Developer Diary, Part XXIV

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Problem with CLOD is there is no scope for online play appart from the boring fly around in circles on the deck senario which is horribly boring.

 

I pray that BOS guys pay attention to this fact. CO-OP play and online missions plus a loby are very important.

[Bearcat]

OK guys enough with this. Let's just settle down and move on....

 

This is not the time or place for this so let's just end this thing now and get back on topic.

[DD_bongodriver]

Problem with CLOD is there is no scope for online play appart from the boring fly around in circles on the deck senario which is horribly boring.

 

I pray that BOS guys pay attention to this fact. CO-OP play and online missions plus a loby are very important.

 

I'm pretty sure BOS will attempt to please everyone, after all it's the most obvious solution.

[71st_AH_Hooves]

is there a reason you won't try CLOD with TF's modifications?......seems daft to me that folks who complained so much about CLOD's unplayability and own the game aren't capitalising on a freely available fix.

I have tried it with the TF modifications. I thought the sounds were absolutely horried and the over done "glint" was in my opinion laughable. The gun sounds came off as if some one was making the sound with tbeir moutb and recorded it.

 

I heard they made good headway in correcting tbe altitude performance, but alas I couldn't get off the ground from any red base due to the same old blues literally luft berrying at 1000 ft directly over the airfields. When commenting about the rabid vulching I was met with the same old " if you don't like it go to another field" so I did. And was promptly vulched by the two hovering over that field. Laughinv at the pitiful flak going up at them.

 

So I say. The absolute terrible community that is entrenched on the clod side of this ridiculous argument is what made me head for my control panel / programs and files / uninstall.

 

 

But since I really would never like to mention CloD again. Can we get back on topic.

I understand g loading and stall speeds but I see no immenent stall indications of the aircraft in the video. It seems to be carrying its enervy through the manuevers and maintaining aileron stability. But there is that sound. I've just not heard it before and am wondering if its supposed to be modeling the disturbed airflow off the wings. Or if tbis is truly something the devs heard while flying in the yaks.

 

 

 

Sorry bearcat was typing while you posted. I agree lets not this one derail.

Edited July 15, 2013 by Hooves

[smink1701]

These kinda posts are kinda moot arent they?  CloD after all has been cancelled and doing these things just deepens the divide and reveals what side of the divide you are on.  I have some real great screenies from CloD too, but I have had my fill of CtD's, stutters and horrible community members to last a lifetime.  Lets move on Shall we?

Moving on ... now.

[Bearcat]

I'm pretty sure BOS will attempt to please everyone, after all it's the most obvious solution.

 

 

Nio sim will please everyone and I don't think the devs are trying to.. I think they just want to please a wide range of people and come out with a product they can be proud of and I think from the looks of the updates that BoS will most certainly scratch that nextgen sim itch I have had for the past 7+ years better than anything else has since IL2 ..

[DD_bongodriver]

 

But since I really would never like to mention CloD again. Can we get back on topic.

I understand g loading and stall speeds but I see no immenent stall indications of the aircraft in the video. It seems to be carrying its enervy through the manuevers and maintaining aileron stability. But there is that sound. I've just not heard it before and am wondering if its supposed to be modeling the disturbed airflow off the wings. Or if tbis is truly something the devs heard while flying in the yaks.

 

 

 

Sorry bearcat was typing while you posted. I agree lets not this one derail.

 

Yes, fair enough,CLOD still seems to break a lot of hearts here.

 

Back to the buffet issue, I have to say the sound being produced in the video is poorly modelled, please don't kill me I'm simply making a constructive observation, but nevertheless is a real phenomenon and is simply the onset of pre-stall buffet, pre-stall being the operative words here, it does not have to mean you are flying on the edge, the aircraft remains controllable and stable in this condition.

 

Here is a youtube video I found quickly, sorry to say you will have to watch toward the end of the video to appreciate the effect.....basically the bit after the bint singing 'bluebirds over the cliffs of dover'....ooops....DOH!!!

pay attention particularly to when the aircraft is coming through the bottom of a dive, the Spitfire is an excellent example of an aircraft that gives ample pre-stall buffet warning.

 

[FlatSpinMan]

Some fairly incendiary posting going on guys from both sides of the CoD divide that really don't help the discussion of BoS, nor do they contribute anything to the goodwill of this forum community.

