Translated QA

[BraveSirRobin]

26 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

 

Eastern front late will have most of us on this side of the pond thinking really hard about dropping more coin on this title, though I admit flying the Brewster and Hawk 75 over Finland appeals to me.  

I suspect the opposite is true for the majority.  Late East might have some buyers.  Brewster and Hawk 75 over Finland is the end of this franchise.

[Vishnu]

*ponders openly why a WWII combat flight sim is boooorrrring with alllllll the planes, and allllllll the maps we already have*

Edited September 27, 2022 by Vishnu

[Lusekofte]

18 minutes ago, ST_Catchov said:

Okay so Sneaksie snuck a snippet in surreptitiously which doesn't really say anything. Except what's not going to be done. Where's Jason? Silence. Has he left the building?

Jason wait until this storm or whatever blows over. A wise man said earlier , wait for what they announce

My guess is they expected a lot more noise

A lot more trouble and drama. All in all I find people reaction more matured than expected. We are after all like kids when it comes to this hobby.

I do not agree to all said, but I am aware we all share the same sickness, flying pixels around in the virtual skies

4 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

I suspect the opposite is true for the majority.  Late East might have some buyers.  Brewster and Hawk 75 over Finland is the end of this franchise.

Naah, it will not be a winner, but I think it would be better than Battle over Berlin. 

I would love it, and many other will too. But my guess is, BOM was the less profitable . And I guess Early war in all scenario would be the same. But then it do not matter what they do. Because if you are right there is no way ahead. One or two more what's and then over

Edited September 27, 2022 by LuseKofte

[BraveSirRobin]

18 minutes ago, LuseKofte said:

 

Naah, it will not be a winner, but I think it would be better than Battle over Berlin. 

I would love it, and many other will too. But my guess is, BOM was the less profitable . And I guess Early war in all scenario would be the same. But then it do not matter what they do. Because if you are right there is no way ahead. One or two more what's and then over

There is absolutely no chance the crap early east front planes would do better than a module with the best aircraft that the USSR managed to produce.  

[357th_KW]

43 minutes ago, Hook_Echo said:

Give me Corsair and Zero collector planes and I'll gladly fly them in Europran alternate history campaigns of my own imaginings. Some people want to fly historical campaigns. I want to fly planes against planes and the timeframe/location is unimportant. If we get late war east I look forward to seeing what the Yak-3 can do against everything else including the Brits and Americans. The coolest part about 1946 was the massive amount of planes.

 

I think a lot of us would be happy with something as simple as a reborn "Pacific Fighters".

 

Give us a few islands - New Georgia, Kolombangara, Vella Lavella.  150kmx150km or so.  And it could be the basis for a bigger map down the road if that was ever deemed feasible.

 

Give us a couple Zero variants (maybe a 21 and a 32), an AI Val and Betty, and an F4F, F4U-1, and SBD.  I think an awful lot of us would jump on that.

[percydanvers]

I just hope it’s battle of Sicily. I really think people underestimate how fun that would be. 
 

I almost never fly Allie’s because it gets SO BORING only going up against 109s and 190s over and over. Some of those late Italian fighters were really impressive and I want to tangle with them!

[Hook_Echo]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

...and then you're going down the road of basically DCS at that point, where the planes and maps actually making sense together is more of a coincidence than anything else. No thanks.

 

Luke, I appreciate you, you're the historical campaign man. We're already well beyond anything DCS can muster when it comes to that. A few rando collector planes will not change the fundamental makeup of the sim ?. You know you want to fly an F4U. Better than not having it at all. The Brits had Corsairs that flew over Norway, even if they didn't see any action.

 

If you don't agree with me I will skin a Typhoon in American Navy livery and parade it all over this forum. Don't make me do it!

Edited September 28, 2022 by Hook_Echo
typo

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, 357th_KW said:

 

I think a lot of us would be happy with something as simple as a reborn "Pacific Fighters".

 

Give us a few islands - New Georgia, Kolombangara, Vella Lavella.  150kmx150km or so.  And it could be the basis for a bigger map down the road if that was ever deemed feasible.

 

Give us a couple Zero variants (maybe a 21 and a 32), an AI Val and Betty, and an F4F, F4U-1, and SBD.  I think an awful lot of us would jump on that.

