Developer Diary #332 Discussion

[Gambit21]

28 minutes ago, Wardog5711 said:

 

As my son constantly reminds me, 'Welcome to Gamer world'.  ?

 

 

It’s like Thunderdome, just not as easy.

 

 

[=gRiJ=Roman-]

Could they maybe say a date for the announcement?

[Hanu]

I was not worried earlier, but actually started to worry when "not to worry" was emphasized so much. Without any concrete publication. Hope it was just an language issues like Juri said earlier.

 

Perhaps biggest stuff was welcoming of the third parties that openly.

[simfan2015]

16 minutes ago, Hanu said:

actually started to worry when "not to worry"

(Sorry, couldn't help it)

IMHO Just *because* of the new roadmap there will be a future for this series.

So many people here demanded major improvements in the past and now we will get what we have

 been asking for all along.

[Irishratticus72]

1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

 

It’s like Thunderdome, just not as easy.

 

 

Two sims enter, one sim leaves.

[[CPT]Crunch]

4 hours ago, creamersdream said:

How come there is no mention of drop tanks anymore? 

Because currently in this engine its a waste of time, if they get this time they can lay a new foundation in for exactly these things much better than you'll ever get now.  Do you want it bandaided in with smoke and mirrors, or fit in as part of the games base?  Pretty much what I understood them saying.

[Rustedgun]

I enjoyed the live session and found the direction not only reasonable but very logical. It focused on the two most important things...the commitment and the foundation for the long term. What they have purposed will amount to a tremendous amount of work and that does not come without risk. However this team has historically proven their technical worth and my money is not only on them succeeding but producing something uniquely satisfying that the next generation if IL2 can be built on.  I do not worry so much about the details of the next location or what order the planes come out in as my enjoyment mostly comes from quality, immersion and depth of the simulation of historical combat aircraft in a realistic world and environment.  

[ScotsmanFlyingscotsman]

I watched the livestream, later, glad to 'meet' the team members and a very interesting and amusing event. The future looks bright, like the idea they want to help those that can do the aircraft interiors, this could net us some interesting aircraft in the future. Well done and thanks for taking the time to do it gents.

[DD_Arthur]

Most important part of all this;

 

Han is now series producer. This is very good news.?

[Jade_Monkey]

No mention of the audio engine. That one is probably the component that feels most antiquated, any thoughts on whether it will get a revamp?

[IckyATLAS]

17 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

Nothing like early to mid war PTO. 

Exactly. ?

[catchthefoxes]

In addition, we plan to create several more Collector Planes, which will be the modifications of the various aircraft that exist in the sim.

 

PLEASE LET IT BE A LATE WAR P-47!! One that would fit the late war BOBP scenario! Either a D-30 or an M!!!! ?

 

Fourth, we have already started the creation of the technical design documents for the new aircraft and one of these aircraft is already in development. The work on new pilots models is already underway. The pre-production of the new map has started - our designers are doing various research on the new area. This work is very extensive and complex because the chosen theatre of war is very interesting and visually appealing. But the reference documents and materials are not easy to come by. In fact, as it was before in our team experience, it looks like we'll not only create a new memorable realistic combat sim, but make a contribution to the history as a science by uncovering new data. At the very least we'll do our part in refreshing the public memory of these events.

 

the pacific?! is it the PACIFIC???!!! ?

[ITAF_Artiglio]

I miss Oleg Maddox so much...

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

1 hour ago, Jade_Monkey said:

No mention of the audio engine. That one is probably the component that feels most antiquated, any thoughts on whether it will get a revamp?

No mention, but based on the stream and the direction of the sim now, I'm sure they're aware.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

1 hour ago, DD_Arthur said:

Most important part of all this;

 

Han is now series producer. This is very good news.?

Yes, I noticed it too. Although perhaps Han was the natural "first in line", you never know what happens when management changes. Han seems like a capable guy, but most importantly, he has lots of experience with the game and its inner workings, so I trust him to make sound decisions about how to best tackle certain problems.

