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

[343KKT_Kintaro]

 

3 minutes ago, US103_Baer said:

Then they could port GB in.

 

 

This is not how porting works, not at all. When you have a given core engine, you can port it into a new platform... or a new game...

 

A new platform: for example, "IL-2 Sturmovik: 1946" (a game for PC) was ported into "IL-2 Sturmovik: Birds of Prey" (a game for consoles). Then 

 

A new game: for example, "Rise of Flight" (a WWI game coded as a free to play) was ported into a "IL-2 Sturmovik: Battle of Stalingrad" (a WWII game coded as a modular system).

 

But you do not port "content". You cannot say, for example, "hey, Wings Over the Reich has poor content, very few flyables... let's port Great Battles content into Wings Over the Reich so that there are dozens of flyables in Wings Over the Reich". It doesn't work that way, sorry, there are severe incompatibilities between core engines.

 

 

Just now, BlitzPig_EL said:

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.

 

 

My suspicion is that plenty of Great Battles limitations fed up our dear devs (difficulties with drop tanks, with carriers, reduced numbers of players & aircraft in servers, etc.) and what you say is one of the capabilities aimed by the "new project"...

 

 

[US103_Baer]

14 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

This is not how porting works, not at all. When you have a given core engine, you can port it into a new platform... or a new game...

 

Semantics. WW2 and WW1 GB planes that didn't have to be started from scratch ending up being resold in the new platform/engine which initially launches with new and separate content modules.
It seemed a possibility and very similar to what they'd already done.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

1 minute ago, US103_Baer said:

It seemed a possibility and very similar to what they'd already done.

 

 

PROVIDED that the "new project" is the same core engine of "Great Battles".

 

 

[Enceladus828]

On 1/5/2023 at 12:32 PM, PB0_Roll said:

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

Yeah, as I have WoFF, I’ll only get the Snipe or the Siemens if on this one occasion I can fly just it and no other WW1 planes over the Western Front map, or there’s an installment with planes or a map that wasn’t in RoF.

[spreckair]

On 1/5/2023 at 5:55 PM, BlitzPig_EL said:

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.

I love flying WWII air combat, and if a new game is better than the old one, I will buy into it.  I suspect that there a lot more like me who will also.

On 1/5/2023 at 1:09 PM, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

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

Well, if it is WWII air combat, it can't avoid being the same content; history is history.  But if they were to rebuild Battle of Normandy into the start of a new series, with dense ground units (like the real event), or with huge bomber formations, then yes, I would buy it again on pre-order and at full price.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

1 hour ago, spreckair said:

it can't avoid being the same content; history is history

 

 

Back in the 1990s, players who also were buyers... played "Dawn Patrol" (1994, a WWI combat flight sim) and they also played "Red Baron 3D" (1998, equally a WWI combat flight sim). The same buyers flew Fokker D.VIIs in both games, but they didn't pay twice for the same content in the core engine, they payed for different games, they payed for different products. A Fokker D.VII in "Dawn Patrol" is like a Fokker D.VII in "Red Baron 3D", but it's not the same content, it's different content in a different game in a different core engine. Those who purchased the "Rise of Flight" content are paying now for the same content in the same core engine... although in a different funding mode ("free-to-play mode" vs "modular mode"). "Rise of Flight" development could have been kept as "the" game for WWI aviation and "Great Battles" could have been kept as a game that specialises on WWII content only. Using the "Great Battles" success to sustain "Rise of Flight" as a separated game. But "Rise of Flight" was dropped. Thus, those who feel they are paying twice for the same content... feel right. I'm not unhappy with "Flying Circus", I'm sure I'll end up by buying all three "Flying Circus" modules and all future WWI collector planes in "Great Battles". I only pretend that those feeling having payed twice... really payed twice. I'm among them (I do possess all the content in "Rise of Flight") but I'm not in a rant against 1CGS. Believe me, I'm not.

 

 

[Charlo-VRde]

I bought all of the Rise of Flight content as it was released, then willingly bought all of the FC content so I could experience those same planes in VR. Worth it for me.

Edited January 8, 2023 by Charlo-VR

[343KKT_Kintaro]

23 minutes ago, Charlo-VR said:

I bought all of the Rise of Flight content as it was released, then willingly bought all of the FC content so I could experience those same planes in VR. Worth it for me.