 

Not the right move for these guys...and I'm a "PTO or bust" guy.

It's just not going to happen. These guys understand the Russian front, not so much the PTO.

 

I'd like to see them go back and re-visit the MiG 3, the I-16, the P-40, the Yak 1 etc and bring them up to a 2022 standard. A game engine upgrade, PBR textures, tighter meshes that are up to standard, re-visit the overall fidelity of the aircraft so that they hold up going into the years ahead. Add the creaks and groans into the physics, sound engine.

Imagine climbing into a MiG 3 or P-40 that was on par with the DCS F-14 (in the mesh, texture, sound department)

I'd be all over that

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Gambit21

[Guest deleted@83466]

C’mon, even the French love the Corsair?

[percydanvers]

54 minutes ago, Hook_Echo said:

 

Luke, I appreciate you, you're the historical campaign man. We're already well beyond anything DCS can muster when it comes to that. A few rando collector planes will not change the fundamental makeup of the sim ?. You know you want to fly an F4U. Better than not having it at all. The Brits had Corsairs that flew over Norway, even if they didn't see any action.

 

If you don't agree with me I will skin a Typhoon in American Navy livery and parade it all over this forum. Don't make me do it!

that would honestly be kind of a cool look on the typhoon

[oc2209]

34 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

I'd like to see them go back and re-visit the MiG 3, the I-16, the P-40, the Yak 1 etc and bring them up to a 2022 standard. A game engine upgrade, PBR textures, tighter meshes that are up to standard, re-visit the overall fidelity of the aircraft so that they hold up going into the years ahead. Add the creaks and groans into the physics, sound engine.

Imagine climbing into a MiG 3 or P-40 that was on par with the DCS F-14. I'd be all over that

 

This could all be done incrementally. As in, while another module is being developed.

 

What people who want the Pacific--or even the Mediterranean--seem to forget, is that modelling unfamiliar planes like the Italian and Japanese would require more effort (i.e. time, i.e. money) with probably little available manpower left over for side projects.

 

Doing Berlin '45 would almost certainly result in a shorter overall development cycle, and should also allow for progress in a few different areas of the sim.

 

While getting more copy-paste planes sounds boring at face value, it allows the company to continue to sell a new product while making efficient use of its time and resources. I'd take that over 'new and exciting' any day.

 

As the devs said (or implied), they can't really afford to sit around for years while learning to develop entirely new systems for new locations. They need to focus on projects they are certain they can finish in X amount of time to a Y standard of quality.

[Rothary]

My totally unbiased self would prefer Continuation War (1941-1944) Finland over Berlin purely for the fact that we're yet to have a single other axis-aligned faction but Germany (and soon in tiny scale Romania). Every single installment has been about the Germans and I'm frankly growing a bit tired of the lack of variety in that regard. Sure Italy could do the trick as well, but strictly focusing on the eastern front I'd find it hard bother with Germany for the 6th time in a row.

[Jaegermeister]

Well... we still don't know what the next project is, but we know 2 things about it for sure.

 

It's not the Pacific...

There will be a next project...

 

I'm good with that for now.  

[=EXPEND=CG_Justin]

12 hours ago, =VARP=Ribbon said:

Dream on

 

Isn't that what this thread is really about? Speculation and day dreaming about what's ahead after a few questions seem to have been answered? No need to be rude.

[HBPencil]

"- Unlike other modern sims where an aircraft carrier, if modeled, is a small fraction of the whole product and any shortcomings of its modeling don’t affect the quality of the whole sim, in the case of an integral, all-in-one BoX title about the war in the Pacific EVERYTHING should revolve around carrier operations and a carrier is ought to be its central part. This means that any shortcomings of the carrier modeling and interaction with it, any performance and other issues that may arise become super-critical, jeopardizing the whole product. In the current situation this makes it a huge risk we can't afford to spend 3 years on."

Assuming the translation into English is accurate, I get two things out of this statement:

1- The devs highly expect to run into problems if they try to build CVs, so I wonder if they'd be willing to share what they are? I ask purely out of curiosity.
2- They are in the PTO = CV camp. I get it, CVs are iconic, are of great historical importance to the PTO and would add a new dimension to the sim, but the land based PTO campaigns employed greater numbers of aircraft (and aircraft types) over the course of protracted campaigns which are as interesting and significant as the CV ops even if they're not as well known. I can't help but feel that players who dismiss non-CV PTO (and CBI) options would find that they'd actually enjoy them as much as any other expansion.

