of incentive or making it a friendly contest of sorts, if you want folks to step up, it is important that folks know that there is a opportunity to do so, I mean, if I had any knowledge of coding and such, I would immediately jump up and help you and your team, without hesitation, I know I can't be the only one.

 

  As  said, even a simple announcement post would go a long way, perhaps even sending it as part of a newsletter so that those who don't visit the forums regularly would be able to have the opportunity to lend a hand.

 

No we are not going to officially seek someone to build this in any official capacity. If someone steps up and starts working on something and shows progress and they need something specific from us, as other folks have done with ROF projects, then we can try to help. But an open invitation to the community to help us build a complicated tool is not something that works. 

 

There was a previous thread about what features a new ME should have and the result was not good. Usually such tools, apps and projects are the brainchild of one talented person who has the vision and skills to get it done. Open source, community projects usually fail.

 

Jason

[E69_Chipi]

We have never had great widescreen support so this bug doesn't surprise me. We are still not a final product, Early Access was to give users a taste of what we are doing and such bugs as this are to be expected. Hopefully we can fix this issue at some point. So the clear answer is, we have no answer as this bug is not our top priority. You can play the game, just not with multiple monitors. I know this answer won't make you happy, but this is the reality.

 

Jason

Well, at least cards are on the table now...And you bet that the answer does not make me happy. But at least it is an answer.

 

You might not have had formal widescreen support, but it was working normally before. It was after one of the updates three weeks ago that it stopped working.

 

I hope it is fixed before release, because after a year playing on three monitors i just can't go back to one.

 

It is probably because I am directly affected, but IMHO (which unfortunately does not count) fixing that should be more important that the balance of CG according to the ammo loaded.

 

Thanks anyway for the reply

[I/JG27_Zimmi]

Some time after game release FMB will be available to everybody but not during early access. At this point it is similar to ROF editor which means that it's not yet ready to be given to everyone. When it's done, it'll be okay to give it to wider audience.

 

That's good to hear. As for me one factor that made IL-2 so popular and successful over the last year was the possibility for pilots, squadrons, and onlinewar-operators to create their own missions. No matter if the complexity of the editor changes, people will always get used to it, I think there are quite some smart guys out there who can learn really fast.

I honestly don't know how many  missions I have created (most of them for my squadron for training purpose or campaign scenarios) since the very beginning of IL-2, probably > 1000, but these self-made battle-scenarios definitely were probably more important than, at least equivalent to,  anything else in IL-2.

[Jason_Williams]

Did you ever think, that RoF and WWi scenarios could be meaningless to many BoS founderrs?

 

Why is it your need to control whether FMB is too complicated for many or few of your customers. Its that fact I simply do not understand!

 

Why would it be meaningless if the ROF ME is used as just a training tool? Fact is many so called "talented" mission makers from other sims have tried and and complained to us that it is too complex. So if they don't like it, why release it at all?

 

Also, I answered all of this in a different thread. Even though all of you swear you won't request support for the complicated editor, people do and in large numbers and then it just snowballs into a big thing about how our ME sucks. So we don't want to deal with this until after we finish the initial release.

 

So as you can see there is a huge contradiction on this forum. First, the community says our ME sucks, now the community says we need to release the ME. Which is it? Actually, what you want is a new ME. So, knowing a new ME is not coming anytime soon, we have proposed a compromise. Best we can do.

 

Jason

[Aracno]

We're talking about the current ME. A simpler one with a new interface, embedded into the GUI is a big, expensive job and would take much time. A simpler standalone ME with a 2D interface can be built by a 3rd Party though. This I would support as best I could as I have done with other 3rd Party projects and tools. Jason

If we are talking about the currentli ME, the same of RoF, why we will have to wait "sometimes after the release"?

Just let us play with it from the start and we will be happy.

[SKG51_Joker]

Why would it be meaningless if the ROF ME is used as just a training tool? Fact is many so called "talented" mission makers from other sims have tried and and complained to us that it is too complex. So if they don't like it, why release it at all?