Kindly refrain.

I'll do some cleaning when I get near a PC.

[Mac_Messer]

Nio sim will please everyone and I don't think the devs are trying to.. I think they just want to please a wide range of people and come out with a product they can be proud of and I think from the looks of the updates that BoS will most certainly scratch that nextgen sim itch I have had for the past 7+ years better than anything else has since IL2 ..

Haven`t seen nothing like that yet. On the contrary, watching the updates repeatedly gets me thinking that for some reason the sim genre cannot get off the ground (meaning that getting airborne is entering nexten). The graphics are definitely currentgen, the mechanics are probably going to be nothing more (no clickable cockpits), the gameplay scratches the surface of the War Thunder clientele. So I`m really hoping that the dev team has a massive multiplayer ideas that must be vastly better than those of IL2 and maybe even RoF. A solid, consistent title that can help people transition from IL2 to a new experience.

 

They already did and it's got the whistle:

That is nice but still a long way from anything authentic. Go watch some of the youtube flyby vids if you don`t believe me.

[csThor]

... the gameplay scratches the surface of the War Thunder clientele. So I`m really hoping that the dev team has a massive multiplayer ideas that must be vastly better than those of IL2 and maybe even RoF. A solid, consistent title that can help people transition from IL2 to a new experience.

 

You know, folks, I'm getting exasperated with those blinders some of you die-hard onliners wear. If it ain't of the "pure doctrine" of a MP-focused sandbox sim it's automatically WT-Arcade stuff? Come on people! Are you aware that there is a sizeable offline crowd which has been force-fed those austere sandbox-style sims for the past ten years and yearns for decent offline gameplay? Is that massive clusterf*** online really all you can think about? How about looking beyond your own noses and realize that different people have different preferences and ideas? Jeez!

Edited July 16, 2013 by csThor

[FlatSpinMan]

MacMesser - what should be different?

 

Multiplayer - fly dogfights, fly coop missions or campaigns. I don't know what else they could do, beyond something like SEOW. I play offline. What ideas should they implement?

 

Mechanics - clickable cockpits. Many people think that clickable cockpits just make it fiddly to fly. Besides, they are hardly the be all and end all, in a genre where most players have HOTAS, some have rudders and throttle things (quadrants?).

Do you perhaps mean being able to move an animated pilot in and out of the cockpit? I'm not sure what else you might have in mind?

 

Gameplay - it's a combat flightsim. Fly, shoot/bomb/strafe/reconnaisse, take off and land. Single mission, campaign/career, quick mission, I don't know, what else could there be? I guess you might be referring to the much-vaunted Falcon career (never played it) but the Devs have been clear from the start that they are under severe time pressure.

You mention it is using gameplay ideas that might make it more popular to a wider market. Personally I think getting more players is kind of a good thing for a marginal genre on an increasingly marginal platform, but that aside, without adding more 'gamey' elements, what else could they add?

[Bearcat]

Haven`t seen nothing like that yet. On the contrary, watching the updates repeatedly gets me thinking that for some reason the sim genre cannot get off the ground (meaning that getting airborne is entering nexten). The graphics are definitely currentgen, the mechanics are probably going to be nothing more (no clickable cockpits), the gameplay scratches the surface of the War Thunder clientele. So I`m really hoping that the dev team has a massive multiplayer ideas that must be vastly better than those of IL2 and maybe even RoF. A solid, consistent title that can help people transition from IL2 to a new experience.

 

That is nice but still a long way from anything authentic. Go watch some of the youtube flyby vids if you don`t believe me.

 

Well I don't see what you see. I think these updates look and sound great. I haven't heard engine sounds like this especially on the 109s in a stock sim. As for the nextgen vs currentgen graphics ... BoS is next gen.. CoD, WoP,WT,DCS.. they are all next gen sims if you count next gen from the previous generation of sims ie IL2, CFS,BoBWoVII etc.. The next generation of flight sims is NOW... and as for authenticity.. I will put more stock in how BoS compares to other sims rather than reality.. since all of them are lacking in terms of how "accurate" and "realistic" they are to some degree but that does not mean that they are bad. That flyby video sounds pretty close to an airshow to me ..  maybe my ears are not as finely tuned to all the nuances of engine sounds as yours.. or maybe you just have a bad APU system on your PC.  You see what you want to see and that is natural... but once you stop comparing BoS to anything but BoS and looking at it on it's own merits perhaps you will see things clearer.