I'm a PTO fan but having said that I'm happy to buy whatever WW2 expansion comes next, be it MTO or Eastern Front.

[Ribbon]

 

2 hours ago, =EXPEND=CG_Justin said:

 

Isn't that what this thread is really about? Speculation and day dreaming about what's ahead after a few questions seem to have been answered? No need to be rude.

It wasn't in a rude tone, not in a slightest.....me as him would like heavies more than anything but it's not gping to happen with this franchise, let's not full our self.

We can't get even medium bombers like b25 let alone heavies....and now carriers!

Just a way it is?‍♂️

[DD_Arthur]

6 hours ago, Hook_Echo said:

The Brits had Corsairs that flew over Norway, even if they didn't see any action.

Eh? Actually the Brits were the first to put the Corsair into action after the US initially rejected it for carrier operations.

It saw plenty of action over Norway when we used it to bomb the Tirpitz!

[Fritz_X]

4 hours ago, Jaegermeister said:

Well... we still don't know what the next project is, but we know 2 things about it for sure.

 

It's not the Pacific...

There will be a next project...

 

I'm good with that for now.  

 

I agree.

 

When AnPetrovich announced to leave the team right after BoN's release and with all the recent hardships (both pandemic and geopolitics) the team had to deal with, I was honestly afraid that the BoX-series was just about to come to an end. And boy, am I glad to have been wrong!

 

With the Pacific being ruled out as the next module, I feel like there are only two realistic options for the coming theatre:

 

1. Eastern Front late: I feel like this one will be the most likely option.

 

2. Sicily/ Italy 1943: This is the one I personally would enjoy the most. I love the Italian planes. Being able to fly a Fiat G.55 in BoX-quality would be a dream come true. Plus the Italian plane roster would finally give Axis players some direly needed plane diversity.

 

I never have been a big fan of the Pacific. Yet I still would have bought it anyway, if it would have been our next destination. Whatever scenerio might follow now will therefore end in my inventory just as well.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Fritz_X

[Luftschiff]

Like for many others, that announcement was most of my interests and hopes dashed. Especially sad to hear about the demise of Air Marshal which promised to actually shake up the way MP is played. I'm all ears for other new theatres, italy, finland, france, africa, med, hell - even spain. But I'm not buying another late east war module, they have nothing new and nothing to entice me.

 

For what it's worth I understand the reasoning, we're creeping up on a recession, there's war in Europe, prices on components and electricity are skyrocketing. It's more than fair to not go for the high risk projects. But it also means I have to be more careful on what I spend my money and late east front is not it.
 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Luftschiff

[Ptolemy_Soter]

8 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

I'd like to see them go back and re-visit the MiG 3, the I-16, the P-40, the Yak 1 etc and bring them up to a 2022 standard. A game engine upgrade, PBR textures, tighter meshes that are up to standard, re-visit the overall fidelity of the aircraft so that they hold up going into the years ahead. Add the creaks and groans into the physics, sound engine.

Imagine climbing into a MiG 3 or P-40 that was on par with the DCS F-14 (in the mesh, texture, sound department)

I'd be all over that

Oh yeah !

Please put this 2013 game to 2022 standards. 

[CCG_Pips]

1 hour ago, Luftschiff said:

Like for many others, that announcement was most of my interests and hopes dashed. Especially sad to hear about the demise of Air Marshal which promised to actually shake up the way MP is played. I'm all ears for other new theatres, italy, finland, france, africa, med, hell - even spain. But I'm not buying another late east war module, they have nothing new and nothing to entice me.

 

For what it's worth I understand the reasoning, we're creeping up on a recession, there's war in Europe, prices on components and electricity are skyrocketing. It's more than fair to not go for the high risk projects. But it also means I have to be more careful on what I spend my money and late east front is not it.
 

Same here.

 

If 1c game no longer has the capacity to make me dream (pacific/heavy bombers/real gameplay for tanks/Air Marshall), I would dream elsewhere.

[Ptolemy_Soter]

For PTO we have alternatives that are not comparable to what Il2 offers.