 

Also, I answered all of this in a different thread. Even though all of you swear you won't request support for the complicated editor, people do and in large numbers and then it just snowballs into a big thing about how our ME sucks. So we don't want to deal with this until after we finish the initial release.

 

So as you can see there is a huge contradiction on this forum. First, the community says our ME sucks, now the community says we need to release the ME. Which is it? Actually, what you want is a new ME. So, knowing a new ME is not coming anytime soon, we have proposed a compromise. Best we can do.

 

Jason

why release at all?

because something is better than nothing.

 

And: if you put it under a disclaimer you can publish it and work on a better one because everybody would know.

Nobody could call you names for not giving support, since you work on a better version.

 

But anyway by now I think discussing things with you guys doesn´t help, you already found your truth. I´ll just see what happens in the future ...

 

Thanks for answering anyway!! Don´t wanna get on your nervs ...

Edited May 30, 2014 by ZG15_Falke

[Jason_Williams]

If we are talking about the currentli ME, the same of RoF, why we will have to wait "sometimes after the release"?

Just let us play with it from the start and we will be happy.

 

Again, see my previous posts on this topic. And no the community will not be happy if we only release the old ROF-style ME.

 

Jason

why release at all?

because something is better than nothing.

 

And: if you put it under a disclaimer you can publish it and work on a better one because everybody would know. Nobody could call you names for not giving support, since you work on a better version.

But anyway by now I think discussing things with you guys doesn´t help, you already found your thruth. I´ll just see what happens in the future ...

 

Not going to work on a new ME until we have the funds and a design and that is dependent on how the initial game does. The usual Catch-22 for a flight-sim.

 

Jason

[I./JG68_Sperber]

NOOOOO I dont play this GAME with one Monitor, when i have 3 MONITORS !!!

Pleas give me back my MONEY !!

Edited May 30, 2014 by I./JG68_Sperber

[SCG_Neun]

Jason, I think now that we know about the campaign/career mode that will be released, for many of us, the ME now becomes a key element in trying to spice up our single player/offline world.  I will now check out the ROF editor, watch some instructional videos, and shorten the learning curve on whatever ME you decide to release.  Another thing.....ROF had one heck of a campaign career mode and the need to bone up on that ROF editor wasn't necessary there.  The SP niche was satisfied......I'm not really a WWI buff, but I played enough ROF to have anticipated some great things for BOS offline play.....I understand your compromise, and I appreciate the chance to work with it.

[SKG51_Joker]

Not going to work on a new ME until we have the funds and a design and that is dependent on how the initial game does. The usual Catch-22 for a flight-sim.

 

Jason

 

 

So its no ME at release and maybe or not a ME later.

Thanks for getting that straight

Edited May 30, 2014 by ZG15_Falke

[I./JG68_Sperber]

 

I am extremely disappointed !!

[Zak]

Regarding the single player campaign I'm wondering if your original plans have changed or if all or some of the following statements are still relevant.

• For SP: QMB, User Missions and a Historical Campaign. (Jason)
• Historical single-player campaign will require internet connection. (LOFT)
• New campaign phases will be unlocked by completing mission objectives. (LOFT)
• Missions will be generated on the server for the selected campaign phase. (LOFT)
• Will have to choose (or change) regiment when joining a new campaign phase. (LOFT)
• Mission types will differ with each campaign phase (e.g. more Luftwaffe supply missions during the aerial bridge period). (LOFT)
• Weather is taken into account for each campaign phase. (LOFT)

All these statements are correct, nothing changed.

[FS_Fenice_1965]

 

 

Players who created good mission for ROF and IL-2 are these few persons who may try to do smth with our FMB

 

1) Is it possible to enter between the "lucky guys" for players who created good missions for IL2 (but not for ROF) ?

2) Has it been considered that a good mission builder in IL2 may be able to learn the ROF editor ?

3) Will it be possible for people not coming from ROF community to enter the area of those who will gain the possibility to use the mission editor before release ?

4) what is the sense of releasing the dedicated server before release if there's no possibility to fill it with missions created with the mission editor ?

[Jason_Williams]

Regarding the single player campaign I'm wondering if your original plans have changed or if all or some of the following statements are still relevant.