 

Mechanics... ? Clickable pits... ? So you think that clickable pits determine the mechanics? Please.. Clickable pits are a nice feature.. not for me but a nice feature.. but as far as I am concerned as long as I can assign everything to a key I am happy I think most would be even if they would like clickable pits. I agree with the devs that clickable pits while a nice feature are a waste of time if you have a deadline.. a very tight deadline I might add that you are working with.

 

Gameplay... ? Really... ?!! Tell me O Great and Wise Mac Messer .. How in the world would you even know that?

 

Who's your daddy this guy? because unless you have some inside track none of us know what the gameplay will be like and we certainly cannot tell from the videos..  and to say it "scratches the surface of the WT clientele" ..     

 

How would you know about that because surely an elite simmer like yourself  would not sully his hands with the likes of that arcade game...   Right.. ?    So...

 

I think that more people will be happy than disappointed with BoS. I also think that about 6 months in at the latest you will be one of them so get that floss ready to get that leather out of your teeth..

[Mac_Messer]

You know, folks, I'm getting exasperated with those blinders some of you die-hard onliners wear. If it ain't of the "pure doctrine" of a MP-focused sandbox sim it's automatically WT-Arcade stuff? Come on people! Are you aware that there is a sizeable offline crowd which has been force-fed those austere sandbox-style sims for the past ten years and yearns for decent offline gameplay? Is that massive clusterf*** online really all you can think about? How about looking beyond your own noses and realize that different people have different preferences and ideas? Jeez!

I seem to not understand what you mean here. Do you expect me to shout for great offline play? I have nothing to do with offline, except training. Not interested in offline. I don`t get why some of you folks tend to force the very same vision Oleg brought up back in 2000. Today is 2013, many people have good internet connections. So maybe they should visit the forum sometime and say what they want. IMO the part about most forumers being the vocal minority has no merit whatsoever.  So as long as I keep playing online, I`ll voice my concerns to the extent I`m allowed. Does not mean anything bad for offline crowd and I do not know where you see it in my posts. I have concerns about online, because current dev team is known for RoF which has online play nowhere near the scale and complexity of what I used to do in online wars back in 2005.

[Mac_Messer]

MacMesser - what should be different?

 

Multiplayer - fly dogfights, fly coop missions or campaigns. I don't know what else they could do, beyond something like SEOW. I play offline. What ideas should they implement?

 

Mechanics - clickable cockpits. Many people think that clickable cockpits just make it fiddly to fly. Besides, they are hardly the be all and end all, in a genre where most players have HOTAS, some have rudders and throttle things (quadrants?).

Do you perhaps mean being able to move an animated pilot in and out of the cockpit? I'm not sure what else you might have in mind?

 

Gameplay - it's a combat flightsim. Fly, shoot/bomb/strafe/reconnaisse, take off and land. Single mission, campaign/career, quick mission, I don't know, what else could there be? I guess you might be referring to the much-vaunted Falcon career (never played it) but the Devs have been clear from the start that they are under severe time pressure.

You mention it is using gameplay ideas that might make it more popular to a wider market. Personally I think getting more players is kind of a good thing for a marginal genre on an increasingly marginal platform, but that aside, without adding more 'gamey' elements, what else could they add?

The problem is that progress is not visible. Say what you say about it being alpha, I`m ok with that. But don`t you think we should push for progress? In any area where it is possible?

 

Multiplayer - heck, I`ll be content with anything close to what has IL2 accomplished. I quit it just because cheating got rampant. We can`t be sure of that making to the final version of the game. Many new ideas you see in dev updates just get the same answer : no. So what do we get I ask?

 

Clickable cockpits is just an example. Some can do without it, obviously. As you can see, IL2 type mechanics cannot be an example. It is too old. Many people did not return to it after experienceing CloD CEM because it felt like arcade. Clickables, I get it, not really vital. Do we stand our ground on everything else or we get satisfied with IL2 CEM?

 

Increasingly marginal platform is your opinion. PC has expanded these few years and depending on what consoles will be, it may expand even bigger.