 

 

Could have been in VR in a further evolution of "Rise of Flight", thus not paying again for the same content, that was my point.

 

On the other hand, it's nevertheless advantageous to have one WWI simulator and one WWII simulator in the same game and in the same GUI. As I said, I'm not in a rant against 1CGS.

 

 

Edited January 8, 2023 by 343KKT_Kintaro
On the hand --> On the other hand

[sevenless]

17 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Could have been in VR in a further evolution of "Rise of Flight", thus not paying again for the same content, that was my point.

 

Customer benefit is always in the eye of the beholder. The market is regulating that.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

39 minutes ago, sevenless said:

 

Customer benefit is always in the eye of the beholder. The market is regulating that.

 

 

I said "Could have been in VR in a further evolution of "Rise of Flight", thus not paying again for the same content"... which is a fact. I accept the fact without serious complaint while others really complain about it. So yes, your point is fair enough to me, but it's a different point. My point is due to the fact that I was a fan of "Rise of Flight" even before its release. In the mid 2000s, the work in progress that was being shared by dStrict and Gennadich Team was simply mind-blowing, and the game was very good at release by Neoqb and 777 Studios in 2009. 1CGS and Jason could have not have dropped "Rise of Flight", the market regulations have nothing to do with their decisions. Again, I have nothing against your point, but my point was different. Cheers!

 

 

Edited January 9, 2023 by 343KKT_Kintaro
grammar corrections

[sevenless]

2 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

1CGS and Jason could have not have dropped "Rise of Flight", the market regulations has nothing to do with their decisions. Again, I have nothing against your point, but my point was different. Cheers!

 

Got it. Yep with hindsight that might be correct. Problem as I see it is funding for continuing work on RoF. My guesstimate is that this scenario would not have worked out commercially.

[mspyker13]

I just dropped a massive 170USD... I really hope this game's development continues.

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

2 hours ago, mspyker13 said:

I just dropped a massive 170USD... I really hope this game's development continues.

We all do...many of the modules are very good and as a core to build on, GB has a lot going for it tbh, but there are many improvements to be made that require big changes to be sure.

[Bonnot]

On 1/9/2023 at 1:01 PM, sevenless said:

Customer benefit is always in the eye of the beholder. The market is regulating that.

I just had a look at the financial results of Ubisoft -one of the "Major" - and the perspective with games reported  or cancelled, market losses, reducing workmanship is not on the optimistic side for investors  ? ?

[simfan2015]

Almost 2 weeks (?)

... any new type ofDD or whatever would be appreciated.

[babymihai]

La IAR 80 se mai lucreaza sau a fost abandonat ?

[343KKT_Kintaro]

23 minutes ago, babymihai said:

La IAR 80 se mai lucreaza sau a fost abandonat ?

 

 

Din câte știu eu, IAR 80 nu a fost abandonat, acest avion este încă în curs de dezvoltare și, în principiu, va fi disponibil în curând. Am folosit un corector automat online pentru a vă răspunde, sper ca acest răspuns să fie satisfăcător pentru dumneavoastră.

 

 

[Wardog5711]

Yes, the IAR is still under development by a third party.  

As posted in the December 2 DD: The visual 3D model of IAR-80/81 is being developed by two famous enthusiasts - Ivan Shirshov (3D model) and Martin =ICDP= Catney (exterior textures). We hope they'll finish their part of the work in the coming months and we'll be able to start the work on its FM and systems.

And please, lets keep the posts and responses to English in the forum. 

 

[Jade_Monkey]

 @Wardog5711, the team mentioned two new variants of existing planes. One is the Bf109G6AS, i forget what the other one was. Can you remind us?

Edited January 14, 2023 by Jade_Monkey

[Wardog5711]

The Spitfire bubbletop is the only other variant that I recall being confirmed as inbound back in DD330.

It was planned for a Spring release.

[76IAP-Black]

Don't forget the La-5, i think it was the 109 and the La.

 

The spitfire wasn't counted in so far 

[mspyker13]

Not at all complaining there. The game is amazing. All I wish for now is Battle of Britain. La7, Yak3, TA152, etc would be awesome ?

[PatrickAWlson]

On 1/5/2023 at 5:59 PM, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

My suspicion is that plenty of Great Battles limitations fed up our dear devs (difficulties with drop tanks, with carriers, reduced numbers of players & aircraft in servers, etc.) and what you say is one of the capabilities aimed by the "new project"...

