Why Isn't Desert Wings - Tobruk [More] Popular?

[Mysticpuma]

1 hour ago, OBT-Lionel said:

You know they are working hard for the next update. It will be so much to communicate when this will be released.

All 83 users who replied to the "Who's still here" thread will no doubt do what they can.....

[BladeMeister]

4 hours ago, Leifr said:

 

Wow, big if true.

It was a joke, but people are going a little off the deep end. This thread is a rise in popularity for CLOD/DWT though.

 

S!Blade<><

[WVS-TheMowe]

I believe it is Single player only though much more an refined game with in cockpit controls though shooting down a bot no matter how advance will never be the same as shooting down a human player.

I never even practice with the Ai only only with humans.

[WVS-TheMowe]

Even though I have purchased nearly all content almost a hundred of times over I have never flown once in Tobruk.

I brought this module before but have no hours in it.

Many thousands of hours online sometimes 24+ hours straight. 

Absolutely Love it.

[5th_Barone]

11 hours ago, OBT-Lionel said:

You know they are working hard for the next update. It will be so much to communicate when this will be released.

You need start to advert the product before it is released in order to create the hype.

If you do that only after it's not the same.

[OBT-Lionel]

Barone,

 

"If you do that only after it's not the same." 

That's what you're saying!

 

In the meantime, they have chosen a strategy and they are following it.

They're not going to change it just to please you. ?

[BOO]

1 hour ago, 5th_Barone said:

You need start to advert the product before it is released in order to create the hype.

If you do that only after it's not the same.

 

1 hour ago, OBT-Lionel said:

Barone,

 

"If you do that only after it's not the same." 

That's what you're saying!

 

In the meantime, they have chosen a strategy and they are following it.

They're not going to change it just to please you. ?

Given it’s an update not a new product perhaps the like of pre release PR is understandable. 

But it’s a big update, that could generate interest/sales so I am A little surprised not to have seen a ramping up as we left summer and entered fall and finally approach winter. 

[OBT-Lionel]

Boo,

 

We know what they are developing: Vr, truesky etc etc...

 

When they have interesting things to show us, they do it.

 

What I think is that they don't know yet when the development will be finished.

 

So for me, it wouldn't make sense to start a communication campaign too early. I think she will start, when they are ready.

[BladeMeister]

There is no doubt that more PR, if presented in a quality manner, will help hype the new update and raise awareness to a broader audience. For good or for bad, TFS normally ups the PR once the new development is very close to release. This generally being the case, the lack of PR at the present may suggest that this big update still has quite a lot of development work yet to be completed. There is one fact for certain, it will happen when TFS believes this update is ready. Rest assured, I am quite certain of that. 

 

S!Blade<><

[BOO]

7 hours ago, OBT-Lionel said:

Boo,

 

We know what they are developing: Vr, truesky etc etc...

 

When they have interesting things to show us, they do it.

 

What I think is that they don't know yet when the development will be finished.

 

So for me, it wouldn't make sense to start a communication campaign too early. I think she will start, when they are ready.

Fair Point however coming back to the topic of CloD being in the minds of people, a general promo/info campaign of what it is good at citing the VU wouldnt be a bad thing. BUT thats time and effort being asked from a small team of part timers I know.  

 

Still, I wonder how many "tried it in 2011-20" potential players are out there who dont know even what has been done in the interim. I, for one, was surprised at the AA quality when coming back in recent times....

[354thFG_Leifr]

Retaining players is the trick, not enticing them back for a couple of hours to ogle at the new shiny things...