As for the "gamey elements" , fulltime casuals aren`t interested in this genre anyway. Most of them are able ust to use wsad, space and two mouse buttons, run around and aim crosshairs at other people. Besides, the supposed arcade problem becaomes a no brainer IF we get options instead of unlockable droptanks.

[Mac_Messer]

Well I don't see what you see. I think these updates look and sound great. I haven't heard engine sounds like this especially on the 109s in a stock sim. As for the nextgen vs currentgen graphics ... BoS is next gen.. CoD, WoP,WT,DCS.. they are all next gen sims if you count next gen from the previous generation of sims ie IL2, CFS,BoBWoVII etc.. The next generation of flight sims is NOW... and as for authenticity.. I will put more stock in how BoS compares to other sims rather than reality.. since all of them are lacking in terms of how "accurate" and "realistic" they are to some degree but that does not mean that they are bad. That flyby video sounds pretty close to an airshow to me ..  maybe my ears are not as finely tuned to all the nuances of engine sounds as yours.. or maybe you just have a bad APU system on your PC.  You see what you want to see and that is natural... but once you stop comparing BoS to anything but BoS and looking at it on it's own merits perhaps you will see things clearer.

 

Mechanics... ? Clickable pits... ? So you think that clickable pits determine the mechanics? Please.. Clickable pits are a nice feature.. not for me but a nice feature.. but as far as I am concerned as long as I can assign everything to a key I am happy I think most would be even if they would like clickable pits. I agree with the devs that clickable pits while a nice feature are a waste of time if you have a deadline.. a very tight deadline I might add that you are working with.

 

Gameplay... ? Really... ?!! Tell me O Great and Wise Mac Messer .. How in the world would you even know that?

I get your optics. So current gen is nextgen for you. Can`t argue with that. If you compare games and see that if relatively one game is great then you think it is great then that is not my optics. If I see a game and can`t get excited over it than no comparing can persuade me. In the end I`ll test BoS and even if it is ages better than IL2 but can`t get me immersed, it fails.

 

As for my APU, it is the same story as with Oleg. I am your average PC user, with midend hardware. Vast majority of gamers have same of worse APU systems as mine. So that number is going to have similar experience as me. Surely, some of them won`t mind if a 109 sounds the same as a Spit, some will mind.

 

But you did get me thinking. Maybe I am completely offtrack here. Maybe BoS is not what hardcore WWII simmers are looking for. Certainly dev team said otherwise, but there isn`t much to confirm it, as opposed to the unlockables sytem we have had introduced.

 

Hopefully devs can show us something that would contradict all those fears that people have about flying a WWII using the RoF engine.

Edited July 16, 2013 by Mac_Messer

[FlatSpinMan]

Hi again

So, other than IL2's multiplayer modes, what features or improvements would you actually like? I'm not winding you up here, just interested in what would make this game an advancement over the status quo. I thought about your statements and ventured some guesses, but I really can't think of much else they could do. You seem fairly unimpressed so far, which is fine - we still haven't seen that much really, and dissenting opinions are allowed - so I'd like to hear what would impress you (realistically).

 

I should add that, from what I recall the Devs saying, multiplayer will be fairly basic in the first release (correct me if I'm wrong, someone) as they had to prioritize, so that's going to constrain you somewhat.

 

Got to do something to fill in the time between updates.

 

And as for the PC being a dying niche, I hope I'm wrong as I've never owned a console.

[Bearcat]

Yeah but Mac my point it.. We don't know what it will be like.. We haven't even seen any real kind of combat footage.. We know what they said they wanted to do.. but I just don't think that given the people involved that even if they said they wanted to focus on offline that that means they will neglect online.. Now if I wind up being wrong about that and online sucks.. then I will be the first to stand right with you.. and a whole bunch of other folks and voice my displeasure .. but until that day all this glass half full.. that sucks this sucks stuff is just getting old. I believe that is what Thor is referring to. Even on my tablet... that 109 does not sound like the Lagg ... so I have no reason to think it will sound like a Spit....  It just seems that in many cases some people just refuse to see anything good in these updates.. regardless to what good may be there. I look at the pits in those videos and I see moving gauges.. I see torquing planes as the throttle is worked.. I see moving shadows.. I see the glint of sunlight off the pilot's goggles.. I hear the whine of that Benz.. I hear the buffet of air as the canopy opens and the overriding drone of the engine ..

