Can this be cleared up please...

[Gambit21]

5 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

We (the BlitzPigs) still play AC, and ACC, on occasion.  We race among ourselves with the field filled with AI sometimes.  True it has a steep learning curve, however it's easier than flying, but requires more constant concentration.  We do shy away from "open" multiplayer servers because they are often filled with kids who somehow haven't got the message that motorsport is not a full contact sport on purpose.

ACC is easier than flying?

I don’t know - squeezing another tenth (or hundredth) out of Spa or Monza  (or anywhere) in the 911 is many times more difficult than flying a WWII bird from where I sit.  
 

This coming from a GPL guy from way back mind you. 

 

 

 

 

[-TBC-AeroAce]

20 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

ACC is easier than flying?

I don’t know - squeezing another tenth (or hundredth) out of Spa or Monza  (or anywhere) in the 911 is many times more difficult than flying a WWII bird from where I sit.  
 

This coming from a GPL guy from way back mind you. 

 

 

 

 

 

Agreed. Completely different disciplines.

Edited January 17, 2023 by -TBC-AeroAce

[tattywelshie]

1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

ACC is easier than flying?

I don’t know - squeezing another tenth (or hundredth) out of Spa or Monza  (or anywhere) in the 911 is many times more difficult than flying a WWII bird from where I sit.  
 

This coming from a GPL guy from way back mind you. 

 

 

 

 

True enough! And is there anything more frustrating that nailing the perfect lap, and then missing the apex by 2mm on the final corner to completely mess it up! Arghhhh!!!

[BlitzPig_EL]

Driving a motorcar is far easier than flying a real aeroplane.  Note that I said that the racing sims require more concentration than combat flight sims.

It's true that on the whole the GT3 cars in ACC are easier to drive than the overly slippery feeling street cars in AC.  That said, I was always faster in a sim than I was in real cars at Mid Ohio.  I guess for the same reasons that "online aces" rack up unimaginable kill numbers compared to real fighter pilots.  No adverse conditions, no heat or cold, no G forces wearing at you, no fear of death or crashing, and you don't have to pay anything if you smack up your virtual race car.

 

I do wish flight sims had the same tactile feedback that racing sims do.  Modern force feedback in racing sims is so much better than just overcoming spring force in a joystick.

[CountZero]

issue is not if racing sim or flying sim is better or harder and so on... problem is that if you have hardcore base of players that belive you cant play it without some fancy hardwere, or you cant play it if its not "full real", or if stuff is not modeled to 99%+ of real stuff, and so on.. you will not grow and new ppl will not come or even stay long... youll end up waisting year time doing ultra real fuel system for game that cant handle it, doing it for all airplanes, where in reality most players just wont simple DT on their 109 or Spitfire, but just making that is not good enought for hardcore playersas it hase to be full realistic... and on another side your disrigarding stuff like interesting SP and making game more playable for new ppl... youll end up with small base, have to make game cost extra, so its not atractive for new ppl, get image that you need expencive hardware

[Rjel]

50 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Driving a motorcar is far easier than flying a real aeroplane.  Note that I said that the racing sims require more concentration than combat flight sims.

It's true that on the whole the GT3 cars in ACC are easier to drive than the overly slippery feeling street cars in AC.  That said, I was always faster in a sim than I was in real cars at Mid Ohio.  I guess for the same reasons that "online aces" rack up unimaginable kill numbers compared to real fighter pilots.  No adverse conditions, no heat or cold, no G forces wearing at you, no fear of death or crashing, and you don't have to pay anything if you smack up your virtual race car.

 

I do wish flight sims had the same tactile feedback that racing sims do.  Modern force feedback in racing sims is so much better than just overcoming spring force in a joystick.

For the uninitiated amongst us, what is ACC or AC?

[Alexmarine]

4 minutes ago, Rjel said:

For the uninitiated amongst us, what is ACC or AC?

 

Assetto Corsa and Assetto Corsa Competizione 

[Rjel]

Thx.

[BlitzPig_EL]

I agree with you CountZero, on all areas of your post.

 

 

[dbuile]

I got the impression from folks here that DCS has a larger player base than IL-2.  Is that correct?