Edited November 12, 2022 by Leifr

[BladeMeister]

Okay but TFS updated Blitz for free, offered NA theater for DLC, which no other modern sim has, and they did PR a lot, back in MP's day, and here we are. How does one retain customers when their software updates are between at least 1.5 to 2 years plus. Honestly, if your sim is not a big hit from the start and has a mediocre following at best, how do they retain customers? I don't think one can attribute the very small following to non PR. If the sim is not accepted as a success from the flight sim community, which CLOD never was from the beginning especially after 1C dropped it, then it is twice as hard to shake the bad rep and build a large following. My hope is that this graphical/VR/TruSky/Speed ? update will be the beginning of a new chapter for TFS with CLOD/DWT. IMHO whether this rebound is successful or not hinges on if TFS begins to work on correcting several of the major longstanding bugs that still hamper CLOD/DWT after the update. The one problem I have with each combat flight sim developer is that they let longstanding major problem bugs go in favor of adding content or visual upgrades. If just one of these developers, TFS, ED or 1C would address the top 10 buggs in their respective sim with each update, then their sims would be much better accepted and supported by its' customers, plus we would have a much more enjoyable simming experience and be more willing to keep buying their products. Some are doing better at this than others, but not one of the three squash majors bugs on a timely basis IMHO. I understand it is about revenue production, but what if their sim operated the way it is advertised, especially in SP? I can only imagine that sales would be even higher. Of course TFS's revenue generation will be on a much smaller scale because this is a free update, but still if word gets out that they have developed an awesome update and are now going to correct longstanding bugs before they begin development of 6.0, the revenue potential would have to increase substantially. Sadly, most Devs have no plans to work on longstanding buggs in a serious manner, and we as consumers, limited by our small genre, continually just roll down the road of very limited change. Better than nothing, but damn it could be so much better. A little OT I suppose, but this is what a lot of these CLOD/DWT threads make me think of.

 

S!Blade<><

Edited November 13, 2022 by BladeMeister

[NO.20_Krispy_Duck]

The following have hurt:

-Buggy initial release and following period, gave the game a bad reputation when it should have been building a loyal player base

-VR still in testing, not generally released yet

-Quirky control set up and display/window settings compared to simpler set ups like BoX

-Issues with firewalls preventing online play, giving weird errors

-Does not cover D-Day and post D-Day scenarios with super prop type planes and jets

 

The main issues with my squad mates have been lack of VR support so far, and people who have had issues with firewalls (not connecting to MP, planes spawning upside down, lagging, etc.). We got the firewall issues sorted for now. I can think of about a half-dozen squad mates of mine who are ready to take the plunge once VR comes.

 

Frankly, I like CLOD/Tobruk better than WW2 DCS. I think it's more natural looking, the plane selection and variety are way better, and the cost is not insanely high as it is with DCS modules.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[5th_Barone]

On 11/12/2022 at 9:37 AM, OBT-Lionel said:

They're not going to change it just to please you. ?

 

LoL, I'm totally aware of that. I was just giving an opinion, since somebody asked why the game is not popular and the PR topic was brought in.

In clod is usual stuff just to cover your eyes so you don't see other people's opinons so don't worry mate! ?

[Mysticpuma]

On 11/12/2022 at 11:35 PM, BladeMeister said:

Okay but TFS updated Blitz for free, offered NA theater for DLC, which no other modern sim has, and they did PR a lot, back in MP's day, and here we are. How does one retain customers when their software updates are between at least 1.5 to 2 years plus. Honestly, if your sim is not a big hit from the start and has a mediocre following at best, how do they retain customers? I don't think one can attribute the very small following to non PR. If the sim is not accepted as a success from the flight sim community, which CLOD never was from the beginning especially after 1C dropped it, then it is twice as hard to shake the bad rep and build a large following. My hope is that this graphical/VR/TruSky/Speed ? update will be the beginning of a new chapter for TFS with CLOD/DWT. IMHO whether this rebound is successful or not hinges on if TFS begins to work on correcting several of the major longstanding bugs that still hamper CLOD/DWT after the update. The one problem I have with each combat flight sim developer is that they let longstanding major problem bugs go in favor of adding content or visual upgrades. If just one of these developers, TFS, ED or 1C would address the top 10 buggs in their respective sim with each update, then their sims would be much better accepted and supported by its' customers, plus we would have a much more enjoyable simming experience and be more willing to keep buying their products. Some are doing better at this than others, but not one of the three squash majors bugs on a timely basis IMHO. I understand it is about revenue production, but what if their sim operated the way it is advertised, especially in SP? I can only imagine that sales would be even higher. Of course TFS's revenue generation will be on a much smaller scale because this is a free update, but still if word gets out that they have developed an awesome update and are now going to correct longstanding bugs before they begin development of 6.0, the revenue potential would have to increase substantially. Sadly, most Devs have no plans to work on longstanding buggs in a serious manner, and we as consumers, limited by our small genre, continually just roll down the road of very limited change. Better than nothing, but damn it could be so much better. A little OT I suppose, but this is what a lot of these CLOD/DWT threads make me think of.