 

 

 

This.  I can guarantee that a new game is not being written completely from the ground up with no reuse.  However, I suspect that the changes are so intrusive and transformational that they will need a very long development time.  1C cannot afford to spend that much money on development and then give it away as a free upgrade.  So we will see IL2 2.  Or  3.  Or whatever it will be called.  We will have to buy all of the planes again because the new standard will be higher.  AI will probably be a rewrite.  The FMs and DMs will largely derive from existing planes with modifications.  

 

For me, the best comp is RoF to FC.  With FC you get VR and mostly better AI.  You get better DMs and 3d models.  Better skins.  However, the experience is more evolutionary than revolutionary.  

 

Edit: I said AI will probably be a rewrite.  However, it is obvious that the ROF AI was largely ported into GB.  The same AI issues that existed in RoF were in GB.  So let me rephrase - AI HAD BETTER be a rewrite, otherwise they are wasting their time and everybody else's time.

Edited January 26, 2023 by PatrickAWlson

[343KKT_Kintaro]

Time will tell Patrick, time will tell!

 

Other than that, I do agree with what you say about RoF and FC. After the release of the first Flying Circus, I spent almost two years saying that I still prefered Rise of Flight... but then by 2020 or 2021, came the update for the pilot's state of health, the new clouds and the new weather engine. Those improvements were sufficient enough to make me say that, finally, at last, Flying Circus is better than Rise of Flight. But I hve 10 flyables with Flying Circus and I still have 40 flyables with Rise of Flight. Pity.

 

 

[71st_AH_Rob_XR-R]

51 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Time will tell Patrick, time will tell!

 

Other than that, I do agree with what you say about RoF and FC. After the release of the first Flying Circus, I spent almost two years saying that I still prefered Rise of Flight... but then by 2020 or 2021, came the update for the pilot's state of health, the new clouds and the new weather engine. Those improvements were sufficient enough to make me say that, finally, at last, Flying Circus is better than Rise of Flight. But I hve 10 flyables with Flying Circus and I still have 40 flyables with Rise of Flight. Pity.

 

 

And a lot more map to fly them over

 

[Bernard_IV]

All I want is a Corsair, carrier, and a few enemies.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

16 minutes ago, Bernard_IV said:

All I want is a Corsair, carrier, and a few enemies.

 

 

My hierarchy plans to attack Pearl Harbor one of these days, so be ready... the problem is that nor you neither I have the required simulator for that... unless you are ready to use "IL-2 Sturmovik: 1946"...

 

 

[mb339pan]

It sounds like a goodbye, like it did with Rise of Flight

 

 

[Styx13]

Dear Devs, 

 

First of all, congrat for the efforts made in 2022. Having read the all content of this forum (= community wishlist) I hope that you will find the right way. 

 

As a first step I think it is not so difficult to create a Channel Front (1941-1943) or Battle of Britain (1940) campaign based on the existing map (Normandy) and planes. It could raise your funds to continue the work on a really professional WWII sim. (I would pay for such campaigns.) Please concentrate on the small(er) steps (fuel systems, radio issues, finetuning dynamic campaign engine = improving SP/MP vs. AI experience) before announcing a new "Starship-Landing-on-the-Moon" Project, which will - we all know - never be finished (like Tank Battles).

 

If you start thinking on a new platform, you will loose many of us again for ages. Starting a giga-project means ages in development (remember BoN), whilst the Il-2 GB series remains the same in game experience. And if you won't enhance the game experience (with small but important details, complexity, with AI, with a better dynamic campaign engine etc.) it will be boring after 5 mins (like now) and most customer will be forced to play with the ridicoluos Warthunder franchise. (DCS is in the same sit like Il-2 GB, still concentrates on the graphical issues and newer plane types instead of developing the playabilty, the overall hardcore sim experience.) 

 

Thank you for your attention. 

 

 

 

[Trooper117]

1 hour ago, Styx13 said:

most customer will be forced to play with the ridicoluos Warthunder franchise.

 

Where on earth did you come to that conclusion?... unless the player base has all become 14 year olds that will never happen.

Have a cup of coffee mate, then allow yourself to return to normal.

[Styx13]

Hope you are right.... 

