Developer Diary #337 Discussion (The Past and The Future)

[Bonnot]

56 minutes ago, 56RAF_Talisman said:

It is not all about Migs and Sabres by a long chalk.

 

YES, I'm surprised everybody looks at the sky when so many interesting things happen closer....

like this:

 

or that :

[Bonnot]

 

There is not only Mig vs Sabre, but Sherman, Chaffee, Patton , vs JS, KV, Txxx...........

USMC ( f4U !) and all "Freee World" forces vs China and Bad guys.........

Sea  Landings, Airdrops, advances and retreats in harsh conditions...

 

...and this has no END , it is still boiling under our feet ....Which is a bit too hot for my taste to really enjoy   ?

[Irishratticus72]

1 hour ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

 

Not joking? You mean "Knights of the Sky"... the early 1990s game?

 

I flew it thousands of times in "Red Baron 3D" (as of 1998).

 

 

Best Amiga sim evah!

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

FC3   ??

[Lusekofte]

In a devblogg or in the interview. They ruled out Italy and jets. 
To me that rule out Korea , and even if it did not. No one ever mentioned it except Jason. To me it looks like devs would like to do anything else than what Jason said.  Making it even more unlikely. 
I am not negative on what’s happening, quite opposite, but it’s been too long. We are getting great improvements together with hopefully good collector planes. But not a new dlc except for the new thing. And then a new game

[CountZero]

4 hours ago, 56RAF_Talisman said:

US Sikorsky H-34 transport helicopters leapfrog behind enemy lines carrying troops, rocket launchers and supplies in Korea

Just the sort of new flying opportunities offered if IL-2 goes for Korea.

It is not all about Migs and Sabres by a long chalk.

Also, lots of new dynamic gameplay could be on offer that have not been provided by the IL-2 series yet.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

ah yes yes they will create helicopters when they do Korea, like we have all the various ww2 air stuff here now... more 109, spitfire ... ppl will be lucky if planset have working bombsight on a bomber in Korea game and not only 10 variants of F-86.

Edited January 4, 2023 by CountZero

[Irishratticus72]

35 minutes ago, CountZero said:

ah yes yes they will create helicopters when they do Korea, like we have all the various ww2 air stuff here now... more 109, spitfire ... ppl will be lucky if planset have working bombsight on a bomber in Korea game and not only 10 variants of F-86.

You need to dial back the optimism, you'll have an aneurysm if you're not careful..

Edited January 4, 2023 by Irishratticus72

[Alexmarine]

42 minutes ago, Irishratticus72 said:

You need to dial back the optimism, you'll have an aneurysm if you're not careful..

 

The aneurysm would need to be careful to not get him 

[AEthelraedUnraed]

4 hours ago, Bonnot said:

China and Bad guys.........

Hey there, don't get too political. Wardog will have to ban you.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

After reading this thread I had to go back to the page of the development diary 337 and... well... no... no mention of Korea on it... did I miss something?

 

 

[sevenless]

26 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

After reading this thread I had to go back to the page of the development diary 337 and... well... no... no mention of Korea on it... did I miss something?

 

 

 

You didn´t miss anything. It is just speculations running rampant, as usual...?

[Trooper117]

16 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

did I miss something?

 

It's called optimism...

In previous discussions it was stated by Jason, and I also think Han, that they wanted to do Korea at some stage... at this point in time, when something big has happened to the development team, plus a new project incoming, it's quite good to think in an optimistic way.

It's certainly better than thinking the worst... as quite a few posts have indicated.

 

[CountZero]

3 hours ago, Lusekofte said:

In a devblogg or in the interview. They ruled out Italy and jets. 
To me that rule out Korea , and even if it did not. No one ever mentioned it except Jason. To me it looks like devs would like to do anything else than what Jason said.  Making it even more unlikely. 
I am not negative on what’s happening, quite opposite, but it’s been too long. We are getting great improvements together with hopefully good collector planes. But not a new dlc except for the new thing. And then a new game

Yes they say no Italy and other stuff, but they never said no jets, i never here or read that from them anywhere.

[danielprates]

11 hours ago, Lusekofte said:

In my opinion, or rather guess. There will be no new DLC within this game engine. 
I guess improvements and additions to what we have is all we going to get. Until the new thing. It has been quiet too long. 

 

You know what, that's my gut feeling too. Can't really pinpoint why, maybe it's the carefull choice of words that has been used. There is promisse of a next big thing and updates to GB; but that coukd just mean small-ish updates for GB like skins, bugfuxes etc, while the next big thing may be an entire new game altogether - which may take years and years to develop, and perhaps even, never materialize.