 

S!Blade<><

 

I remember from a while back (no idea where) that Buzzsaw indicated the very longstanding 'vehicles no being able to cross bridges' was liky to be addressed due to the Blitz map effectively being rebuilt using the tools they developed to create the Tobruk map. 

I can't find that post so I can't clarify if that was part of the ongoing graphics update or if it was going to be part of v6? I don't intend to fish for clues on that but I wonder if that would be down to map makers or coders to fix the 'crossing bridges' issue. Ultimately it was good to have it acknowledged that the issue could be fixed. 

I can't imagine the time it would take to rebuild a map and its assets, could it be possible this has already been done and is part of the visual update, time will tell. 

In regards to v6, the way I have read posts, updates and timeliness, it would appear that most of the VR/TS and Graphics update are now down to coding and v6 has been planned for a long time. I only speculate that the map makers and asset/model makers will have been working for a long time on the v6 content and likely have that mostly complete, the issue now is what becomes of v6 after the recent update by Buzzsaw? 

I would say that once VR/TS and GU are released, if possible, announcing v6 would be a great positive action only because you will have large amount of visitors to various forums arriving to try out VR and at that point you will have a lot of eyes on the product if you announce V6 and where this influx of pilots will be able to fly next? 

 

Ultimately as we bounce around various threads, all we can do is wait and see, I personally just wish for more engagement from TFS, but that's my personal feeling and I know it's not likely to ever change. 

 

Just wishing TFS good luck with the VR/TS and GU update because if successful I am sure there will be a lot of traction and interest in their next map and thereby CloD lives to fight another day ?

[BOO]

The debate here has raised the matter of whether CloD needs to be popular. And it’s an interesting one. The current models dictates sales of new product and find a wider acceptance.  Yet there is a clamour to fix existing stuff from the base. Undoubtedly having a version of the source code has helped TFS but now the demand to deliver a house built on partial foundations appears to be something of a millstone and unsolvable problem. 
 

Prior to Blitz and the take over of ATAG by TFS, I gave £20 a month to the site. I was happy to do so as it felt like everyone was in it together. Obviously this went towards server costs at the time. I also did my bit in the community, helping new players, writing guides, skinning, organising events etc. 
 

If for whatever reason things returned to a pre agreement state I wonder how many of us would do something similar for TFS? A TFS focussed on fixing bugs not new products. One dedicated to making the original game all it should have been instead of building extensions on dodgy foundations. 
 

If just a hundred players felt the same a £2000 monthly income going directly would surely help TFS achieve this? 
 

Of course it’s pie in the sky. Hong Kong has its claws in now. Just musing. 

[Dagwoodyt]

I remember asking why BoB enhancement was being abandoned for North Africa. To best of my recollection the response was that the base had become bored with the BoB and had collectively opted for North Africa. I had originally bought CloD hoping it would eventuallly represent a worthy successor to Rowan's BoB. I think that was the start of my disenchantment with direction of Team focus. Many years later DW-T demonstrated a woefully bland map with no meaningful GUI progress. At this point the Visual Update simply represents an off ramp and return on investment.  Since it seems to have been acknowledged that major restructuring of the GUI is not to be expected I think the future of Blitz is more of new map and new aircraft/variants DLC using the existing GUI. If that can attract and keep new players, great for the Team! A possiblity though is that DW-T has disappointed a segment of buyers who are unlikely to have interest in another TFS product. Finding an audience whose opinion of CloD/Blitz has not already become calcified may prove daunting. ?