We have planes but not the context to fly them.

The major strength of IL2 is this context. Maps, ground targets, airfields etc.

But the game seems to have reach its limits and there is some technological barriers that are impossible to break.

 

Perhaps DCS will succeed where IL2 has given up ?

DCS F4U is still under developpment and is the first to pave the way for PTO so many, many (many) years to wait before having something playable.

But DCS has the technology to built a carrier and the planes onboard contrary to IL2.

And the F4U has an insane level of details. A quality that is impossible to reach on this 10 years old game.

[Chief_Mouser]

Well the next module has to be commercially viable, but considering...

 

1: I'll buy everything and anything no matter what.

2: I'll buy a late-war Eastern Front module.

3: No PTO, so I'm likely to be done here.

4: No heavies, no air marshal, just another copy and paste, so I'm likely to be done here.

5: Late-war Eastern Front? I'm likely to be done here.

6: Malta/Sicily is the way to go; if not I'm likely to be done here.

7: I'd really like an early war scenario but it won't happen. I'll wait and see what's next.

8: The Russian player base.

 

...that groups 3 to 7 may not all go for the same things just how many current players can they afford to lose and still keep it so?

Plus, who knows what the Russian players want? One has to assume that they'd be happy with more Russian aircraft, but with current world events are their numbers shrinking?

 

In an uncertain world BoX has reached a critical juncture; is ANY new module going to be worthwhile? Let's hope that the team can deliver something fresh and interesting for the majority, not just one small section of us.

[Luftschiff]

I am glad to hear that the team is excited and energized for this new project, as a game developer myself that is probably the most important thing you can have and I don't begrudge them that for even a second, even if it isn't what -i- want. I still hope it's something we can both be excited for but regardless, all love for the team.

[kendo]

4 hours ago, HBPencil said:

"- Unlike other modern sims where an aircraft carrier, if modeled, is a small fraction of the whole product and any shortcomings of its modeling don’t affect the quality of the whole sim, in the case of an integral, all-in-one BoX title about the war in the Pacific EVERYTHING should revolve around carrier operations and a carrier is ought to be its central part. This means that any shortcomings of the carrier modeling and interaction with it, any performance and other issues that may arise become super-critical, jeopardizing the whole product. In the current situation this makes it a huge risk we can't afford to spend 3 years on."

Assuming the translation into English is accurate, I get two things out of this statement:

1- The devs highly expect to run into problems if they try to build CVs, so I wonder if they'd be willing to share what they are? I ask purely out of curiosity.
2- They are in the PTO = CV camp. I get it, CVs are iconic, are of great historical importance to the PTO and would add a new dimension to the sim, but the land based PTO campaigns employed greater numbers of aircraft (and aircraft types) over the course of protracted campaigns which are as interesting and significant as the CV ops even if they're not as well known. I can't help but feel that players who dismiss non-CV PTO (and CBI) options would find that they'd actually enjoy them as much as any other expansion.

I'm a PTO fan but having said that I'm happy to buy whatever WW2 expansion comes next, be it MTO or Eastern Front.

 

I agree about the PTO. Even a land based PTO scenario will be something fresh and new - and for me anyway that is what is needed. 

 

Med '43 could be another that would bring new interesting features in map and new Italian aircraft.

 

Outside of those two, a well done Korea could be excellent.

 

But my enthusiasm for another East Front module is low.

 

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

I can honestly say as someone who owns every module sans TC and FC2, I wouldn't buy another Eastern Front module unless it was $5. Now that Normandy is out, I don't want to fly anything except Normandy and Bodenplatte anyway, but I'm glad we have those two maps and planesets.

[MAJ_Raptor]

Well since ive just recently come back and am energized about being in the virtual skies again.  Likely I too will buy whatever comes next.  That being said I would love to see some heavies just to round things out.  Also feel free to add some sabers and migs and take us to Korea next.

 

I know likely not happening but I would still enjoy it.  

[Raptorattacker]

12 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

That’s because you were too busy watching crap like Faulty Towers ?

Now now... steady on there. I'm a 61 year-old Englander... although I HAVE heard of it (and I watched Fawlty Towers, although that wasn't in the same timeframe!!)! 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Raptorattacker

[CountZero]

10 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

This could all be done incrementally. As in, while another module is being developed.