[Mainstay]

Well I’m still hoping it won’t be Korea. Sorry guys but that era and theatre just doesn’t scratch my itch.

 

I really hope we see the pacific or North African part of ww2 

[Guest deleted@83466]

I don’t know if they’ll do it in a module, or just a standalone plane, but I keep thinking me-163 in the gut.  We’re, all just speculating, right?

[mazex]

On 12/29/2022 at 1:38 PM, Cunctator said:

 

Korea ticks all the boxes. A New theatre, a new war, can be marketed to Russian, Chinese and Western audiences. Early jets and high end prop planes, well documented Western and Russian aircraft to model and a lot of the required US assets can be reused for a later Pacific module.

 

Well - as much as we want it, something needs to be noted... I asked my two late teenage sons that have max grades in all subjects in school what they know about the Korea War. "It was in the 50:ies, South Korea / US vs North Korea and to some extent China and Russia?". "What more? Can you summarize what happened in the war?": "Nahh - don't really know anything about the actual war"... "And what aircraft where used?". "No clue"...  "Heard of Mig Alley?". "What???". I guess they same would apply for most that are 25-30 as well.

 

They can quickly separate a Spitfire from a Hurricane in the air on long distance and tell the story that the Hurricane really is more important than people understand. And they can list the most important 4-engined bombers like the B17, B24, B29 and Lancaster with no problems. They know who the Red Baron was and that he flew a Fokker, and that the Mig-29 and Su-27 really are old cold war era aircraft that has survived into the modern days...

 

So how interested would they be in trying out a Korean War simulator? They do play War Thunder from time to time on their own computers and likes to try IL2 and DCS on my computer in VR.

 

And have you seen any Korean War movies / TV series accept M*A*S*H (that is really not about the war)?

 

So from that perspective - the Korean War does not make that much sense unfortunately... But me as a 50 year old nerd would like it a lot  It really hurts that the Pacific theatre requires so much work with ships, map assets, many Japanese and US Navy aircraft... Because they have seen many movies about that and knows that Guadalcanal was the Stalingrad of the Pacifics... They know about Pearl Harbor, Okinawa and Midway. And we sure do as well

 

Edited January 5, 2023 by mazex

[Bonnot]

8 hours ago, Mainstay said:

really hope we see the pacific or North African part of ww2 

 

7 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

We’re, all just speculating, right?

 

North Africa speculating  : what about the birth of a Nation and the ensuing events until...say  1956  ???

From the nostalgic of the BF109 to the glamorous jets of the era there is a lot to satisfy everybody without Heavies, A/C carriers, large towns etc... although they can also be there. Most of late WWII stuff can be recycled -with new paints-  from trucks, halftracks, even Pzr IV.....

And this period is probably most known than Inchon or Chosin  ?

[PB0_Roll]

1 hour ago, mazex said:

 

Well - as much as we want it, something needs to be noted... I asked my two late teenage sons that have max grades in all subjects in school what they know about the Korea War. "It was in the 50:ies, South Korea / US vs North Korea and to some extent China and Russia?". "What more? Can you summarize what happened in the war?": "Nahh - don't really know anything about the actual war"... "And what aircraft where used?". "No clue"...  "Heard of Mig Alley?". "What???". I guess they same would apply for most that are 25-30 as well.

 

 

 

I didn't know anything about eastern front planes bar Yaks (thanks to Normandie Niemen) prior to 2001's IL2 game serie, and I was one who knew more about WW2 than most of my 30 y-o friends (and I knew about F-86s and Mig15s by then !). Well, I learnt with these games as an incentive, just like most will with whatever next module is. Otherwise we'd get stuck in BoB/BoN/Bulge/PH/Midway for ever....

[Lusekofte]

8 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

I don’t know if they’ll do it in a module, or just a standalone plane, but I keep thinking me-163 in the gut.  We’re, all just speculating, right?

Would fit me pretty well. Design bases in crashlandings 

[PB0_Roll]

Me-163 is a must to intercept 4 engine bombers !

 

Oh wait..... ?

[CountZero]

10 hours ago, danielprates said:

 

You know what, that's my gut feeling too. Can't really pinpoint why, maybe it's the carefull choice of words that has been used. There is promisse of a next big thing and updates to GB; but that coukd just mean small-ish updates for GB like skins, bugfuxes etc, while the next big thing may be an entire new game altogether - which may take years and years to develop, and perhaps even, never materialize.