[BOO]

44 minutes ago, Dagwoodyt said:

I remember asking why BoB enhancement was being abandoned for North Africa. To best of my recollection the response was that the base had become bored with the BoB and had collectively opted for North Africa. I had originally bought CloD hoping it would eventuallly represent a worthy successor to Rowan's BoB. I think that was the start of my disenchantment with direction of Team focus. Many years later DW-T demonstrated a woefully bland map with no meaningful GUI progress. At this point the Visual Update simply represents an off ramp and return on investment.  Since it seems to have been acknowledged that major restructuring of the GUI is not to be expected I think the future of Blitz is more of new map and new aircraft/variants DLC using the existing GUI. If that can attract and keep new players, great for the Team! A possiblity though is that DW-T has disappointed a segment of buyers who are unlikely to have interest in another TFS product. Finding an audience whose opinion of CloD/Blitz has not already become calcified may prove daunting. ?

Agreed.

 

I wonder sometimes about the wisdom of the "bored" argument. Ultimately its all pixels floating about a screen (sometimes a screen in a snorkel). Once the revelry of the new wears off what is left? The base on which it sits. Ultimately what where people actually bored of? Simply saying people were board doesnt give the fullest insight. I was never bored of the scenario. I was board of the same 6 (well done) missions on ATAG, I was board of the limited SP scope but not the game itself. 

 

The promise of the new always comes with an unspoken expection of progression. I think there was quite a bit of hope raising too. Perhaps thats why DWT was clamoured for. Still, I remember amongst all that clamour were those asking the team not to move on until the original product was refined further. A damned if you do and damned if you dont situation? Perhaps.

 

Like you DWT left me cold whilst the empty online servers took away that part of the game to. Whilst unfair, having decent looking deserts reproduced in DCS didnt help as I inevitably drew comparisons. The original aircraft and map have more than enough about them for me to have spend years "gittin gud" - something I never acheived in 109. I didnt need more, just needed it to work and look its best. I bought DWT to support that and I dont regret doing so even though I knew it was unlikely to hook me. Question now though is how many future expansion am I willng to buy if the base stuff that tickles my pickle doesnt improve?  

 

My expereince is the same for all sims - In DCS whilst I have perhaps 20 of so modules including the latest and greatest - the Hip is still the module I enjoy the most, The free Caucauses map is still a map I fly most often. Why? Because I can tinker easily. Make my own fun. Because the stuff that matters works (mostly, sometimes, for a while). Some things just hook you in. CloD did that. DWT just didnt. 

 

As you say opinions on Clod are like bumholes. Everyone has one. I will however try not to let my own get in the way of giving whatever happens next a chance but I reserve the right to not become an fanboi. ?

 

 

Edited November 14, 2022 by BOO

[OBT-Eazy]

8 hours ago, BOO said:

If for whatever reason things returned to a pre agreement state I wonder how many of us would do something similar for TFS? A TFS focussed on fixing bugs not new products. One dedicated to making the original game all it should have been instead of building extensions on dodgy foundations. 
 

If just a hundred players felt the same a £2000 monthly income going directly would surely help TFS achieve this? 

 

It's not enough for a full time dev salary (medium or senior).

100 customers is too much.  When I work for a company, I have one customer and max 3 contacts (a project mgr, a super user, the one who pay invoices).  I can't imagine 100 contacts for a project.
Who decide which bug must be fixed first and how much bugs must be fixed per day, per week, per month?  Don't forget, trying to fix a bug can cause a lot of site effects and cause more bugs.  

And last but not least, that gives some arguments to some to say : "Hey, we paid for this!  We want more PR!".  It's bad enough to read some here about it when TFS work is free and I dare not imagine the reactions if they fail...

 

Edited November 14, 2022 by OBT-Eazy

[BOO]

3 hours ago, OBT-Eazy said:

 

It's not enough for a full time dev salary (medium or senior). 

You miss the point- its was about supporting the project so no one is out of pocketand perhaps giving some of the volunteers at TFS something nice in the christmas stocking.  Not paying salaries

 

3 hours ago, OBT-Eazy said:

100 customers is too much.  When I work for a company, I have one customer and max 3 contacts (a project mgr, a super user, the one who pay invoices).  I can't imagine 100 contacts for a project.

 

Supportrers are not customers in the contractual sense. If they like the sound of whats happening they donate - if the dont - they dont. 

