The status of the yet-to-be-announced title

[Guest deleted@83466]

1 hour ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

But does DCS do it better?  They have no correct map, their F86 is a post Korea model, and they have no period correct ground units, or ancillary aircraft types.  Mostly what they have is a good cockpit procedure simulator, and a lot of buttons, all set in a sterile world that depicts what is in essence a modern airshow.

Do it better than what?  Two completely hypothetical “survey sim” airplanes, that you won’t see for a few years even if they are actually making them, compared to hi-fi modules that have existed for years, that you might actually have to learn something about to fly and fight? I don’t think there is anything “sterile” about that sim.  Know that not everyone shares your opinion.  Do you even have those two planes?

 

 

Edited October 13, 2023 by SeaSerpent
Toned it down.

[BlitzPig_EL]

No I don't.  Their economic model is something I want no part of.  I certainly could learn to do the complex procedures that DCS has, I choose not to.

 

A pity that my point went over your head at Mach 1.  Normally I am in agreement with your posts.

[Guest deleted@83466]

Notice I toned down my wording a bit, because I came off a little more rude than I should have.  But if you’ve never used those planes in the other sim, you probably shouldn’t just write them off as too-many-buttoned-air-show planes in a sterile world.  

[MAJ_stug41]

There really isnt much to learn, and dcs does have auto-start like il2. As long as I am forced to wait like in il2, id rather have something to do, so I generally enjoy and prefer startups in dcs or clod.

[Lusekofte]

3 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

But does DCS do it better? 

Yes 

It took some years for me and my mates to close the door on GB. But when we did there seem to be no way back for us. 
To me there are 3 options, DCS, clod and MSFS

Some mates just disappeared from sim all together. Since the very beginning GB leaked just about as many flyers as they gained. Lately they gain minimal and loose a lot. It is not about what sim are best. It is what people prefer to spend their time on 

Edited October 13, 2023 by Lusekofte

[LukeFF]

49 minutes ago, Lusekofte said:

Lately they gain minimal and loose a lot.

 

Not true in the least. ?

[Guest deleted@83466]

IL-2 Sturmovik, the present incarnation, is one of my favorite games of all times.  And before that RoF.   I played IL-2 for almost 5 years and thousands of hours. I don’t think any game has captured my fancy for so long.   But then I got bored with it, with so much playing, and I would need some novelty to continue.  It’s really that simple.  I look forward to seeing what the developers are making.  Maybe I’ll want it, maybe I won’t.  I’m a “high maintenance” flight simmer, lol?

 

 

Edited October 14, 2023 by SeaSerpent

[Panzerlang]

2 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

Notice I toned down my wording a bit, because I came off a little more rude than I should have.  But if you’ve never used those planes in the other sim, you probably shouldn’t just write them off as too-many-buttoned-air-show planes in a sterile world.  

But they are. I mastered the Mig15 (manual everything) in DCS, then tried to use it in combat. Obviously SP was a total waste of time so I tried MP. Tumbleweed. On occasion there'd be a handful of players on the server (only one was doing 'Korea') and they used Hercules as B29 stand-ins.

So yeah, awesome plane but a bit like owning a Ferrari with nowhere to run it but the driveway. I'm blown away that DCS still exists actually.

[Guest deleted@83466]

Oh my

I might just have to drink too much tonight and start a flamewar over this type of tribalism (edit: and it’s all friendly trash talk to me because we are talking a video game).  I’ll bet you aren’t worth a damn in MiG-15.

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, SeaSerpent said:

Oh my

 

I might just have to drink too much tonight and start a flamewar over this type of tribalism.  I’ll bet you aren’t worth a damn in MiG-15.

? 
I wish I had time to make a photo of Robert Conrad with a tiny F-86 sitting his shoulder. 

[Lord_Pyro]

On 10/7/2023 at 10:59 PM, Blooddawn1942 said:

Whether we are going to fight in the sky over 37 Spain or the Korean peninsula 53. I'm quite sure the dudes will deliver. 

 

Sure I'd like to have more transparency but it is as it is. Alas, so long I enjoy what we have in GB, move the F15e around the Sinai Map and care about my daily life. ?

WE are your daily life!

[Gambit21]

[Guest deleted@83466]

Those rigid guys never had a minute of fun in their lives, did they?

[Gambit21]

3 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

Those rigid guys never had a minute of fun in their lives, did they?

The only known photo of a smiling MiG 15 pilot

 

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

2 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

Those rigid guys never had a minute of fun in their lives, did they?

What?  That photo just screams fun guy.  ?

[Lusekofte]

14 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

IL-2 Sturmovik, the present incarnation, is one of my favorite games of all times.  And before that RoF.   I played IL-2 for almost 5 years and thousands of hours. I don’t think any game has captured my fancy for so long.   But then I got bored with it, with so much playing, and I would need some novelty to continue.  It’s really that simple.  I look forward to seeing what the developers are making.  Maybe I’ll want it, maybe I won’t.  I’m a “high maintenance” flight simmer, lol?

 

 

You are right I enjoyed it long time myself. And I hope this new thing will be a way back for me. Old IL 2 was for me longest continuous flying. And I flown clod since it came out but much more sporadic. 
I wish this sim all the best.  

[dburne]

26 minutes ago, Lusekofte said:

You are right I enjoyed it long time myself. And I hope this new thing will be a way back for me. Old IL 2 was for me longest continuous flying. And I flown clod since it came out but much more sporadic. 
I wish this sim all the best.  

 

I tip my hat to you on that one - you were very brave! I thought it was biggest gaming mess I had ever seen. I did run it some after the guys got their hands on it to fix some things. 

[Lusekofte]

2 hours ago, dburne said:

 

I tip my hat to you on that one - you were very brave! I thought it was biggest gaming mess I had ever seen. I did run it some after the guys got their hands on it to fix some things. 