 

To me it just makes mre sense to save a lot of the angst at least for when you get a beta or a demo in your hands and on our PC .. and regardless to what anyone may say.. to see nothing good all the time.. In light of the updates we have been getting just makes no sense to me.. Like FSM said.. What would you like to see different.. ?

[FlatSpinMan]

What do 'hardcore' WWII simmers seek in a combat sim? I think BC is after the same answer in his recent thread.

 

Off the top of my head, being a non-hardcore simmer, I can think if the following.

 

- Some form of CEM - that'll be in for sure. It'll be simplified to a greater or lesser extent, but it'll be there. This won't be a study-sim of one particular aircraft, but a combat sim after all.

 

- No external aids (padlock, icons, etc) - no problem

 

- Realistic comms with ground and wingmen? This would be good but I wonder to what extent it'll be in.

 

- Realistic formations and tactics by AI (for 'hardcore' offline simmers - or is 'hardcore' reserved for online players only?). This will be attempted of course, but again, the extent to which AI can be realistic is limited and often pretty subjective

[Uufflakke]

And as for the PC being a dying niche, I hope I'm wrong as I've never owned a console.

 

Computer sales are in a free fall.

Not just Microsoft but also Apple suffers from consumer interest.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324695104578414973888155516.html

 

And even I don't know what to do when XP expires around March/April 2014.

Buying a Windows 8? It looks so frikkin' ugly with that Fisherprice design.

A Windows 7? That was introduced 4 years ago already.

Trying Apple this time? I can't get used to it. Simple commands like Ctrl C/Ctrl V don't exist and where is my right mouse button?

Or a tablet and leave the PC for what it is?

[csThor]

I seem to not understand what you mean here. Do you expect me to shout for great offline play? I have nothing to do with offline, except training. Not interested in offline. I don`t get why some of you folks tend to force the very same vision Oleg brought up back in 2000. Today is 2013, many people have good internet connections. So maybe they should visit the forum sometime and say what they want. IMO the part about most forumers being the vocal minority has no merit whatsoever.  So as long as I keep playing online, I`ll voice my concerns to the extent I`m allowed. Does not mean anything bad for offline crowd and I do not know where you see it in my posts. I have concerns about online, because current dev team is known for RoF which has online play nowhere near the scale and complexity of what I used to do in online wars back in 2005.

 

Nobody expects you to lobby for offline play if online is what you're seeking. Instead I asked for a minimum of courtesy and comprehension that your preferred style of playing sims is but one of many and not the center of the universe (that is exactly how I understood your first post and the one quoted above as well). And the way that you claim that forum participation by 2013 should speak of a majority or so is not exactly helpful to your POV, either. It speaks of an entitlement belief ... and a lack of real arguments.

[JG13_opcode]

Clickable pits are stupid. What are you going to do, take your hands off the throttle/stick and reach for your mouse to change your gyro-sight controls while you're pulling 4G's inverted at the top of a loop?

 

Yeah, good luck with that. If you want immersion, go to a discount electronics website, spend 50 dollars/euro and buy some potentiometers and make yourself a usb control panel.

[DD_bongodriver]

Clickable pits are stupid. What are you going to do, take your hands off the throttle/stick and reach for your mouse to change your gyro-sight controls while you're pulling 4G's inverted at the top of a loop?

 

Yeah, good luck with that. If you want immersion, go to a discount electronics website, spend 50 dollars/euro and buy some potentiometers and make yourself a usb control panel.

 

I half agree with you, certainly functions critical to combat need to be able to be mapped to HOTAS, but there's nothing stupid about clickable pits if they are representative of the true systems, and there is without question still a significant element of the siming community that would like to be able to deal with the systems in a realistic manner, you can't deny there are many systems on aircraft that require the pilot to swap hands etc, many great recounts from combat involved the white knuckle, sweaty brow accounts of just making it home with a sick airplane.........what's not immersive about that?

 

One could argue if you were actually trying to change the sight ring at 4 'g' inverted then you were having a harder time than someone doing it with mouse clicks.