 

3 hours ago, OBT-Eazy said:

Who decide which bug must be fixed first and how much bugs must be fixed per day, per week, per month?  Don't forget, trying to fix a bug can cause a lot of site effects and cause more bugs.  

 

TFS - as for if that suits everyone - see above

3 hours ago, OBT-Eazy said:

And last but not least, that gives some arguments to some to say : "Hey, we paid for this!  We want more PR!".  It's bad enough to read some here about it when TFS work is free and I dare not imagine the reactions if they fail...

 

No one is paying for anything - they are donating with all that entails. Not crowdfunding, not buying - donating. I gave £20 every month to ATAG along with others - not once did I note anyone demanding a certain mission, or exclusive use of the server. Its voluntary and there will always be those arguments.

 

Anyhow its not happening so no need to waste any more time on. 

 

 

Edited November 14, 2022 by BOO

[Dagwoodyt]

If the decision to divert resources from BoB development in favor of North Africa reflected Team' "true love" for MP they have made their "bet" and maybe no other choice was viable. It seems though that DW-T was unable to break through solely on MP interest and is still dependent on a SP base that does not seem to be growing. The Visual Update seems a "lifeline" that will give reason to take another look. Hopefully the VU will surface by Summer 2023.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

22 minutes ago, Dagwoodyt said:

If the decision to divert resources from BoB development in favor of North Africa reflected Team' "true love" for MP they have made their "bet" and maybe no other choice was viable.

 

 

Well, Dagwoodyt, in the first place, who has the power to really make decisions? All of these people (Jason Williams, Albert Zhiltsov, Buzzsaw... even the Daedalos Team I guess) are permanently discussing with others with whom they need to reach agreements before they do anything (no longer Jason, I know). We don't know what happens between 1CGS (a development company) and... others, whoever they are. We don't know what happens between TFS (a development company) and... others, whoever they are. My feeling, Dagwoodyt, is that we witness something that is the tip of the iceberg only, and that 1CGS and TFS are not free at 100%. Maybe back in 2016 the development of a new add-on was presented to TFS as a mandatory requirement, who knows. At any rate my point is that we don't know all of the essentials. Regards.

 

[Mysticpuma]

2 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Maybe back in 2016 the development of a new add-on was presented to TFS as a mandatory requirement

 

It wasn't, TFS were already working on Tobruk before the discussions took place for the Source Code. The Source Code made it easier to add features officially rather than through modding. 

Edited November 15, 2022 by Mysticpuma
Modding not nodding ?

[Dagwoodyt]

Some of us have been following CloD/Blitz longer than others ?

[343KKT_Kintaro]

4 minutes ago, Dagwoodyt said:

Some of us have been following CloD/Blitz longer than others ?

 

 

I've been absent from Cliffs of Dover mainly from 2012 to 2019. During these years I went back to the game very few times, only for testing (from time to time only) what has been done for the game. For example I completely missed the 2017 re-release, the Blitz edition. In the last months of 2019 I asked the OBT guys they let me fly with them so that I experience the game differently. They taught me, oh yes, they did... and now I understand that I was the problem, not the game. I was too lazy and not enough forgiving with the game's specificities. This connects with the thread's title, this responds to the title question. "Why Isn't Desert Wings - Tobruk [More] Popular?" Because of the greatness of this game combined to the human nature which is most of the time lazy, dull and unforgiving. I ended up seeing how great this game is, I ended up (as others ended up before me) discerning the potentialities it does present still in the present days. I don't care if others were present all the time, If they focus only on what it still needs to be fixed, not enjoying the game for what the game is. Cliffs of Dover is far than playable, it's enjoyable. Why it isn't more popular? fellow pilots... I just gave the answer.

 

 

[LukeFF]

Wait, so now laziness is the reason why people don't like CloD? ?

[343KKT_Kintaro]

5 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

Wait, so now laziness is the reason why people don't like CloD? ?

 

 

Now?

 

 

[Dagwoodyt]

If an inherent weakness of human nature in dealing with "specificities" is the root problem causing declining Blitz stats I guess very few people buy DCS modules or visit its fora ?