 

But please concentrate on the whole context of my opinion. Thanks. 

[Rhino-1938]

On 2/25/2023 at 2:13 AM, Trooper117 said:

most customer will be forced to play with the ridicoluos Warthunder franchise.

 

On 2/25/2023 at 2:13 AM, Trooper117 said:

Where on earth did you come to that conclusion?... unless the player base has all become 14 year olds that will never happen.

Have a cup of coffee mate, then allow yourself to return to normal.

Well i am 84 and i play war thunder. I play with my 2 sons, and 3 grandsons on play station which they have. they are all over 14 years old, and i have introduced some of  them that have a PC to GB and DCS. It amazes me that some people look down on war thunder as if they are superior to those that play it. I look at it as a good training ground for possible serious mil-sim players. War thunder has good graphics, looks good and is easy to use in vr, and works with all of the accessories you need to fly in cockpit. It has a BIG selection of aircraft, tankls, and ships and a lot of people (over 14) playing it (just my 2 cents)

[dburne]

57 minutes ago, Rhino-1938 said:

 

Well i am 84 and i play war thunder. I play with my 2 sons, and 3 grandsons on play station which they have. they are all over 14 years old, and i have introduced some of  them that have a PC to GB and DCS. It amazes me that some people look down on war thunder as if they are superior to those that play it. I look at it as a good training ground for possible serious mil-sim players. War thunder has good graphics, looks good and is easy to use in vr, and works with all of the accessories you need to fly in cockpit. It has a BIG selection of aircraft, tankls, and ships and a lot of people (over 14) playing it (just my 2 cents)

 

And now they even have a version for the Playstation 2 VR with PS5.

I personally have never tried War Thunder but obviously it has quite a following.

Edited March 12, 2023 by dburne

[Rhino-1938]

The problem they will have on the PS5 version is sony has the accessories locked to thrusmaster hotus 4 which is the only authorized JS/throttle . which is like a toy comapared to other accesories. one of its reason for a huge following is cross play between console and pc (something other sims shoild look at to increase their members.) the new comsole like ps5 and xbox x are capable enough  Gb or DCS

Edited March 12, 2023 by Rhino-1938

[chiliwili69]

9 hours ago, Rhino-1938 said:

The problem they will have on the PS5 version is sony has the accessories locked to thrusmaster hotus 4 which is the only authorized JS/throttle . which is like a toy comapared to other accesories.

A bit off topic but,

I bought 2 weeks ago the PSVR2 just to test that only-ps5 VR headset (the PSVR2 is still in the box until my son finish their exams this week).

I saw then last week that Aces of Thunder was annouced, so I think I will try it and perhaps will give the opportunity for my son to like this kind of games, but with a Joystick!

You say Thrusmaster Hotus 4 is the only one authotized, is it really like that? Where Sony said that?

I have find other links who say other PS5 joysticks: https://www.pccomponentes.com/hori-flight-stick-joystick-de-vuelo-para-ps5-ps4-ps3-pc

[CountZero]

you just play with gamepad, no need for sticks or pedals or hotas for consols

[Rhino-1938]

12 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

A bit off topic but,

I bought 2 weeks ago the PSVR2 just to test that only-ps5 VR headset (the PSVR2 is still in the box until my son finish their exams this week).

I saw then last week that Aces of Thunder was annouced, so I think I will try it and perhaps will give the opportunity for my son to like this kind of games, but with a Joystick!

You say Thrusmaster Hotus 4 is the only one authotized, is it really like that? Where Sony said that?

I have find other links who say other PS5 joysticks: https://www.pccomponentes.com/hori-flight-stick-joystick-de-vuelo-para-ps5-ps4-ps3-pc

I donot think the hori will work  https://stores.horiusa.com/hotas-flight-stick-for-playstation4/ i have the ps5 and have tried everything i have and only the thrustmaster hotus 4 will work. all of my js, throttle, rudder pedals will work on the ps4 but not the ps5

[chiliwili69]

9 hours ago, Rhino-1938 said:

all of my js, throttle, rudder pedals will work on the ps4 but not the ps5

 

https://blog.playstation.com/2020/08/03/playstation-5-answering-your-questions-on-compatible-ps4-peripherals-accessories/

 

Seems that even Sony don´t confirm or denny anything. It also depends on games. Let´s see at the release of the game.