• For SP: QMB, User Missions and a Historical Campaign. (Jason)
• Historical single-player campaign will require internet connection. (LOFT)
• New campaign phases will be unlocked by completing mission objectives. (LOFT)
• Missions will be generated on the server for the selected campaign phase. (LOFT)
• Will have to choose (or change) regiment when joining a new campaign phase. (LOFT)
• Mission types will differ with each campaign phase (e.g. more Luftwaffe supply missions during the aerial bridge period). (LOFT)
• Weather is taken into account for each campaign phase. (LOFT)

All points taken from the "what we know so far" thread.

 

To be fair to 1C/777, I'm wondering if a lot of my/our disappointment is down to the fact that we presumed more than we've been told and have therefore granted ourselves false expectations.

 

All of this is still valid. The only issue you can argue about is what do you consider "historical". For some I guess that means role playing stuff, for others it means proper airfields and weapons and mission types etc. The term is subjective.

 

If you want a really detailed role playing experience then find someone to convert PWCG for BOS and that would really make the super hardcore guys happy.

 

Jason

[zippyPerrserker]

huh. So what is the difference between a "Squadron" and a "Regiment" in the single player campaign? Or in general?

[II/JG17KaC_Wolfe]

I'm not an experienced flight simmer but as one of the 95% I just want to say this game is brilliant !  Sounds like those with the skills and imagination to develop missions will get it made available and I'm looking forward to that to.  I'm happy to say it's beyond me though. 

 

This is a real quality product amongst a lot of dross.

 

I think we should bear that in mind guys.

[kendo]

I'm also disappointed at the news about the single player campaign.

 

I hope for the success of this project and i think enough has been achieved to give it a more than good chance.

 

But there has been a succession of 'disappointments' - skins and the system used to control them, the lack of a mission builder that the mass of players can use to create content, and now the single player campaign which doesn't seem to be what the community (at least those represented here) want.

 

Each one of these issues may be small in itself but each one disappoints a portion of the user base and reduces enthusiasm for the end product.

 

I take on board the facts about what can actually be achieved in a limited time with a limited budget. But these issues are building to really affect the level of enjoyment and immersion that the end product can deliver.

 

And there is an interlocking issue (as someone already mentioned) between the single player campaign and a limited set of single player missions with no capacity for the wider user base to create more. 

 

Going back to original il-2 several of the big features that REALLY hooked me into it will be missing. Skins are a huge issue. One of the joys in il-2 was to collect those amazing community made skins and to be able to decide exactly when you would use them in a mission.

 

Despite never publishing a il-2 single mission to the wider community, I made scores of them for my own use - some minor variations, some major scenarios with many objects and aircraft.

 

In comparison I fear BOS may provide a limited and frustratingly sparse set of experiences at least at initial release. 

Edited May 30, 2014 by kendo

[Nage]

If you was expecting powerful, yet simple enough ME (for use for average simmer), you was wrong. This is BOS. Not il2 46. Whoever played FOR knows it was initialy built as "dogfighter sim". I was never planed to be a large scale MP WW2 sim (big complex missions etc). Never. Thus the limited use of ground units, strange AI and mission editor which was in the first place built for devs, not for customers.

Edited May 30, 2014 by tikvic

[LeadTurn_SD]

Regarding the Mission Editor:

 

I'm somewhat comfortable with the RoF editor, and have made "hybrid" missions that could be flown cooperatively and allowed respawn.

 

I do not consider myself to be in the "5%"... I am not a programmer, just a lowly, long time flight sim enthusiast who enjoys building coop missions for my friends to fly with me.  I've been doing this with every simulation that supported it, for almost 17 years.

 

I see the RoF editor's complexity as really the only "flaw" to an otherwise stellar game.  It has a much steeper learning curve than any mission editor.... you can do amazing things with it, but it is not inuitive, even if you have built missions and campaigns in other flight sims' editors.  It takes quite awhile to master (I have not mastered it, but can use it).

 

I was hoping BoS would refine the RoF editor and make it more user friendly. 

 

I do understand this is a major undertaking.