Edited November 15, 2022 by Dagwoodyt

[343KKT_Kintaro]

What don't you understand about the word "unforgiving", Dagwoodyt?

 

 

[Mysticpuma]

7 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

I've been absent from Cliffs of Dover mainly from 2012 to 2019. During these years I went back to the game very few times, only for testing (from time to time only) what has been done for the game. For example I completely missed the 2017 re-release, the Blitz edition. In the last months of 2019 I asked the OBT guys they let me fly with them so that I experience the game differently. 

 

Genuinely not here to pick an argument with you, I just want to say that I find this reply very interesting (even if it was from any player, not just yourself).

 

7 hours ago, Dagwoodyt said:

Some of us have been following CloD/Blitz longer than others ?

 

Maybe this is a reason why the ones who are seen as miserable and 'moaners' look at the progress differently, and while I do appreciate that others who have been around just as long can have a different perspective, Kintaro, you have yourself said you have had long periods of absence and so can likely come back each time with a fresher perspective?

 

Two questions, if you feel able to answer them.

 

1) Why did you keep coming back, in terms of was it publicity, ownership of the game, did you hear about patches....how or why didn't you hear about the re-release? That last point is useful because there are likely hundreds of players like yourself who don't know, but why don't they know?

 

2) During the 7 years you dipped in and out 'only for testing', why didn't you stay once you came back, what didn't spark your interest and keep you engaged?

 

 

I think the answer to those two questions would be useful to have an input on because (should they wish to), TFS could use it as a learning point and maybe use it to engage 'lost/missing' players to possibly find them again and bring them back?

 

Cheers, MP

[354thFG_Leifr]

Are we still banging on here? ?

It's dead, my dudes. The numbers will spike on update, and drop down to the single digits - again.

 

I am actually shocked (shook, even!) that the most ardent defender of Cliffs (Kintaro) here hasn't played for most of it's lifespan and missed out on the healthiest moments during its storied life - participating in the Storm of War campaigns, and flying ATAG. You spend endless time on here whittling away to any one who dares voice the opinion that something is wrong with Cliffs, and yet you admit to only dipping in out briefly for the best part of the game's lifespan. Please...

Edited November 15, 2022 by Leifr

[Dagwoodyt]

After responding to a post by fielding an imaginary history it becomes difficult to present oneself as an authority figure. ? 

[BladeMeister]

So since you play CLOD/DWT a lot(do you really play it a lot, how much in the last month - 6 months? I don't as RL has  been holding me captive for the last 6 months)that gives you the right to complain, to disrespect TFS, Buzzsaw and anyone who still is thankful that TFS is working on CLOD/DWT? The really funny part is that the people bitching about this try to use that as a badge of courage and entitlement to bitch in the name of saving CLOD/DWT from the doom that TFS is perpetuating it into, according to them. So I will ask again, what is your motivation? What is the expected outcome from complaining that nobody is playing CLOD/DWT on Steam? If CLOD/DWT is already dead or doomed, what is you motivation to bitch? Do you want TFS to stop all work and quit? Is it spite, your just so pissed that CLOD/DWT failed in your eyes? Do you just like stirring the shit? Maybe you just like beating a dead horse? Whatever your motivation, I want to assure you that you three are achieving nothing to save or even help CLOD/DWT in any way shape or form. In fact it is pitifully humorous that each of you claim to Love CLOD or CLOD/DWT. Keep up the good work, your each showing your ass in a shinning example of how much you love CLOD/DWT and don't want it to fail.

 

S!Blade<><

 

 

Edited November 15, 2022 by BladeMeister

[354thFG_Leifr]

20 minutes ago, BladeMeister said:

-snip-

 

I'm just here since it's attached to the BoX forum, seeing what's up and throwing in my two pennies.

I guess the fact that some folk keep catching the bait is reason enough to keep returning... ?

 

I no longer play Cliffs because there is nothing that can entice me back, Tobruk was a pretty lame duck (in my opinion) and not worth the monies. I would only return for an online campaign again (if Storm of War restarted), and the old groups came out of the woodwork to participate. The fact that they don't, and most likely won't, should be all you need to know. ?