Edited July 16, 2013 by bongodriver

[gavagai]

Clickable cockpits make sense for aircraft like the DCS P-51.  If you're going to simplify the aircraft systems like BOS (and even CLOD), then it doesn't really matter.

[ST_ami7b5]

I have confidence in the dev team  based on what they have already delivered in  RoF - a top quality product.

So, let's wait a little before making any preliminary assumptions.

Edited July 16, 2013 by Rinzai

[DD_bongodriver]

I have confidence in the dev team  based on what they have already delivered in  RoF - a top quality product.

So, let's wait a little before making any preliminary assumptions.

 

you have confidence, others don't, ROF is a quality product.........but top?, the devs open, frank and regular Friday updates give plenty of justifiable reasons for the less faithful to doubt, I'm half way, I like what I see so far, I am slightly 'meh' about what I hear......and I can already feel the hot breath of the hate mongers having just said that, the wait and see theory goes both ways, not simply to assume everything will be perfect......besides, apparently none of us here even remotely reflect the wider potential user base so why we waste our breath I don't know.

[choctaw111]

I have been away from this forum for quite some time and I must thank Bearcat who took the time to personally call me today to see how I have been doing.  We had a nice chat and he told me to come back in here and see the progress that is being made.  I can get used to these Friday updates again.  I remember well when those would be commonplace many years ago on the old site.  Things look great for the new sim.  

[StG2_Manfred]

I seem to not understand what you mean here. Do you expect me to shout for great offline play? I have nothing to do with offline, except training. Not interested in offline. I don`t get why some of you folks tend to force the very same vision Oleg brought up back in 2000. Today is 2013, many people have good internet connections. So maybe they should visit the forum sometime and say what they want. IMO the part about most forumers being the vocal minority has no merit whatsoever.  So as long as I keep playing online, I`ll voice my concerns to the extent I`m allowed. Does not mean anything bad for offline crowd and I do not know where you see it in my posts. I have concerns about online, because current dev team is known for RoF which has online play nowhere near the scale and complexity of what I used to do in online wars back in 2005.

 

+1

 

I understand and share your concerns, Mac, and also I'm only online. In my personal opinion (read PERSONAL, so nobody needs to attack me please), the project can only succeed on a long term, if they can create a comprehensive and well performing multiplayer. Because, when I bought IL-2 in 2007 I wasn't able to fly properly at the beginning and then discovered this wonderful online flight school, where "freaks" taught me the basics. After that I joined my squadron, where I learned all the special things, like strafing, dropping torpedos correctly, guiding the Fritz X into the target, using the LOTFE,  and not last to mention, win a dogfight. And in the online missions where our squadron fly together, I have the most immersive feelings, I never experienced in any offline gameplay (whether IL-2, CloD, or RoF).

 

All these things only worked out for me, because of this online community. And if the multiplayer of BoS doesn't work well, for whatever reason, I assume people won't "talk" much about this sim in a couple of years. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against a well created offline gameplay and if my internet connection is down, I'm probably very happy to have this possibility as well. And I'm not unhappy or disappaointed, if not everything can realisized in the first release. I'm just hoping the devs share some of this considerations, and can enhance the DN engine, to make all these things possible...

[csThor]

It's a simple question of format and tone, Manfred. I found his posts to contain a sizeable portion of utter disregard for offliners - a personal interpretation, I know that - but I think one can articulate his interest in a specific matter without open or hidden disregard (or even disdain) for other people's interests. The tone makes the music in this case. Just to carify that from my POV.

[Mac_Messer]

Hi again

So, other than IL2's multiplayer modes, what features or improvements would you actually like? I'm not winding you up here, just interested in what would make this game an advancement over the status quo. I thought about your statements and ventured some guesses, but I really can't think of much else they could do. You seem fairly unimpressed so far, which is fine - we still haven't seen that much really, and dissenting opinions are allowed - so I'd like to hear what would impress you (realistically).

 

I should add that, from what I recall the Devs saying, multiplayer will be fairly basic in the first release (correct me if I'm wrong, someone) as they had to prioritize, so that's going to constrain you somewhat.

Multiplayer - I`d like to have the online war system actually built into the game, so 3rd party won`t have problems that arose before. Make everything simpler, you know. That is about it for it to become nextgen. I have lots of other ideas, but I can wait for them being applied. I am even able to p2p if it proves to give me most of what I like and to help the devs have a steady stream of cash.