[Hoss]

7 hours ago, creamersdream said:

Hopefully the new project stays in the WW2 time frame. I'm not a huge fan of the jet era its to modern for me. Nothing interesting about flying jets. 

Korean era jets.... and props... carriers...... it would be the first of its kind done at this level of detail.

 

IL-10 Sturmovik Battle of Korean Peninsula.

Edited November 10, 2022 by Hoss

[Jade_Monkey]

1 hour ago, catchthefoxes said:

In addition, we plan to create several more Collector Planes, which will be the modifications of the various aircraft that exist in the sim.

 

PLEASE LET IT BE A LATE WAR P-47!! One that would fit the late war BOBP scenario! Either a D-30 or an M!!!! ?

 

Fourth, we have already started the creation of the technical design documents for the new aircraft and one of these aircraft is already in development. The work on new pilots models is already underway. The pre-production of the new map has started - our designers are doing various research on the new area. This work is very extensive and complex because the chosen theatre of war is very interesting and visually appealing. But the reference documents and materials are not easy to come by. In fact, as it was before in our team experience, it looks like we'll not only create a new memorable realistic combat sim, but make a contribution to the history as a science by uncovering new data. At the very least we'll do our part in refreshing the public memory of these events.

 

the pacific?! is it the PACIFIC???!!! ?

Pretty sure they said early war planes, so no P-47M

[US103_Baer]

13 hours ago, DBS said:

 

Sounds awful, with that logic you'd be paying for another hurricane to get the 40mm vickers instead of getting them as an option.

Not really.  It opens the door for long-called-for and very important engine variations in FC. All the major aircraft types had several significant engine power upgrades from 1917 thru to end of war.  None of that is modeled currently,  leading to much difficulty in time-period planesets. 

[Tonester]

22 hours ago, CanadaOne said:

 

Really? 

 

I'd love to see the Pacific. Hellcats and Zeros would be some solid fun.

yep and carriers…the one major thing i really miss from 46…carrier landings are a fantastic test of ones skills

 

[CosmiC10R]

9 hours ago, Wardog5711 said:

But no matter what it eventually turns out to be, somebody will be happy and others will be unhappy.

As my son constantly reminds me, 'Welcome to Gamer world'.  ?

 

 

 

Its the wider part of the internet really... I was buying a ride on mower and doing some research and guys were in there arguing over cut lines and trashing each other... 

 

I had to laugh really... maybe I'm just not taking it seriously enough lol

Edited November 11, 2022 by CosmiC10R

[Boomerang]

21 minutes ago, CosmiC10R said:

Its the wider part of the internet really... I was buying a ride on mower and doing some research and guys were in there arguing over cut lines and trashing each other... 

 

I had to laugh really... maybe I'm just not taking it seriously enough lol

Know what you mean, how embarrassing for them ... .. .

[IckyATLAS]

Whatever comes in the future it will be related to IL2 Sturmovik. I mean by that that the future BoX will have the IL2 Sturmovik plane as one of the planes of the battle.

This is what I caught or understood indirectly from what Han said during the Interview.

[DN308]

I finally had a look at the video stream and tried to understand as not native English speaker.

 

Well…

If I understood well, nothing about what I and many others were expecting the most won’t appear because it’s said far too complicated.

Ok, so I guess I should stick with what I had bought so far and never ask or expect for more. So I guess I should shift to another flight simulation, waiting for Microprose’s B-17, or shifting to DCS definitely soon. Even the older IL-2 CoD offer more flexibility for some missions or campaigns. Even the number of planes in a single mission is greater.

 

We asked years for tools in order to improve maps and correct them, etc. The answer received was always no.  And now, we should work in place of the devs. Funny.

Edited November 11, 2022 by DN308

[Docholiday]

I heard what they said and, unfortunately, I am sure that they will develop a COMPLETELY new game !

 

It will overcome the most shortcomings of BoX and It will be a great game     BUT    like some years ago after ROF   you will have to buy (and You have to wait again years for them.  IF they are included in the new game)  all planes and maps You already had in BoX.

 

Especially for the non online gamers it will be a hard time ?