[Mysticpuma]

1 hour ago, BladeMeister said:

 Blade

 

 

 

Mine was a genuine question if you read it again. I was respectful and if you re-read it I think it has some interesting points to understand from? 

[Dagwoodyt]

The formula we are seeing is this: when all else fails, start a rant. Include vulgarity as bait and wait for someone to respond in kind so that you eventually get the thread closed.

Edited November 15, 2022 by Dagwoodyt

[343KKT_Kintaro]

  

5 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

Maybe this is a reason why the ones who are seen as miserable and 'moaners' look at the progress differently, and while I do appreciate that others who have been around just as long can have a different perspective, Kintaro, you have yourself said you have had long periods of absence and so can likely come back each time with a fresher perspective?

 

 

Wasn't my statement clear enough, Puma? The game is not the problem. I was the problem and I do admit that now. The game is playable and enjoyable, there's no need to stick to it permanently since day one for realising that. I, personally, ended up by realising this three years ago. Simple.

 

 

5 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

1) Why did you keep coming back, in terms of was it publicity, ownership of the game, did you hear about patches....how or why didn't you hear about the re-release? That last point is useful because there are likely hundreds of players like yourself who don't know, but why don't they know?

 

 

At some point in your life you feel some curiosity about some stuff that retained your attention in the past. Nothing in particular Puma, memories reappear quite randomly I guess.

 

 

5 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

2) During the 7 years you dipped in and out 'only for testing', why didn't you stay once you came back, what didn't spark your interest and keep you engaged?

 

 

I already responded: I wasn't in the proper mood, I was too lazy to forgive what wasn't working. There's that bug on board the Tiger Moth trainer (I no longer go to the training section), there's the lack of an easy-to-use QMB (and now, I don't care!, a simple use of the FMB allows me to create my own cold-engine start-ups), there's that interface that is more complexe than in 1946 (and now I learned to use it), and a few other aspects that I wasn't ready to forgive. My approach wasn't the appropriate in this game. Great Battles or 1946 are easy-to-use games while Cliffs of Dover requires educated players. As a simulator, nevertheless, the latter is far superior. So here I am, standing behind TFS. Go TFS, go !

 

 

5 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

I think the answer to those two questions would be useful to have an input on because (should they wish to), TFS could use it as a learning point and maybe use it to engage 'lost/missing' players to possibly find them again and bring them back?

 

 

Why not...

 

 

5 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

Cheers, MP

 

 

Cheers pal.

 

 

4 hours ago, Leifr said:

Are we still banging on here? ?

 

 

 

Apparently, yes, we are. But I thank you Leifr for you are not permanently sticking to the forums, and I understand your position when asking such a question. When I said you are affected by OCSOTNOOPICODS that was a joke and I hope you noticed the humorous tone.

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Leifr said:

Are we still banging on here? ?

It's dead, my dudes. The numbers will spike on update, and drop down to the single digits - again.

 

I am actually shocked (shook, even!) that the most ardent defender of Cliffs (Kintaro) here hasn't played for most of it's lifespan and missed out on the healthiest moments during its storied life - participating in the Storm of War campaigns, and flying ATAG. You spend endless time on here whittling away to any one who dares voice the opinion that something is wrong with Cliffs, and yet you admit to only dipping in out briefly for the best part of the game's lifespan. Please...

 

 

You are missing my point Leifr. I clearly, positively do say, and it's not the first time I say it, and this is not the first thread where I say it... that there is a group of experienced players here in these forums who live for years now in the awareness of the longstanding problems of Cliffs of Dover. They know these longstanding problems are not an obstacle for the promotion of the game nor for the recruitment of new incomers to the game. They know if we focus on the playable part of the game, a community could be put together, a community of players taking advantage of the good things the game has to offer. But they don't do that. That's not their choice. They choose to face TFS and add themselves as an obstacle to the developer. It has been said that this is due to personal rancours. I don't care to what it is due. I care about these forums not being permanently polluted by TFS detractors. A new incomer to the game and forums may create new threads stating that there's a problem here and there, but all of those longstanding players who are applying their ad nauseam methods should move on and leave us alone.