 

What would impress me. Well I guess the graphics won`t be much better in gold version, so maybe the complexity of the game. Being able to fly great online campaigns with vast numbers of objects mainly driven by actual people. Although far from what is an MMO. The thing that worries me a bit is that the game will fail to get me immersed, so there are my concerns about graphics (cokpits mainly) and sounds. You know, I need to feel the thrill.

[Mac_Messer]

Yeah but Mac my point it.. We don't know what it will be like.. We haven't even seen any real kind of combat footage.. We know what they said they wanted to do.. but I just don't think that given the people involved that even if they said they wanted to focus on offline that that means they will neglect online.. Now if I wind up being wrong about that and online sucks.. then I will be the first to stand right with you.. and a whole bunch of other folks and voice my displeasure .. but until that day all this glass half full.. that sucks this sucks stuff is just getting old. I believe that is what Thor is referring to. Even on my tablet... that 109 does not sound like the Lagg ... so I have no reason to think it will sound like a Spit....  It just seems that in many cases some people just refuse to see anything good in these updates.. regardless to what good may be there. I look at the pits in those videos and I see moving gauges.. I see torquing planes as the throttle is worked.. I see moving shadows.. I see the glint of sunlight off the pilot's goggles.. I hear the whine of that Benz.. I hear the buffet of air as the canopy opens and the overriding drone of the engine ..

 

To me it just makes mre sense to save a lot of the angst at least for when you get a beta or a demo in your hands and on our PC .. and regardless to what anyone may say.. to see nothing good all the time.. In light of the updates we have been getting just makes no sense to me.. Like FSM said.. What would you like to see different.. ?

Please do not blame me for speculating based entirely on what information devs choose to give. They should be able to manage the stream with thinking what they give out to the world. So far they introduced what raises my concerns and nothing that would contradict them. We do not know yet if the new IL2 will be ahead of RoF at all, and if, by what margin. What we do know that there will be some features to unlock, what exactly we again do not know.

I understand your impression of some of here posts as it is obvious that you are excited about the new project and want nothing but success to happen for them. With me it is different, so far I didn`t see, read or hear anything that would make me feel the same way back when I was following the development of Forgotten Battles and SoW.  Maybe it is the devs holding back expectations, maybe not. Maybe once I check out the demo I`ll get bown away or maybe I will just treat it like Wings of Prey which never gave me any simmer-type satisfaction. Does that mean I shouldn`t voice my concerns? Or do you really just want to hear fanfare every single friday.

What I`d like to see is managing some cockpit stuff, seeing some CEM, maybe an improvised tank battle with planes flying over, maybe something of a DeathTrack.trk (can`t remember what it was called). Something that would show that they are going in the right direction and not just talking about it.

 

Nobody expects you to lobby for offline play if online is what you're seeking. Instead I asked for a minimum of courtesy and comprehension that your preferred style of playing sims is but one of many and not the center of the universe (that is exactly how I understood your first post and the one quoted above as well). And the way that you claim that forum participation by 2013 should speak of a majority or so is not exactly helpful to your POV, either. It speaks of an entitlement belief ... and a lack of real arguments.

Well tough luck. I won`t apologise for wanting the game to appeal to myself to anybody. I`m mainly interested in what the new game has to offer for my personal best experience. If that ruins your day, too bad.

[Lord_Haw-Haw]

Well I believe that sales will rely on both, fans of online & offline play as WWII flying sims are a small market compared to other game types.

So I am certain the developers will try their best not to leave out any part of this small market as far as possible.

I am also mainly a onliner, but I do enjoy trying out stuff offline.

[71st_AH_Hooves]

Please do not blame me for speculating based entirely on what information devs choose to give. They should be able to manage the stream with thinking what they give out to the world. So far they introduced what raises my concerns and nothing that would contradict them. We do not know yet if the new IL2 will be ahead of RoF at all, and if, by what margin. What we do know that there will be some features to unlock, what exactly we again do not know.