 

Because the marketing strategy prefers the onliners,  the first planes will be the popular single engine  fighter planes.

Guys like me who prefer  twomot attacking planes will have to wait again years until they will be produced too !   IF they will produced before the next switch to the next gaming engine.  

For Example   the Hansa Brandenburg an Felixtowe seaplanes newer found the way in FC, and now it is over ?

 

As a former long time user of the original IL-2  I really hoped BoX could play the same role in the flightsim comunity.

 

so I am really dissapointed !

 

Doc

Edited November 11, 2022 by Docholiday

[simfan2015]

15 minutes ago, Docholiday said:

I am sure that they will develop a COMPLETELY new game

It would be better if we got a clear answer about what exactly is being considered because now I ... am not sure.

I hope the *new* stuff is exciting and state-of-the-art, simply because DCS will have a more fleshed out WWII offering in a few years as well.

All those people guessing what the next DLC was going to be ... at least maybe *everybody* got that wrong !?

But I'll buy whatever they develop, even if it means buying all the stuff again ... in time everything has to start over to advance.

Maybe they will transfer existing planes *and* vehicles to the new environment ... I did not hear/read that this was not going to be

 an option.

Edited November 11, 2022 by simfan2015

[DN308]

27 minutes ago, Docholiday said:

I heard what they said and, unfortunately, I am sure that they will develop a COMPLETELY new game !

 

It will overcome the most shortcomings of BoX and It will be a great game     BUT    like some years ago after ROF   you will have to buy (and You have to wait again years for them.  IF they are included in the new game)  all planes and maps You already had in BoX.

 

Especially for the non online gamers it will be a hard time ?

 

Because the marketing strategy prefers the onliners,  the first planes will be the popular single engine  fighter planes.

Guys like me who prefer  twomot attacking planes will have to wait again years unil they will be produced too !   IF they will produced before the next switch to the next gaming engine.  

For Example   the Hansa Brandenburg an Felixtowe seaplanes newer found the way in FC, and now it is over ?

 

As a former long time user of the original IL-2  I really hoped BoX could play the same role in the flightsim comunity.

 

so I am really dissapointed !

 

Doc

That’s exactly how a game dies… and how older games died.

RIP IL-2 BoX

[IckyATLAS]

One thing they mentioned they would do is to have the pilot when ditching or parachuting in water not to systematically die but be able to float.

They mentioned that with their sea model animation it was difficult to do because the pilot would be too small to make it float properly. Now if it floats in a dinghy then the whole object becomes a little larger and should be easier to model. 

But this is a good thing because the sea animation needs to be improved. Maybe we get both.

5 minutes ago, DN308 said:

That’s exactly how a game dies… and how older games died.

RIP IL-2 BoX

It is very dangerous, because there is no guarantee that the new one will succeed.

And I speak also for myself too. If there is a complete disconnection and we start on a completely new platform with a completely different editor, I am not sure at all that I will invest the time I did with the existing editor to be able to build mission in a blink of an eye. And it is one of the things that are important to me. It is a very steep learning curve and to accept to restart the whole stuff I say maybe, but then it must be for something much much better (tool and visual) by a factor of 10 (an order of magnitude) at least. The challenge is high because the existing editor is already an impressive tool. 

Wait and See

[simfan2015]

18 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

we have already started the creation of the technical design documents for the new aircraft

I think most we believe we know about what is planned is plain wrong.

They can not possibly create an aircraft and pilots for it ... before having that 'new' game engine.

Even if they use, say, UE5 then it will still take many years before a NEW sim is born.

My bet is on evolution, not revolution.

 

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

1 hour ago, simfan2015 said:

 

Maybe they will transfer existing planes *and* vehicles to the new environment ... 

I'd be surprised if they did not.  They have a sizable investment in that content.  I would think they will certainly try to convert and import that content. Especially if it can be easily done.  

[simfan2015]

11 minutes ago, RNAS10_Mitchell said:

I would think they will certainly try to convert and import that content. Especially if it can be easily done.

That makes a lot of sense, but not for free.

This was partly done for IL-2 GB FC planes.

These were not free either.