 

No matter how long I'm a continuous uninterrupted player in this game, the above remains the truth. So... Leifr... please...

 

 

1 hour ago, Dagwoodyt said:

After responding to a post by fielding an imaginary history it becomes difficult to present oneself as an authority figure. ? 

 

 

I do not pretend I'm an authority figure Dagwoodyt (straw man argument, but nice try nevertheless). I do pretend you are part of those applying an "ad nauseam" policy in these forums. Indeed, permanently using the forums for focusing on the negative aspects of this game, this is what you and a few others are doing. You build nothing. Nor you help others to build. The problems have been notified, the developer knows that... but some of such problems are particularly persisting. Permanently harrassing the developer adds nothing. You won't make things move forward with your negative attitude.

 

It's funny you reproach me to having been absent Dagwoodyt... because this is what you should have done... as I did myself. Indeed, for a time, I wasn't happy with the game so I left. I was absent from something I didn't like. I was disappointed in 2011/2012 so I didn't start hanging around the internet limbos, permanently spitting at the modders/developers' eye. I wasn't aware in 2012 that, step by step, slowly, an "ad nauseam" policy was being put in place. We need to put an end to the "ad nauseam" policy.

 

 

24 minutes ago, Dagwoodyt said:

The formula we are seeing is this: when all else fails, start a rant. Include vulgarity as bait and wait for someone to respond in kind so that you eventually get the thread closed.

 

 

The only formula in these forums is you "ad nauseam" policy. We need to put an end to the "ad nauseam" policy.

 

GO TFS GO !!!

 

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

Wow! I did some obscure witchcraft and this thread has gotten a lot cleaner! All threads in these parts of the forum, even ?

 

Yeah, why isn’t it more popular? 
 

New GUI and a remake of some of the older models would give this a more modern look. 
Correcting all the more obnoxious bugs (It’s CloD) would make people actually trying the game be worth their time. 
 

Adding single player content besides the scripted campaigns (carreer with profile tracking, awards, virtual lives, dynamic mission generation) would make people stay. 
 

Along with the UI overhaul, having clearer targets shown on the briefing / flight map (like in BoS) in mp, on a server like twc, would make the mp crowd happy too I think. 
 

This game has a lot of good things. But like repeated many times here these things are hidden inside a cropolite. People don’t even get to the good part. 

Edited November 15, 2022 by 9./JG52_J-HAT

[garethj2]

I have been into military flight sims for many years, always looking for the best BoB experience, but never being fully satisfied. ( MicroProse Dogfight / EAW, Rowan BoB, Microsoft CFS3, IL2 46(TD), IL2 GB )

Then there is CLOD, which I delved into a couple of years after its release.

CLOD for me can provide the most satisfying SP experience for BoB - June 1940 to October 1940.

By using the mission creator - by far the easiest one to use - and the enormous choice of historical skins - Asbiz being one of them - I have created numerous historical SP missions based on Red Kite BoB books.

What I have created for my own personal use is by far the most realistic BoB missions I have ever seen.

I for one, after many years military flight simming' will definitely give CLOD a massive thumbs up.

 

[Dagwoodyt]

4 hours ago, garethj2 said:

I have been into military flight sims for many years, always looking for the best BoB experience, but never being fully satisfied. ( MicroProse Dogfight / EAW, Rowan BoB, Microsoft CFS3, IL2 46(TD), IL2 GB )

Then there is CLOD, which I delved into a couple of years after its release.

CLOD for me can provide the most satisfying SP experience for BoB - June 1940 to October 1940.

By using the mission creator - by far the easiest one to use - and the enormous choice of historical skins - Asbiz being one of them - I have created numerous historical SP missions based on Red Kite BoB books.

What I have created for my own personal use is by far the most realistic BoB missions I have ever seen.

I for one, after many years military flight simming' will definitely give CLOD a massive thumbs up.

 

There is no benefit in disputing a testimonial endorsement. I only note that the endorsement does not reference the substance of the OP for context.

Edited November 15, 2022 by Dagwoodyt