[DBFlyguy]

18 minutes ago, dbuile said:

I got the impression from folks here that DCS has a larger player base than IL-2.  Is that correct?

By a large margin, yes.   MSFS and DCS are closer competitors, everyone is dwarfed by War Thunder:

 

War Thunder: https://steamcharts.com/app/236390

MSFS https://steamcharts.com/app/1250410

DCS https://steamcharts.com/app/223750

IL-2 (Great Battles)  https://steamcharts.com/app/307960

 

Granted these are just steam numbers but DCS has a large amount who use standalone too which I'd venture to guess also dwarfs standalone IL-2 numbers. IL-2 really isn't even in the discussion, which makes the whole "keep quiet to not tip off our competitors..." stance that seems to be going on for the last few months even more ....."odd"

Edited January 17, 2023 by DBFlyguy

[352ndOscar]

16 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

We (the BlitzPigs) still play AC, and ACC, on occasion.  We race among ourselves with the field filled with AI sometimes.  True it has a steep learning curve, however it's easier than flying, but requires more constant concentration.  We do shy away from "open" multiplayer servers because they are often filled with kids who somehow haven't got the message that motorsport is not a full contact sport on purpose.

‘Hell @BlitzPig_EL, even the group professionals have a problem with this one!  “Just because you can do a thing doesn’t mean you should do a thing.”  I think the sanctioning bodies ought to implement an immediate rule that if your car touches another car - your fault of not - you are sent to the penalty box for 5 mins.  Maybe that’d stop some of the crap!

[RossMarBow]

8 hours ago, dbuile said:

I got the impression from folks here that DCS has a larger player base than IL-2.  Is that correct?

For multiplayer both are about equal

[RossMarBow]

12 hours ago, CountZero said:

issue is not if racing sim or flying sim is better or harder and so on... problem is that if you have hardcore base of players that belive you cant play it without some fancy hardwere, or you cant play it if its not "full real", or if stuff is not modeled to 99%+ of real stuff, and so on.. you will not grow and new ppl will not come or even stay long... youll end up waisting year time doing ultra real fuel system for game that cant handle it, doing it for all airplanes, where in reality most players just wont simple DT on their 109 or Spitfire, but just making that is not good enought for hardcore playersas it hase to be full realistic... and on another side your disrigarding stuff like interesting SP and making game more playable for new ppl... youll end up with small base, have to make game cost extra, so its not atractive for new ppl, get image that you need expencive hardware

I think it is very much inline with the issue enigma highlighted that we are in a dearth of simulators.
But the real issue really is the lack of people wanting to multiplayer sim.
And I totally agree theirs way to much gatekeeping and self-gate keeping going on.

I think the problem is the average gamer compared with the 2000s has no tolerance for loss.
And just lacks the mental strength and energy.

All the most popular games are built like casinos.
Take your average battle royale game, joe smuck might be terrible at fps, but every few days the stars align and he's the last man left.
Compare that with the total lack of players in Quake style shooters, were joe smuck would just always be bottom half of the score board.
Theirs strong parallels with the above and lack of interest in multiplayer games that aren't built like casinos.
WT once a day you might top the score board, for 1 match, and every match contributes to grinding. And then theirs the literal casino loot boxes.
IL2 just doesn't offer much of a serotonin hit.
And games that aren't built like slot machines struggle to attract main stream support.

 

So yea when people start gate keeping on skill and equipment all they are doing is making the game irrelevant. 
And when your game is so niche and irrelevant how can you seriously say it takes skill to play with a straight face.
All the top gamers are playing popular games, your just king shit, lord of the flies.

Edited January 18, 2023 by RossMarBow

[DBFlyguy]

21 minutes ago, RossMarBow said:

For multiplayer both are about equal

It's not even close.   DCS currently has a bit over 800 people playing multiplayer right now on a Tuesday evening, IL2 has than 100.

Edited January 18, 2023 by DBFlyguy

[RossMarBow]

10 minutes ago, DBFlyguy said:

It's not even close.   DCS currently has a bit over 800 people playing multiplayer right now on a Tuesday evening, IL2 has than 100.