 

Edited November 11, 2022 by simfan2015

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

Well, if it's new and improved.  If additional content is added.  I see a marketable product.  Perhaps they could combine FC1 and FC2,  add float planes, etc...

 

One thing is certain, if they don't generate revenue, they don't last long.

Edited November 11, 2022 by RNAS10_Mitchell

[Jade_Monkey]

42 minutes ago, simfan2015 said:

I think most we believe we know about what is planned is plain wrong.

They can not possibly create an aircraft and pilots for it ... before having that 'new' game engine.

Even if they use, say, UE5 then it will still take many years before a NEW sim is born.

My bet is on evolution, not revolution.

 

Please stop misquoting me by editing your quoted. I never said that, that was a quote from someone else.

[Eisenfaustus]

I really liked how enthusiastic the devs presented themselves in the stream. 
 

But I got the feeling they misunderstood the problem of time dilation. They said something about VR increasing the problem due to the necessity to render everything twice. While VR does indeed tax the CPU a little more the double rendering is mostly a GPU problem, which has not much to do with TD. In Normandy career I regularly have serious TD (with ingame time running at something like 15% of the real world time) at solid 60+ FPS in VR. 
 

And telling your customers to just get super high end cpus to play a 9 year old game series when other games can display large complex battles without grinding out pcs to a halt is… interesting. 
 

The sad message I got from this however: The devs don’t think about reducing TD by optimising cpu usage of their sim. It’s not even that they tried and failed - they just don’t have it on their agenda…

 

Maybe in 10 years from now I might be able to afford a cpu that is capable of computing GB missions in real time. ?

[Frequent_Flyer]

Based upon the vague comments regarding the next "installment ", my guess is  the second sino japanese war ,timeframe around 1937. It would have a plane set consisting of early USA and soviet aircraft vs. the early Japanese offerings. I hope I am wrong, unless of course they include the aircraft carriers that were involved.

[CountZero]

15 minutes ago, Frequent_Flyer said:

Based upon the vague comments regarding the next "installment ", my guess is  the second sino japanese war ,timeframe around 1937. It would have a plane set consisting of early USA and soviet aircraft vs. the early Japanese offerings. I hope I am wrong, unless of course they include the aircraft carriers that were involved.

Khalkhin gol, SB vs Ki-21 and i-15s vs Ki-27s , and big bombers finaly in game in TB-3 , who would not buy that ?

 

[Frequent_Flyer]

24 minutes ago, CountZero said:

Khalkhin gol, SB vs Ki-21 and i-15s vs Ki-27s , and big bombers finaly in game in TB-3 , who would not buy that ?

 

I wouldn't disagree, as long as they also include a flyable B-25 and B-26. So, both are available for the smooth transition into the PTO.

[CountZero]

On 11/10/2022 at 9:01 AM, AEthelraedUnraed said:

I would say that the concept of one single app for everything is dated. Microsoft tried it with Win8 that could be deployed to everything including tablets and phones; see how that went. If you have two separate goals (i.e. playing and creating missions) that may be related but have a completely different workflow and requirements, it's usually better to keep the apps separate.

 

I'm curious which modules you think *would* yield a good return, that haven't been done already.

 

Obviously, many PTO modules (although I think they'd need at least some land-based aircraft and relatively close-by missions to keep people interested) would yield a good return, but the PTO is already off the table. Korean War is off the table too as it isn't mainly piston engines. Berlin is a too large city. CBI? Most people would think it's a crime series. BoB or Africa since their agreement with CloD presumably dissolved? BoB isn't possible for the same reasons as Berlin; Africa would probably yield even less returns than Italy I think (remember that Italy isn't completely unheard of, even in AAA titles (Sniper Elite 4 for instance)). I think we can agree that outlandish propositions such as the Battle of the Atlantic or Arctic are just that: outlandish. Which basically just leaves Italy and Eastern Front 1944. Do you think the latter would yield a much better return worldwide, especially given recent renditions of Tolstoy's works?

 

Anyhow, I guess we'll find out since Italy is off the table now too.