 

Fewer user-created missions were the end result of the overly-complex editor in RoF. 

 

That was and is a real shame. 

 

I hope that I have misunderstood what has been announced about the full mission editor.

 

Best wishes.

Edited May 30, 2014 by LeadTurn_SD

[VBF-12_Stick-95]

 Zak said:

The original IL-2 game lived several years before such creativity came out to the light; we’re only 16 month old.

 

 

 

I would beg to differ with this statement.  BOS is not 16 months old, it hasn't been born yet.  I'll be holding off on any "judgement" of features, etc. until the final release.  Before that my thoughts of BOS, and those of most of the early access group,  are only conjecture.

 

Looking forward to seeing the next 50%.

[fjacobsen]

Having seen how ROF has evolved from the very early stage (beta) I have no doubt that IL-2 BOS will become even greater over the next years.

ROF started with only 3 flyable aircraft and no campaign. Today we got 10 x the initial number of flyable aircraft and both a campaign as well as alot of 3rd party addons and enhancements.

 

While I will miss the Full mission builder that we knew from the earlier IL-2 series, I agree with the devs that it´s much more important that we will have a stable release version, rather than a version with many bugs in both the sim as well as a mission builder.

 

I don´t think that the dev should waste their time on a mission builder before after release, but then I als would like it available for everyone, though alot of uses will whine about how complex it is.

 

My opinion is clearly that it is better to have fewer features that actually work from day 1, rather than a feature rich sim that might become unplayable.

[=VARP=Cygann]

Hello folks,

 

I did a quick glance at what we know so far and did not see this or similar, so here goes one more question regarding mission building or generating even.

 

Will it be possible to create (build or generate, don't matter to me) coop missions with players on both sides like in old IL2? 

 

In ROF, PWMG will create coop mission and track it for one pilot (we can modify by hand to include more pilots) but that is all missions against AI. What any IL2 game needs is missions with objective or multiple objectives and slots on both sides in conflict (good old HL days when mission after mission was launched every evening).

 

Because if MP will come down again mostly to ongoing DF servers with few objectives per side, I don't see this game live even a fraction of the original or to live up to IL2 name. Everyone knows this, hard core IL2 players do not hang on DF servers if they have a choice (and we had a choice from very early days considering 13 years old life span of IL2, and what a glorious 13 years those were).

 

I really hope you learned from ROF when you compare it's MP components to IL2, that DF is not a key to success.

DF is mostly for training and for those left in it nowadays flying with icons on and external views and what not, I don't consider those people true simmers, they are just gamers to me, same as if they play any other online shooter where you run and gun, die and repeat. That can be fun and useful while you learn new plane of as a casual steam out. But I recon most of early buyers are like me, much more into realism (NOT to be confused with elitism, I do not judge tastes, just wish there are face off coops where you get 1 life for the duration for us that like it a bit more realistic, that is all).

Edited May 30, 2014 by EAF19_Cyclops

[startrekmike]

@Jason

 

  So we are back to the point where it is not a matter of when for the full mission editor but if?

 

  I mean, we have Zak saying that there will be a public release but it is not going to be on the actual release date of the game but perhaps a bit later then we have you saying that there really may not be a public release at all.

 

  Look, Jason, I have been a cheerleader for ROF/777 for a long time, I have defended your company against naysayers and I have always bought anything that comes out for ROF without hesitation, I even enjoy using the ROF mission editor in my own (perhaps limited) fashion.

 

  Having said that, I feel like part of the problem we are having about the mission editor topic is that we have people (moderators, Zak) telling us that it will happen, that we don't need to worry and that there will be something released at some point after September, I think a lot of us would be okay with that, heck, I personally still say that making the existing editor a separate download with a mandatory disclaimer (saying clearly that it is not going to be officially supported) every time you start the software is a better way to go for the short term.

 

  On the other hand, we have you saying that there is no demand for one, that there is no real plan to release one publicly at this time and that there may not even be one if the project is not successful and to that, some of us here are trying to tell you that something is better than nothing at all.