That is clear as day after this DD, i do not expect any more DLCs for GB, only collector airplanes or maps made by others, devs will focus on new project that is also clear is new game with same but upgraded game engine. And for new game they said it could have PTO after first option that is not PTO. 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

1 minute ago, CountZero said:

devs will focus on new project that is also clear is new game with same but upgraded game engine.

 

 

If such is the case, if the new project is a new game incompatible with "Great Battles", that would be nice, indeed, that the devs develop a completely new engine (thus a new game) but simultaneaously adapting the existing content in "Great Battles" to the new game... thus simultaneously creating equivalent account users in the new game, I mean: equivalent to the already existing account users in "Great Battles". Newcomers to the new game, those never having purchased any "Great Battles" product, would ensure the funding of the "new project" at 100%, and the loyal "Great Battles" users would be rewarded with granted access to the equivalent content in the new game, nevertheless paying for the 100% new content (as of launch of the alleged new game). But at this point we don't know if whether or not the "new project" is a new game.

 

 

[CountZero]

1 minute ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

 

If such is the case, if the new project is a new game incompatible with "Great Battles", that would be nice, indeed, that the devs develop a completely new engine (thus a new game) but simultaneaously adapting the existing content in "Great Battles" to the new game... thus simultaneously creating equivalent account users in the new game, I mean: equivalent to the already existing account users in "Great Battles". Newcomers to the new game, those never having purchased any "Great Battles" product, would ensure the funding of the "new project" at 100%, and the loyal "Great Battles" users would be rewarded with granted access to the equivalent content in the new game, nevertheless paying for the 100% new content (as of launch of the alleged new game). But at this point we don't know if whether or not the "new project" is a new game.

 

 

This makes it clear:

There are ambitious goals ahead, and the team is gathering strength and resources to reach them. Here’s what we have planned for the next year:
1. Bring the production of the new large-scale project to full speed;
2. Complete the development of a number of new base technologies for the new project, which we started working on last year already;
3. Develop new approaches to the user experience in the next project, taking into account all the previous experience (both our own and that of our competitors);
4. Continue releasing new content for the Great Battles world;
5. Add new employees to the team, increasing the number of team members by 1.5 times in total;
6. Establish partnerships with teams and enthusiasts who will help us in the development of the Great Battles world, as well as in the creation of content for the new project.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

No, it doesn't make it clear. What you say, CountZero is exactly what I said myself at first. My first reading of DD 337 was exactly like yours, but I recently changed my mind. Now I think that this "new project" is not that clear. The "Great Battles world" could be World War II in Europe and the next project could be another theatre of operations with improved technologies (a game inside the game). The devs may have decided that the existing players have access to "Great Battles" as it is and, if they want to benefit of the new technologies, be forced to pay and install an application that simply launches an improved version of "Great Battles" in a different game user interface. I'd be the happiest man on earth if this hypothesis was false and if, on the contrary, the "new project" was a completely new game, even if I have to pay it separately and start a new line of payabale modules... but at this point we have no confirmation of that. We know nothing in fact. We simply need to be patient.

 

 

[Robli]

Unless it is a language issue, the very last message that CountZero highlighted "development of the Great Battles world, as well as in the creation of content for the new project" indicates that the "new project" is not "Great Battles world", otherwise there would not be "as well as" between these two things. Also, if in point 4 they promise "content for the Great Battles world" and in point 6 they promise "content for the new project" then that also indicates that these are two different things.

[US103_Baer]

Can't rule out the eventual porting of GB planes into 'new project engine' as well.

They did it with RoF > FC and, for the most part, users were happy enough to pay again and benefit from the much improved tech in GB engine.

 

Edited January 5, 2023 by US103_Baer

[Archie]

I mean, they could clear up all this confusion in one short DD...

[simfan2015]

3 minutes ago, Archie said:

they could clear up all this confusion in one short DD...

This was a DD to clear things up !

Are they expected to clear up the ... clear up ?

[Archie]

1 minute ago, simfan2015 said:

This was a DD to clear things up !

Are they expected to clear up the ... clear up ?

I really think they should...

[Bonnot]

1 hour ago, US103_Baer said:

They did it with RoF > FC and, for the most part, users were happy enough to pay again and benefit from the much improved tech in GB engine.

 

 

Is it possible to have a statistic on the number of users happy to pay again  ?

From who I know and read here and there it is quite mixed - an opinion I share !