 

What people who want the Pacific--or even the Mediterranean--seem to forget, is that modelling unfamiliar planes like the Italian and Japanese would require more effort (i.e. time, i.e. money) with probably little available manpower left over for side projects.

 

Doing Berlin '45 would almost certainly result in a shorter overall development cycle, and should also allow for progress in a few different areas of the sim.

 

While getting more copy-paste planes sounds boring at face value, it allows the company to continue to sell a new product while making efficient use of its time and resources. I'd take that over 'new and exciting' any day.

 

As the devs said (or implied), they can't really afford to sit around for years while learning to develop entirely new systems for new locations. They need to focus on projects they are certain they can finish in X amount of time to a Y standard of quality.

How are you expecting Berlin when maps in game dont have London, Paris and Moscow ? if they are crazy enought to do another east front at time of real war in east, it can only be Poland 45, map betwen Berlin and Warsaw, and nither of thouse citys would be on map because big hit on performance (same like Paris and London dont exist in BoN even as textures in distance). Good luck promoting game where russians are liberating poland for next 3 years DLC cykle lol that aint gona happend.

If PTO is no go, Korea is fantasy, your left with Sicily 43, Italy 45 and Channel 43, there is no other vailable option in todays world and games limitations.

[Lusekofte]

I am in desperate need of boosting my motivation on flightsim. I buy next module if it contaib planes of interest, for sure. 

Beggars can't  be choosers, my confident in Clod as a future main ww2 sim is relatively high. Short missions with P47 in DCS provide the US fighter itch. And for a backup what we have here.

After all this genre lied with a broken back just a few years back. One must not loose all mood by the state of things

[Jaws2002]

Looks like Il-2 has hit a wall. The shortcomings of the engine they decided to go with, got us to this technological wall.

 It's sad to see such important aspects of ww2, like heavy bombers, large formations and carrier opps, being off limits, because they chose to go ahead with a limited engine, when they could have taken over the CLOD engine and build on that.

 Live and learn i guess. It was the safer option back then, but that decission really limited the life of the game.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Jaws2002

[GarandM1]

At some point the question has to shift from "can we afford to implement the Pacific?" to "can we afford not to?".

 

The game is stale for many of us. Normandy brought me back into the fold for a bit, but after exploring the new map you realize there is nothing really groundbreaking here. My enthusiasm for another round of Yaks, Spits, 109s, and 190s is just about zero. I don't know what proportion of the community feels that way, but I'm definitely not alone.

 

If anyone finally steps up and starts delivering Pacific WWII content, the devs will know where to find many us.

[kendo]

20 minutes ago, Jaws2002 said:

Looks like Il-2 has hit a wall. The shortcomings of the engine they decided to go with, got us to this technological wall.

 It's sad to see such important aspects of ww2, like heavy bombers, large formations and carrier opps, being off limits, because they chose to go ahead with a limited engine, when they could have taken over the CLOD engine and build on that.

 Live and learn i guess. It was the safer option back then, but that decission really limited the life of the game.

 

Really?! A buggy mess that even now, still does not have proper clouds. 

 

Hardly the 'safer' option. 

[TWC_Ace]

Rise of flight was such a great sim and Im proud I was a member of the beta team. We had so much fun, specially in early days, with COOPs. Then came BOS and was very promising. After "a while" we realised its using advanced version of ROF engine which means it would never be capable of large bomber formations nor we will see PTO, bombers or whatever. Also I noticed that the quality of FMs went downfall, specially with "premium" planes like Hurricane and P51B, intentionally or not their FMs are very questionable (too good). So, now I guess they will go with late eastern front or whataver but the story finished for me year ago when I completely migrated to DCS. DCS at least has more realistic DM, much better cockpits, sounds (in general), maps, most of the ppl are more mature there. And you have jets also. Sure the lack of focus on one theater is frustrating but we have normandy map and all the main fighters/jabos of the 44 Nrmandy theater plus Mosquito. Also the cold war has a nice planest now (many are coming) and the beutiful Syria map.

I was banned from this forum for years, though I was one of the biggest fans of the game...just for speaking up, and talking truth.

This is my final farewell to this community and this sim.

Salute!