 

  So, where do we sit officially here? Is there going to be one released publicly (in one form or another) for sure but at a later date or is it not really being planned at the moment and instead entirely dependent on sales?

 

  I mean, it is just confusing, I don't know if I should get my hopes up or not on this and I really, really, really want to continue to be enthusiastic about BoS but if there is no real concrete plan for a public FMB release (in some form or another), I can't say it won't seriously change my feelings about the product as I need a editor for making multiplayer missions for my friends and I that match our specific needs.

[6BLBird-Dog]

Making the best of what ROF had to offer for FMB was a daunting task at first  but once a few basic rules were learnt it became far easier .I found Something very interesting in the learning of the FMB in rise of flight , it was the ability to save groups .Once done whole or small sections of missions could be saved,imported into new missions and then altered to suit .

Saving the group again built up a number of groups over time making a substancial library with triggers timers and other features .There are still many aspects of the RoF editor I have not got the grasp of yet but the scenarios one can create with the use of trigger interphase relieves the need to learn scripting ,a great relief to me . If Librarys by builders with a short read me file are collected indexed and made downloadable very quickly the FMB  would offer massive potential to users .A decent FAQ section on mission building would eventualy be a database and quick reference section for those who "hit the wall" trying to get a particular action . Just want to get my paws on it  especialy if we get to run our own missions like ROF

[Letka_13/Arrow_]

All of this is still valid. The only issue you can argue about is what do you consider "historical". For some I guess that means role playing stuff, for others it means proper airfields and weapons and mission types etc. The term is subjective.

 

If you want a really detailed role playing experience then find someone to convert PWCG for BOS and that would really make the super hardcore guys happy.

 

Jason

 

I agree here, I have just one problem with the need to complete mission objectives to be able to continue or unlock some stage. I think the only historical mission objective needing to be completed to be able to continue missions was to survive/return to your base so you could fly another mission. I hope that is the case of (or at least optional) BoS, and not needing to refly a certain mission needing to figure out how to win it like some FPS game.

[Nonolem]

NOOOOO I dont play this GAME with one Monitor, when i have 3 MONITORS !!!

Pleas give me back my MONEY !!

 

You remember that the game is still an alpha version, of course... As it has been already answered to you, you can play the game, so your problem is not a top priority. Nobody as never told you that your problem will never be solved.

 

It's true that this game is so good, even in alpha, that some seem to forget that it is an alpha version.

 

Or maybe you are just jocking...

[No601_Prangster]

@Jason

 

  So we are back to the point where it is not a matter of when for the full mission editor but if?

 

I think that what they are saying is that they what to make a user friendly mission builder but that they won't be able to work on it until after release. If the game is a success you will get a mission builder but if it crashes and burns they will all lose their jobs and there will be no mission builder. It's simple economics. Of coarse some on these forums will say that unless you give me a mission builder I won't buy the game, but that doesn't matter because the people who care about a mission builder being included are a small percentage of the market. The developers need to sell hundreds of thousands of copies to all the causal player on Steam to make a profit and continue in business. 

Edited May 30, 2014 by No601_Prangster

[[JG2]R7_Blackadder]

Can't say I'm happy with the news. I am rally happy because of the progress but the list of "insufficient" features looks likely to grow.

I hope you realize that this habit selling the product can't be bend so easily from the original promised features. You decided to use the "IL-2" trademark for obvious reasons but keep in mind the level you have to reach. 

 

Don't take my words in the wrongs way: I don't require the fully modded IL-2 1946 at the start but you have to admit serious doubts have been put in front of us, while we paid (much or not) in advance.

The Alpha thingy is really really really nice but can't replace the final quality.

[21-23-STstef57]

Hi, 

I also would like to take this mission editor. Can I ask for a more information who benefits and who does not benefit. 

Thank you.

 

Stef57

[FlyingNutcase]

Jason,

 

For someone to get access to the current mission editor:

1. What kind of mission would they need to submit to you? Or what skills would they need to demonstrate (simple/complex triggers for example). Perhaps a certain minimum size of mission too?
2. Would there be a requirement to provide public missions?