I understand your impression of some of here posts as it is obvious that you are excited about the new project and want nothing but success to happen for them. With me it is different, so far I didn`t see, read or hear anything that would make me feel the same way back when I was following the development of Forgotten Battles and SoW. Maybe it is the devs holding back expectations, maybe not. Maybe once I check out the demo I`ll get bown away or maybe I will just treat it like Wings of Prey which never gave me any simmer-type satisfaction. Does that mean I shouldn`t voice my concerns? Or do you really just want to hear fanfare every single friday.

What I`d like to see is managing some cockpit stuff, seeing some CEM, maybe an improvised tank battle with planes flying over, maybe something of a DeathTrack.trk (can`t remember what it was called). Something that would show that they are going in the right direction and not just talking about it.

Well tough luck. I won`t apologise for wanting the game to appeal to myself to anybody. I`m mainly interested in what the new game has to offer for my personal best experience. If that ruins your day, too bad.

As hard as I try I can't take word you say seriously with that avatar. To me its all just a complaint to complain hidden behind "oh I really want it to be good " comments but not so secretly wanting it to crash and burn because it isn't your avatars namesake.

 

But that's just me. Honestly reading these back and forths I am really starting to ask myself. What does it matter? I can promise you that at release non of the things we are talking about right now will even on on our perverbial radar. So like the news or not. There just isn't enough to go on.

Edited July 17, 2013 by Hooves

[DD_bongodriver]

You mean all XXIV of these these regular Friday updates so far told us nothing?

[BraveSirRobin]

You mean all XXIV of these these regular Friday updates so far told us nothing?

 

+M

[FlatSpinMan]

This thread has become more interesting, I think. People actually responding rationally to each other. It has given me some things to think about.

As for the comment about not actually having shown us much (of the workings of the game) well, that may be true but there's still plenty of time. Release is scheduled for early Q2 2014, which puts us about 8 months out, easily. Perhaps the flight vids made us jump the gun. Previously we'd only seen screenshots against sky backgrounds or 3D modelling shots.

[Zak]

This thread has become more interesting, I think. People actually responding rationally to each other. It has given me some things to think about.

As for the comment about not actually having shown us much (of the workings of the game) well, that may be true but there's still plenty of time. Release is scheduled for early Q2 2014, which puts us about 8 months out, easily. Perhaps the flight vids made us jump the gun. Previously we'd only seen screenshots against sky backgrounds or 3D modelling shots.

We're showing pretty much everything that we can show (even thou everything you've seen is in WIP stage). All the rest just doesn't satisfire the critical look of LOFT the prooducer. You know, some features are simply great for me, but he knows that they will significantly impove over time, so some of the demos and presentations just need to be postponed. And come on, we're in pre-alpha! Most game studios don't show anything at all at such early stage.

[StG2_Manfred]

We're showing pretty much everything that we can show (even thou everything you've seen is in WIP stage). All the rest just doesn't satisfire the critical look of LOFT the prooducer. You know, some features are simply great for me, but he knows that they will significantly impove over time, so some of the demos and presentations just need to be postponed. And come on, we're in pre-alpha! Most game studios don't show anything at all at such early stage.

 

Poor ZAK, LOFT seems to be a stern boss

 

As I posted above, for me all the details like whistling engine, shadows, CEM or whatever else doesn't concern me at all at the moment, cause I know those things can always revised later. I just cross my fingers and press my thumbs (German way to wish luck) that you can recognise, address and eliminate all possible bottlenecks of the engine, so all the wishes for single- and multilayer can be realised, even later...

Edited July 17, 2013 by Manfred

[Zak]

Poor ZAK, LOFT seems to be a stern boss

 

As I posted above, for me all the details like whistling engine, shadows, CEM or whatever else doesn't concern me at all at the moment, cause I know those things can always revised later. I just cross my fingers and press my thumbs (German way to wish luck) that you can recognise, address and eliminate all possible bottlenecks of the engine, so all the wishes for single- and multilayer can be realised, even later...

Nah, he's a great boss, seriously.

About the bottlenecks - beta test will show them hopefully. I'm not going to give out details about it but we indeed plan a closed public test. You've probably heard of it already, so I'm confirming it. 'Cause it's good news. Yay!

Here's a photo with Viks and LOFT examining an old warbird (it's from our Twitter which I started a couple of days ago)

 

[falstaff]

You're not supposed to pull the bloody thing to bits, you know...

 

[FlatSpinMan]

Name the plane for bonus points.