 

If there's some capable 3d modelers and texturers out there, I'm willing to give a Malta map a try (its small size keeps things manageable; it's only a portion of the Lapino map). When fiddling around with the game tools, this is how far I got:

 

In all this time we got one user made map added to game, it was simple, small and used existing stuff.
Bigger projects we know about like Murmansk, Odessa, and Finland seam like not douable.

 

So why map makers dont start simple, for example we have devs made Channel Map, someone can make changes so airbases look like they looked in 40-41-42-43, one map per years, start with 43. Or retexture it so it has Autmn and Winter phases... start simple, no big work for new buildings models, no big terrain remodeling, and so on... but benefit is so big, if added then even offical career can be expanded with existing airplanes that fit, or even opens up oportunities for collector airplane types that fit timeline and then have map and career to be used for officaly.

 

Or more advanced try, there is planty of areas on east front that we aready have all or most airplanes for, so it cant be done with 5v5 DLC as airplanes are used up. Why not try this, most buildings are same or similar, terrain not complex, and so on... Some area where you can use La-5FN, Yak-9, Yak-9T and G6Late, G14, A6, A8 (and other axis stuff from BoBp, BoN) in late 43 or early 44 is good option to make. Again not to big 200kmx200km or smaller, map areas like Kursk, Smolensk or Lviv map was in IL-2 1946 , and so on... for first try.

Spoiler

 

Where i see problem is to big projects are selected and nothing happend, start small is best as shown from game example of added map. Its not like in old 46 where one person can pick area, and do it in 1 year, and no need for any standards, here devs need to aprove it before its added, one person can spend 10 years doing all that alone, or small team 4+ years like its with Finland map try...
I think totaly new areas to be made by player map makers is to big task to ask for, and we will probably never see them be added in game. Finland map was suposed to be most promising project and still nothing after so many years.
 

Edited November 12, 2022 by CountZero

[dburne]

And after all this time I think we are left with even more questions than answers.

Guess that is how they wanted it to go. I anticipate maybe at some point they will divulge the next theatre that has supposedly already been decided on - and maybe even a new game engine who knows -  at least I think , that is what I have taken away from all this.

 

It is rather odd how all of this is going down, beginning with the conjecture that something was up with Jason to where we are now currently. 

 

 

Edited November 12, 2022 by dburne

[III/JG52_Al-Azraq]

20 hours ago, DN308 said:

I finally had a look at the video stream and tried to understand as not native English speaker.

 

Well…

If I understood well, nothing about what I and many others were expecting the most won’t appear because it’s said far too complicated.

Ok, so I guess I should stick with what I had bought so far and never ask or expect for more. So I guess I should shift to another flight simulation, waiting for Microprose’s B-17, or shifting to DCS definitely soon. Even the older IL-2 CoD offer more flexibility for some missions or campaigns. Even the number of planes in a single mission is greater.

 

We asked years for tools in order to improve maps and correct them, etc. The answer received was always no.  And now, we should work in place of the devs. Funny.

 

Why are you considering to abandon the game just because they announced they will not be developing more expansions for it? I just don’t get it. The sim is not going to stop being good or fun because of that.

[DN308]

56 minutes ago, III/JG52_Al-Azraq said:

 

Why are you considering to abandon the game just because they announced they will not be developing more expansions for it? I just don’t get it. The sim is not going to stop being good or fun because of that.

If you are happy with what they announced, and if this is ok for you to hear that what you asked for or expected for, as many other players, will never happen or it’s considered as silly, you won’t get it.

 

What I’ve heard there was that whatever the expectations around the customers, nothing gonna happen. Too much work, too much money and another project as a goal for them.

Ugra media which is in charge of the Flyable C-47, is making a Hi-Res map from London to Paris include, with dynamic lights, actual buildings, etc. This is made for DCS and seems to be make able. 

I had to negotiate with people like this in the past. That’s a waste of time. Nothing happens, never, and my time and money serve another goal.

The game is still « fun » and « good » if we consider it for what it is. 
For the rest, I want to see what is possible to do elsewhere.

That is MY point of view and I understand that you can think differently