Thanks ~

 

Flying Nutcase

[LeadTurn_SD]

Hello folks,

 

I did a quick glance at what we know so far and did not see this or similar, so here goes one more question regarding mission building or generating even.

 

Will it be possible to create (build or generate, don't matter to me) coop missions with players on both sides like in old IL2? 

 

In ROF, PWMG will create coop mission and track it for one pilot (we can modify by hand to include more pilots) but that is all missions against AI. What any IL2 game needs is missions with objective or multiple objectives and slots on both sides in conflict (good old HL days when mission after mission was launched every evening).

 

.......

 

It is already possible to create coop-like missions in RoF, playable from either side, with AI, and with respawn, and the ability to choose multiple aircraft types which is nice.  It is a "hybrid" between a dogfight mission and a coop ... it can be done with a little forethought and effort in the RoF editor, so I am hoping to do the same thing in the BoS editor.

 

This is of course different from "classic" IL2 coops where "dead is dead"  (if you get shot down, you can only spectate).   The classic IL2 style coop is available in RoF... you just have to set it up in the mission editor. 

 

But the ability to respawn either airborne or at a base is nice; it is nice to have a 2nd (or 3rd!!) chance if you crash on takeoff, get shot down 2 minutes into the mission, etc.

 

The RoF editor is as powerful as it is complex.... my hope remains  that BoS' editor would be more user friendly.

 

Best wishes.

Edited May 30, 2014 by LeadTurn_SD

[21-23-STstef57]

 

Hi, 

Why 5%?

And others?

 

I also would like to take this mission editor. Can I ask for a more information who benefits and who does not benefit. 

Thank you.

 

Stef57

 

[tanr]

Jason and Zak,

 

I have spent much time in your position of having to discuss bug prioritization, funding, changing development schedules, and the resulting feature changes with many different users with varied requests/demands and no way to make them all happy.

 

My sympathies!

 

As many others have vocally said, a good Mission Editor would be a great asset for all concerned.  Hope schedules and money work out so it can happen.  But I won't hold my breath for it.

 

Good luck with your development schedules over the next few months.

[ShamrockOneFive]

Thanks for the reply. That's encouraging.

 

Don't get me wrong, I will reserve judgement until I've flown the campaign.

Just a bit disappointed with how things sound, based on the description we have so far.

 

I'm generally a glass-half-full kind of guy so I remain hopeful that the campaign will prove interesting and entertaining.

 

For me as well. I'm keeping an open mind that the SP experience will be a fun one... it may very well. I am excited by the comments that the devs understand that sometimes (and some people) have lots of time to devote to playing and others have limited amounts of time and still want to get something meaningful in. I fit in both categories depending on whats going on so I'm hopeful.

 

Zak, one other question that I'm not sure if you guys want to answer right now. Will the campaign dynamically add in aircraft as they are added to the game. So hypothetically if the I-16 or IAR80/81 or Yak-7B or whatever aircraft get added later will the campaign be able to pick up on those without trouble? The biggest problem for some of the dynamic campaigns in IL-2 was that they never were updated/adapted to take advantage of aircraft that were added later. Not officially anyways.

[arjisme]

@Jason

 

  So we are back to the point where it is not a matter of when for the full mission editor but if?

 

So its no ME at release and maybe or not a ME later.

Thanks for getting that straight

 

Where are you guys getting THAT from?  Jason said a new, easier to use ME is what is contingent on the success of the game.  The harder-to-use, original ME that they have now will be released sometime after the official game release.

[MasaIV]

 

Why then have we not seen legions of BOS fans learning the ROF Editor and have been demonstrating to us how easy it is to use? Are they waiting for something? No, the the truth is the large majority of feedback over the years has been that it is too complex, too slow and not integrated into the main game enough to be effective or fun.

 

 

Probably because you never explained what FlyingNutcase asked.

 

 

Jason,

 

For someone to get access to the current mission editor:

1. What kind of mission would they need to submit to you? Or what skills would they need to demonstrate (simple/complex triggers for example). Perhaps a certain minimum size of mission too?
2. Would there be a requirement to provide public missions?