That was not my experience when I had DCS installed for a month (last month).
Two servers with a lot of players GS/Engimas.
And a sprinkling of other servers like dogfight practice etc. 
Was almost identical to looking at IL2 multiplayer server browser.

Edited January 18, 2023 by RossMarBow

[DBFlyguy]

5 minutes ago, RossMarBow said:

That was not my experience when I had DCS installed for a month.
Two servers with a lot of players GS/Engimas.
And a sprinkling of other servers like dogfight practice etc. 
Was almost identical to looking at IL2 multiplayer server browser.

GS and Engima are definitely popular but there's also Grayflag, Blueflash, Hoggit, Inferno, 4YA... etc.  Now, on the WWII specific maps (Channel and Normandy) those are pretty low user wise.

[spreckair]

After reading all of these posts, my head is left spinning.  What is the goal of IL-2 or its successor?  I would love to see 1C's mission statement for IL-2; that alone would answer a lot of questions.

 

If it is to be the best-of-the-best WWII flight simulator, then it will probably always be a niche product.  Is there a legion of Gen Y and Z who are interested in WWII air combat; if they are, they seem to be very quiet about it.  If WWII flight sims were universally popular, we would see a lot more than we have now.

 

But in a world with 7.8 billion people (and a lot of baby boomers), I would imagine that even a niche product can become successful and profitable to an acceptable degree if it is really good.  And I think that the better the product replicates realism, the more successful it will be, and this applies both to single and multi-player.

[Bonnot]

7 hours ago, spreckair said:

Is there a legion of Gen Y and Z who are interested in WWII air combat; if they are, they seem to be very quiet about it.

Legion can be  misleading : if you think Crowd and mass market = no....

In you think of a picked "Elite" , it is closer to what I saw in the Wargamers communities when I studied ( and participated in ) this society.  There was/ is an obvious reason :  Education and learning History, acquiring the need to read and learn, and then approaching the subject by the pleasant bias of gaming, weather with tin soldiers, cardboard counters, or PC games. still there were other profiles : young historian ladies, lads, passionate collectors self-educated,  etc..... but a minority.

From my own statistics ( a long time ago ! ) when PC games were crude, ugly and limited, Wargamers were mostly ( 95% ) male in their Thirties, had secondary -or University- studies level, purchased and read many books a year, subscribed mags related to History...

In this time WWII was the most popular topic, near equal Napoleonics, then Ancients ( Romans, Greeks ahead ), Medieval, ACW, WWI, Marlburians...followed in changing ranks.

.......but this could be only an instant photography in the 70's.

Reading and learning History -Military History-, is now out of Fashion for most people, except in caricatural TV series or numeric enhanced movies, sketchy plots, anachronistics events and representations. The plethora of games on various consoles, pads, telephone (?) provides cheap entertainment without thinking and official surveys of edu level regularly alarms on this situation.

So, you're hopefully right on your 7.8 billion able to produce a Legion of WWII gamers as a niche,  but they probably will come from a different background and with attempts formated by today standards of quality, variety, easy access and the possibility to fill individual taste ( = no TEN BF109xxxx but 2 with 5 free variations for instance ) at low cost....

Is IL2  production able to move there ?  it is the  Billion Question  ?

 

[Koziolek]

14 hours ago, spreckair said:

 

 

But in a world with 7.8 billion people 

we passed 8 billion several months ago ?

[Lusekofte]

If one stop thinking “ifs” and “buts”  And think what they actually said. 
they are going to triple the staff

It sound to me they have great prospects for succeeding. 
What we did hear them say was unanimous positive. We know more in a while

[spreckair]

1 hour ago, Koziolek said:

we passed 8 billion several months ago

Well, the silver lining might be that some of them will buy IL-2.  Just sayin'...?

[JG7_X-Man]

Look all of you are wrong! However, the other guys are right!

[dburne]

2 hours ago, Lusekofte said:

If one stop thinking “ifs” and “buts”  And think what they actually said. 
they are going to triple the staff

It sound to me they have great prospects for succeeding. 
What we did hear them say was unanimous positive. We know more in a while

 

Yeah right. They really got us hangin on for anything now and probably laughing all the way.

[Rjel]

29 minutes ago, dburne said:

 

Yeah right. They really got us hangin on for anything now and probably laughing all the way.