 

Special thanks to my =IRFC" buddies, what a bunch of international nuts we were and what a pleasure and fun was to fly with you (including the Requiem who wasnt so keen to fly with me LOL).

Edited September 28, 2022 by =VARP=Tvrdi

[Ptolemy_Soter]

23 minutes ago, Jaws2002 said:

Looks like Il-2 has hit a wall. The shortcomings of the engine they de ided to go with, got us to this technological wall.

 It's sad to see such important aspects of ww2, like heavy bombers, large formations and carrier opps, being off limits, because they chose to go ahead with a limited engine, when they could have taken over the CLOD engine and build on that.

 Live and learn i guess. It was the safer option back then, but that decission really limited the life of the game.

You're totally right

 

The engine is not limited, it is outdated.

[smink1701]

18 minutes ago, GarandM1 said:

At some point the question has to shift from "can we afford to implement the Pacific?" to "can we afford not to?".

 

The game is stale for many of us. Normandy brought me back into the fold for a bit, but after exploring the new map you realize there is nothing really groundbreaking here. My enthusiasm for another round of Yaks, Spits, 109s, and 190s is just about zero. I don't know what proportion of the community feels that way, but I'm definitely not alone.

 

If anyone finally steps up and starts delivering Pacific WWII content, the devs will know where to find many us.

I totally agree. I have opened my wallet for every new map and have all the planes I want with the exception of the Zero and Corsair. Have never been into Russian planes and do not need another ME109 variant. I think this franchise has possibly run its course. 

[Jade_Monkey]

1 hour ago, CountZero said:

How are you expecting Berlin when maps in game dont have London, Paris and Moscow ? if they are crazy enought to do another east front at time of real war in east, it can only be Poland 45, map betwen Berlin and Warsaw, and nither of thouse citys would be on map because big hit on performance (same like Paris and London dont exist in BoN even as textures in distance). Good luck promoting game where russians are liberating poland for next 3 years DLC cykle lol that aint gona happend.

If PTO is no go, Korea is fantasy, your left with Sicily 43, Italy 45 and Channel 43, there is no other vailable option in todays world and games limitations.

 

Agree for the most part except "Korea is fantasy". Not sure what is fantasy about it, the map being too large? 

 

I think the team is interested in moving to new territory and explore jets more. 

[Avimimus]

1. A 1944/1945 Eastern European war model has always been inevitable:

There is a market for it, it will be easier for the devs to research, and it is an important part of history.

 

2. There will be upgrades to the core game engine and high fidelity aircraft (it is never 'copy paste' with this team), there will also probably be something a bit novel (i.e. to get five German aircraft they'd need something interesting). The module will also not take forever to develop. If they did both a Berlin and a Continuation War module they'd still be done in the amount of time it took them to do BoBP and BoN. Most likely half that.

 

3. What do you really want? What would make you happy? A resource intensive strategic bomber module (even fewer people fly heavy bombers compared to twin engined bombers)...? The Pacific? Which requires extensive tropical assets and possibly Carriers (e.g. Guadalcanal involved Carrier aviation), and would probably require CFD and inventing a lot of details for some aircraft (lengthening the development time to three or four years)? I agree that a land based Pacific module might be feasible? Would anything else make you happy?

[VBF-12_Pequod]

Of course, there's no need of drama. Great Battles is the best WW2 sim out there, no doubt.

However I confess I'm starting to have a déjà vu feeling regarding this series. It surely needs something fresh, new experiences...

Edited September 28, 2022 by VBF-12_Pequod

[Avimimus]

  

38 minutes ago, Jaws2002 said:

Looks like Il-2 has hit a wall. The shortcomings of the engine they decided to go with, got us to this technological wall.

 It's sad to see such important aspects of ww2, like heavy bombers, large formations and carrier opps, being off limits, because they chose to go ahead with a limited engine, when they could have taken over the CLOD engine and build on that.

 Live and learn i guess. It was the safer option back then, but that decission really limited the life of the game.

 

It isn't the game engine. It is the fact that it would take millions of dollars to develop any of this. There isn't another game engine that provides these features, so if they switched engines they'd have to spend tens of millions rebuilding existing features and solving bugs - then build the carrier tech anyway. This isn't a cheap asset flipped first person shooter... I don't think you have any idea how complex game engine development is or how finely tuned this engine is for what it does.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Avimimus