Thanks ~

 

Flying Nutcase

 

The truth is World War I and World War II are very different and appeal to different groups of people.  You are managing the release of the ME based on the idea that you understand how the community will respond, when you don't seem to understand this simple concept.  A disclaimer saying the ME is released as is and unsupported is all you need.  Simply don't reply to requests for support.

 

This sim was set to, in my opinion, destroy DCS: WWII.  Now it seems that (at least as far as content) it will blow IL2:BOS out of the water.  This is frustrating to many of us because we want this sim to be successful in the long term.  Flight sim enthusiasts will stick with a sim so long as there is content.  This is why people still fly Flight Simulator X and IL2: 1946.

[Jason_Williams]

@Jason

 

  So we are back to the point where it is not a matter of when for the full mission editor but if?

 

  I mean, we have Zak saying that there will be a public release but it is not going to be on the actual release date of the game but perhaps a bit later then we have you saying that there really may not be a public release at all.

 

  Look, Jason, I have been a cheerleader for ROF/777 for a long time, I have defended your company against naysayers and I have always bought anything that comes out for ROF without hesitation, I even enjoy using the ROF mission editor in my own (perhaps limited) fashion.

 

  Having said that, I feel like part of the problem we are having about the mission editor topic is that we have people (moderators, Zak) telling us that it will happen, that we don't need to worry and that there will be something released at some point after September, I think a lot of us would be okay with that, heck, I personally still say that making the existing editor a separate download with a mandatory disclaimer (saying clearly that it is not going to be officially supported) every time you start the software is a better way to go for the short term.

 

  On the other hand, we have you saying that there is no demand for one, that there is no real plan to release one publicly at this time and that there may not even be one if the project is not successful and to that, some of us here are trying to tell you that something is better than nothing at all.

 

  So, where do we sit officially here? Is there going to be one released publicly (in one form or another) for sure but at a later date or is it not really being planned at the moment and instead entirely dependent on sales?

 

  I mean, it is just confusing, I don't know if I should get my hopes up or not on this and I really, really, really want to continue to be enthusiastic about BoS but if there is no real concrete plan for a public FMB release (in some form or another), I can't say it won't seriously change my feelings about the product as I need a editor for making multiplayer missions for my friends and I that match our specific needs.

 

Unfortunately, I am forced to read english from Moscow sometimes that is a bit rough and even I can get confused as to the plans that have been decided. Sometimes, my comments seem to contradict what Zak and Loft write. It is not my sole decision to release the ME or not. I am one part of the management team and can only suggest what to do on topics such as this. In this case, it has been decided to give the ME to a few trusted users who can work on some content for the community. And then later, after release the plan is to release the ME either as it is now or maybe with some improvements. When that happens we don't know and what possible improvements may occur we also don't know.

 

Jason

[Oesau]

My 2 cents on this heated topic.

 

Personally I really enjoyed learning the FMB in RoF, despite not being a "full-on" mission builder myself, I could create a number of scenarios that you can't do in the QMB and that's where I see the value of the tool is.

 

Now I can understand that 777 do not want to have people coming to them in droves about how the FMB is too complex (and to be fair - it is more complex than other FMBs - but thats the beauty of it - the power of it) but I still think not having it is a step in taking BOS towards a simplified product. Provide the QMB and the FMB and let people make their own choices.

[SKG51_Joker]

Now imagine what these whole hick-hack,

 

we might,

maybe,

we don´t know,

information lost in translation,

 

things do on the consumers end ...

 

Just think, decide, communicate, thats what a community of founders could expect.

Edited May 30, 2014 by ZG15_Falke

[AbortedMan]

You guys really need to get on the same page when it comes to announcements and information dissemination...there's 4 pages of confused customers here. That should be a clear indicator that something on the communication side of things is very, very wrong.

 

I highly suggest that the next time an announcement or Q&A/developer response is planned, that it go through a more stringent public relations proofread session...Loft's response to the questions asked in today's dev diary looks like he's giving a "thumbs down" review of his own product...describing the SP campaign as "groundhog day"...really?!?! That was Bill Murray's absolute living hell...I would never want a game to play like "groundhog day".