After 14 pages of asking, a lot of pontificating and angst, I'd have to agree. For whatever reason, they've decided to ignore any and all requests for more information and hopefully more clarity in their previous announcement. At least for the time being.

[Trooper117]

And people wonder why there are so many negative posts and opinions forming... it's as if the devs just don't care.

It's not as if people want to believe the worst, they don't... they just want something positive to look forward to, not stoney silence on the way ahead.

 

[CountZero]

3 hours ago, Lusekofte said:

If one stop thinking “ifs” and “buts”  And think what they actually said. 
they are going to triple the staff

It sound to me they have great prospects for succeeding. 
What we did hear them say was unanimous positive. We know more in a while

they aint gona triple the staf, its less then 50% incress from what they said not 300%.

 

This is backed up by the fact that we're significantly expanding - the plan is to increase the team from 36 to 50 people,

 

to me they started succedeing when Jason take over, since he gone i only see stumbling and amaterisam

 

 

[Bonnot]

13 minutes ago, CountZero said:

they are going to triple the staff

.......Too bad they don't hire a ( part-time ?)  Public Relations or Communication speaker   ?

[BMA_FlyingShark]

8 minutes ago, Bonnot said:

.......Too bad they don't hire a ( part-time ?)  Public Relations or Communication speaker   ?

Well, we have a community manager, Wardog, he's doing a fine job as far as I've noticed.

He can off course not say what he doesn't know or what he's not allowed to.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[dbuile]

I personally don't interpret the withholding of announcement as the dev team "not caring".   Just my opinion.

[Bonnot]

17 minutes ago, FlyingShark said:

we have a community manager, Wardog, he's doing a fine job as far as I've noticed.

 

I'm sorry if I gave the impression of a critical post against Wardog and I apologize for this !

I think he makes the best to keep this board going in a "stormy weather" , in spite of relations he could have with upstairs level : not an easy task ....

 

22 minutes ago, FlyingShark said:

He can off course not say what he doesn't know or what he's not allowed to.

 

I agree totally with your statement, I'll try to be more cautious in aiming now - not to hit the wrong target ?

[BraveSirRobin]

It’s always fun watching the meltdowns when the devs go more than a few hours without an update.  In this case it seems likely that they’re working on the press release that will accompany the announcement of the next product.  That will probably include a CGI video and other such stuff that probably doesn’t appear out of thin air.

[ST_Catchov]

1 hour ago, Trooper117 said:

they just want something positive to look forward to, not stoney silence on the way ahead.

 

I remember the stoney silence about the FC DM issues that went on for over two and a half years under Jason's leadership. There was some vague acknowledgement in 2020 from Jason that maybe there was something wrong, maybe there wasn't, maybe we'll look at it, maybe we won't .... and then nothing. Then the new management came in and fixed it. So stoney silence is not a new thing. 

 

As per BSR, and as entertaining as they are, these meltdowns are petulant. The dudes here ought to chill a bit, quit the constant speculation and dummy spits, and give the new team time to organise themselves. Instant gratification is not only the realm of bratty teenagers it seems.

[RossMarBow]

On 1/18/2023 at 3:01 PM, DBFlyguy said:

GS and Engima are definitely popular but there's also Grayflag, Blueflash, Hoggit, Inferno, 4YA... etc.  Now, on the WWII specific maps (Channel and Normandy) those are pretty low user wise.

Wasn't the case in December and everyone who I talked to who plays DCS regularly said this was normal. 
Like I said before the multiplayer server browser looked almost identical to IL2s
Two servers with regular population, but not full. 
Minor activity on other servers, and maybe some more events.
So yea theirs more players but not 6x more players like you suggested.

Edited January 19, 2023 by RossMarBow

[DBFlyguy]

9 minutes ago, RossMarBow said:

Wasn't the case in December and everyone who I talked to who plays DCS regularly said this was normal. 

No idea who you talked to but DCS has always had larger multiplayer numbers than IL2. It's almost midnight here in my timezone and there are still almost 700 folks doing multiplayer on DCS right now on various servers.  Maybe the people you asked meant specifically WWII themed servers?