[343KKT_Kintaro]

3 hours ago, Robli said:

Unless it is a language issue, the very last message that CountZero highlighted "development of the Great Battles world, as well as in the creation of content for the new project" indicates that the "new project" is not "Great Battles world", otherwise there would not be "as well as" between these two things. Also, if in point 4 they promise "content for the Great Battles world" and in point 6 they promise "content for the new project" then that also indicates that these are two different things.

 

 

Robli, I think, after the published videos in the last few months, and after reading DD 337, that I was one of the first, if not the first, to say exactly what you say, presenting the very same demonstrative argument and even assuming that the "new project" is a new game, thus incompatible with "Great Battles". Now I changed my mind not because I pretend that the "new project" is not a new game, but because I realise that, in fact, we don't have enough evidence of what exactly the "new project" is. You said "then that also indicates that these are two different things", and I do agree, they are two different things, sure, but out of the two, we only know that one is "Great Battles" (or, more mysteriously "the Great Battles world"), we don't know what exactly is the one that's left, we don't know what the hell is the other thing, the so mentioned "new project". Dealing with the "new project" we have no confirmation of compatibility or incompatibilty with "Great Battles", we don't have it. It's too early to speculate that much.

 

 

3 hours ago, US103_Baer said:

Can't rule out the eventual porting of GB planes into 'new project engine' as well.

They did it with RoF > FC and, for the most part, users were happy enough to pay again and benefit from the much improved tech in GB engine.

 

 

 

What they did with "Rise of Flight" was the creation of an entirely new flight sim set in WWII because there was a mass of simmers ready to pay for a playable survey at the time. The decision of dropping RoF thus making the "Rise of Flight" possesors pay again for "Flying Circus" happened later, many years after the release of the first module in the Great Battles series. The situation now is completely different. The feeling back in 2013/2014 wasn't "hey I do possess this game engine through "Rise of Flight", why should I pay for a porting into a WWII flight sim?", the feeling, back in the early days of "IL2-BoS", was "hey, I'm paying for a new WWII combat flight sim, cool, let's give it a try". The situaton now is completely different because most WWII fans have a satisfactory game in the "Great Battles" series, so they won't be happy paying for the same content if not in a completely new game. I really hope the "new project" is a completely new game, developed from scratch, completely incompatible with "Great Battles" AND presenting all the features, systems and flight & damage models that any simmer dreams for a WWII aviation simulator.

 

 

2 hours ago, Archie said:

I mean, they could clear up all this confusion in one short DD...

 

 

They won't, they are happy and smiling when looking at our speculations...

 

 

2 hours ago, simfan2015 said:

This was a DD to clear things up !

Are they expected to clear up the ... clear up ?

 

 

As per my response to Archie...

 

 

2 hours ago, Archie said:

I really think they should...

 

 

As per my response to simfan2015...

 

 

1 hour ago, Bonnot said:

Is it possible to have a statistic on the number of users happy to pay again  ?

From who I know and read here and there it is quite mixed - an opinion I share !

 

 

Those who are happy for paying twice the same content = 0

 

Those who are happy for paying a completely new game they never tried, at least after having watched some in-game gameplay in YouTube or other source = most of video games player base worldwide, I'd say.

 

 

[BlitzPig_EL]

1 hour ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

Those who are happy for paying a completely new game they never tried, at least after having watched some in-game gameplay in YouTube or other source = most of video games player base worldwide, I'd say.

 

 

Precisely.

 

Just as I was happy to pay for original IL2 after the total clown show that was MS CFS2, and CloD, after that, and Rise of Flight, then Great Battles, and all it's expansions since.

 

I will purchase the new thing as soon as it is available for pre-order.

 

It's time for a change.

Advance or perish, choose one.

Edited January 5, 2023 by BlitzPig_EL

[343KKT_Kintaro]

2 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

I will purchase the new thing as soon as it is available for pre-order.

 

It's time for a change.

 

 

Provided that "the new thing" is a new game. As I said, we don't know what it is but... yes, it's time for a change. "Cliffs of Dover" still is in the thick of WWII combat flight sims because the devs are improving it and we don't know if whether or not they'll succeed in their "visual update" (fingers crossed). At any rate, buggy or not, "Cliffs of Dover" presents the latest "modern-standards" core engine in the domain of combat flight sims. Release dates as follow:

 

2008 = DCS

2009 = Riseof Flight/Great Battles

2011 = Cliffs of Dover

 

Except from the set of B-17 games by MicroProse... no developer since the 2000s had ever try to develop a completely new core engine. The three core engines in the list above are really the latest and all three started to be modeled by 2003. This is 20 years my friends... as BlitzPig_EL said, isn't really time for a change? Dammit, sure it is!