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

10 hours ago, Lusekofte said:

If one stop thinking “ifs” and “buts”  And think what they actually said. 
they are going to triple the staff

It sound to me they have great prospects for succeeding. 
What we did hear them say was unanimous positive. We know more in a while

This was...3, 4 months ago now? I'd personally, like many others here, like to hear something...

Edited January 19, 2023 by drewm3i-VR

[BMA_FlyingShark]

7 hours ago, Bonnot said:

I'm sorry if I gave the impression of a critical post against Wardog and I apologize for this !

No worries.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[Robli]

7 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

It’s always fun watching the meltdowns when the devs go more than a few hours without an update.

 

Well, if I knew that even a few hours are important for my customers to avoid meltdowns then I would probably do something about it instead of ignoring the issue for months. This very thread was created already on November 10th and questions were in the air obviously before that already.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

On 1/18/2023 at 2:31 AM, RossMarBow said:

I think the problem is the average gamer compared with the 2000s has no tolerance for loss.
And just lacks the mental strength and energy.

All the most popular games are built like casinos.
Take your average battle royale game, joe smuck might be terrible at fps, but every few days the stars align and he's the last man left.
Compare that with the total lack of players in Quake style shooters, were joe smuck would just always be bottom half of the score board.
Theirs strong parallels with the above and lack of interest in multiplayer games that aren't built like casinos.
WT once a day you might top the score board, for 1 match, and every match contributes to grinding. And then theirs the literal casino loot boxes.
IL2 just doesn't offer much of a serotonin hit.
And games that aren't built like slot machines struggle to attract main stream support.

Is not entirely true, there are very popular multiplayer games where you die a lot but they have 10 000 ppl playing every day , and being noob is not pleasant, because there is no official guide or in game tutorial. Those game are popular because they are immersive and rewarding. In any game are losers and winners. It's normal. If il2 would reproduce same battlefield immersion as on official CGI movies promoting the game , it would attract more ppl. The game feel empty and sterile. You can make mayhem on the ground but after one or two minutes the place do not show that. Look how unrealistic and bullets hitting the ground looks. How objects destruction is just change one model to another in one frame time. How smoke and dust are unrealistically small. The ground objects need to have some destruction physic or very nice animation to be convincing and rewarding. What all we do in CFS is destroying opposite site air and ground objects this need to be spectacular as it is in real world. This game need new AI engine object based on physic  where those things are possible, in current one they are not.

[RossMarBow]

4 hours ago, DBFlyguy said:

No idea who you talked to but DCS has always had larger multiplayer numbers than IL2. It's almost midnight here in my timezone and there are still almost 700 folks doing multiplayer on DCS right now on various servers.  Maybe the people you asked meant specifically WWII themed servers?

No I played the game for over a month multiplayer only
Enigmas server averaged about 40 people
GR had more at times but was also empty at times
Their were some other minor servers that seemed to be tied to specific events and might get 20 people for a few hours
Their were a lot of servers with very few people in them
I have been on enigmas discord for years
I don't even remember any players being in ww2 servers as far as I could tell ww2 is dead in DCS for day to day play
Where are you counting these 700?

13 minutes ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

Is not entirely true, there are very popular multiplayer games where you die a lot but they have 10 000 ppl playing every day , and being noob is not pleasant, because there is no official guide or in game tutorial. Those game are popular because they are immersive and rewarding. In any game are losers and winners. It's normal. If il2 would reproduce same battlefield immersion as on official CGI movies promoting the game , it would attract more ppl. The game feel empty and sterile. You can make mayhem on the ground but after one or two minutes the place do not show that. Look how unrealistic and bullets hitting the ground looks. How objects destruction is just change one model to another in one frame time. How smoke and dust are unrealistically small. The ground objects need to have some destruction physic or very nice animation to be convincing and rewarding. What all we do in CFS is destroying opposite site air and ground objects this need to be spectacular as it is in real world. This game need new AI engine object based on physic  where those things are possible, in current one they are not.

Theirs a massive gap between a shooter
And more complex games
But I agree with you the game feels very sterile compared with most games
Hopefully we get more smoke and fire without it causing performance issues

Edited January 19, 2023 by RossMarBow