 

 

[JG5_Schuck]

6 hours ago, CountZero said:

This makes it clear:

There are ambitious goals ahead, and the team is gathering strength and resources to reach them. Here’s what we have planned for the next year:
1. Bring the production of the new large-scale project to full speed;
2. Complete the development of a number of new base technologies for the new project, which we started working on last year already;
3. Develop new approaches to the user experience in the next project, taking into account all the previous experience (both our own and that of our competitors);
4. Continue releasing new content for the Great Battles world;
5. Add new employees to the team, increasing the number of team members by 1.5 times in total;
6. Establish partnerships with teams and enthusiasts who will help us in the development of the Great Battles world, as well as in the creation of content for the new project.

I read into that IL2 GB will continue as is, adding more content (i mean an Il2 is a WWII aircraft) and a new project named something else will run along side,
and with the addition of new technologies would probably eventually supersede it..
I would certainly like to see some flyable 'heavies' in GB, even if the gunner positions are just AI..... maybe this would be an acceptable work around..
And a more comprehensive DM would be nice, but not essential to the game...... 
I hope for either a Murmansk, Leningrad or Malta map (or fingers crossed all three)... whatever happens, GB will be around for a bit yet...

[PB0_Roll]

I didn't appreiate AT ALL re buying the WW1 stuff, and not being provided a career yet,so barely flew it, maybe once or twice to test VR in an open cockpit but that's all. Will probably fly some FC2 career if/when it's out.

 

New game better be a very much more rewarding experience if I'm expected to buy planes that are already in GB/Clod/DCS, and I'm done with supporting devs with buying early access unless it's useful to what I can already use (ie buying early BON was useful, to fly BON planes that fitted BoBp planeset).

[343KKT_Kintaro]

7 minutes ago, PB0_Roll said:

I didn't appreiate AT ALL re buying the WW1 stuff

 

 

The only chance of redemption of 1CGS for having dropped "Rise of Flight" in the years 2013 to 2015, is to fully release the entire series of "Flying Circus" modules + all necessary collector planes. We talk about three modules (30 aircraft) + 10 collector planes so that the 40 "Rise of Flight" planes are available again under an equivalent form in the "Great Battles" simulated environment. Until 2020 approximately, I used to say that for 1914-1918 I prefered "Rise of Flight" rather than "Flying Circus"... but then came to "Great Battles" the new pilot's health system, with progressive fatigue and blackouts, and the new clouds and new weather system. This is why now, even on a flat 2D-monitor, thus not even taking VR into account, "Flying Circus" as a simulation is far superior  to "Rise of Flight", at least to me. But last news, if I got it right, are good news: the plan is to complete the "Flying Circus" modules and the collector planes so that all the "Rise of Flight" content is rescued. For the campaigns and the career mode in "Flying Circus"... fingers crossed.

 

 

[US103_Baer]

 

4 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

What they did with "Rise of Flight" was the creation of an entirely new flight sim set in WWII because there was a mass of simmers ready to pay for a playable survey at the time. The decision of dropping RoF thus making the "Rise of Flight" possesors pay again for "Flying Circus" happened later, many years after the release of the first module in the Great Battles series. The situation now is completely different.

 

Is it different now? The new engine will have its own new content and modules. Then they could port GB in. Seems very much the same to me.

 

Of course lots of people will say they won't re-buy etc, and while GB world is still good and top notch, why would you. But at some point the new engine is going to look real attractive and GB pretty dated. Business opp!

[BlitzPig_EL]

If they get the back end coding sorted so that there is efficient use of multicore CPUs, get the AI's heavy consumption of computer cycles tamed, and make the sim able to handle large numbers of AI flights and ground assets, they will come, in droves.

[CountZero]

13 minutes ago, US103_Baer said:

 

 

Is it different now? The new engine will have its own new content and modules. Then they could port GB in. Seems very much the same to me.

 

Of course lots of people will say they won't re-buy etc, and while GB world is still good and top notch, why would you. But at some point the new engine is going to look real attractive and GB pretty dated. Business opp!

Will that point be when next new project is finished in 2-3 years time, i doubt it, i can not see how can they make new game be so big jump to make GB dated compared to it, using same gameengine just upgrading it... if RoF was suported, ppl would still be there... so what is my problem with this 2 game thing, GB will be forced to be bad to make new project more tempting no mather what... especialy if preorders are not as expected.

Edited January 5, 2023 by CountZero