I find clod very well done. Always have. In the start some Stuka attacks on convoys. Still find the cockpits marvellous and best ever damage model. 
Flying bombers in clod is just great. Big maps to hide in and if attacked a complex damage system make a return very exiting if you not fatal damaged. And parking behind a bomber do punish the attacker. All things Gb do not have. But it take time. If one fly clod you need to know you have time

[deathmisser]

On 10/13/2023 at 1:12 PM, BlitzPig_EL said:

But does DCS do it better?  They have no correct map, their F86 is a post Korea model, and they have no period correct ground units, or ancillary aircraft types.  Mostly what they have is a good cockpit procedure simulator, and a lot of buttons, all set in a sterile world that depicts what is in essence a modern airshow.

For me the ground side of the module is as important as the air side most if not all modules interchange in some way or another.

A Korean module wouldn't be able to do this not only would you need a new map but almost a new set of aircraft and ground assets too.

 

I suppose sticking to WW2 is not only logical for marketing but reusability also. For context BON & BP and be class as a double act or a part series

Same can be said for all of the eastern front modules. 

 

From that point of view I can't see how the team can benefit from Korea from a asset point of view. 

[Gambit21]

3 hours ago, deathmisser said:

For me the ground side of the module is as important as the air side most if not all modules interchange in some way or another.

A Korean module wouldn't be able to do this not only would you need a new map but almost a new set of aircraft and ground assets too.

 

I suppose sticking to WW2 is not only logical for marketing but reusability also. For context BON & BP and be class as a double act or a part series

Same can be said for all of the eastern front modules. 

 

From that point of view I can't see how the team can benefit from Korea from a asset point of view. 

I know what you’re saying, but this is mostly the same boat when they go PTO anyway with a few exceptions. What you’re missing is that the “sameness” of previous modules is not something that they (wisely) want to carry forward. This was quite obvious IMO from watching the Q/A.

[Gambit21]

9 hours ago, Lusekofte said:

I find clod very well done. Always have. In the start some Stuka attacks on convoys. Still find the cockpits marvellous and best ever damage model. 

Bought it on release day - Wouldn’t even run. I uninstalled immediately and never bothered again.

[CountZero]

8 hours ago, deathmisser said:

For me the ground side of the module is as important as the air side most if not all modules interchange in some way or another.

A Korean module wouldn't be able to do this not only would you need a new map but almost a new set of aircraft and ground assets too.

 

I suppose sticking to WW2 is not only logical for marketing but reusability also. For context BON & BP and be class as a double act or a part series

Same can be said for all of the eastern front modules. 

 

From that point of view I can't see how the team can benefit from Korea from a asset point of view. 

Planty of GA in Korea war.

 

Many of ww2 ground units got used in that war also.

 

How did they manage to make BoBp after 3 east front dlcs, they anounced it normaly like any previous dlc, and made it in less then 2 years from anouncment, and its all new assets, map totaly differant then east front they were only making at time, units buildings, airplanes itd. and they made it in 2 years top with anouncing it early.

So you now knowing all that, belive that they are doing some dlc for this game, using existing stuff , but why are they then not sure in anouncing it its already year time pased them working on it, in that amount that they are afraid anounce it even, but they are using existing gb assets, not making totaly new stuff or front or war, sticking to east or west ww2 front like you think. Past work shows that they are capable to do totaly new stuff for this game in 2 year time, now they have more ppl and sudenly they cant ?

 

How any of that makes any logic to you, its clear they are making new game , not conected to this one, and training new ppl on adding updates to this game while veterans make stuff needed for new game, and when your making new game you do not care about assets in this one, they make no impact on war you plan to make for new game. Then you, need more then 2 year, you cant be sure what youll be able to make and you cant anounce it early.

 

If they are just making next dlc for this game, italy 43, poland 45 , channel 42 or what not where they can build on existing stuff in game now, they would anounce it a year ago, as you can be sure youll be able to make all you promise in anouncment, like they could do for previous dlcs. When your making new game , you cant anounce it early like that, situation is same as RoF to FC, this GB IL-2 to new project/sim IL-2.

 

And i still thing Korea is terible choice, but its only one that makes sence from all info we got on forum or videos of them.

 

 

Edited October 15, 2023 by CountZero

[Gambit21]

[MiGCap]

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

The more I think about Korea, the more it not only makes financial sense as it is true something new in the CFS scene, but also could make for some interesting scenarios. The only real problem I see is the fact that many perceive it to have been a meaningless war, kinda like Vietnam or French Algeria. The gravity and "do or die" nature of WW2, makes it such a fun conflict to simulate and take part in virtually. Korea simply doesn't have that kind of aura surrounding it.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

12 minutes ago, drewm3i-VR said:

The only real problem I see is the fact that many perceive it to have been a meaningless war, kinda like Vietnam or French Algeria.

It still is. The was officially hasn't ended and Kim Jong Un still plays with his toy rockets whenever he feels the Western media has been ignoring him for too long. Furthermore, the two sides of the conflict are still in place, with the NATO still up against China/Russia. In that sense, the Korean war is still current in many ways, perhaps even more so than WW2.

 

21 hours ago, CountZero said:

If they are just making next dlc for this game, italy 43, poland 45 , channel 42 or what not where they can build on existing stuff in game now, they would anounce it a year ago, as you can be sure youll be able to make all you promise in anouncment, like they could do for previous dlcs. When your making new game , you cant anounce it early like that, situation is same as RoF to FC, this GB IL-2 to new project/sim IL-2.

That's not correct; they're making all kinds of new stuff that's not related to the theme of the next module. E.g. they've announced upgrades to the UI, AI, graphics, etc. Besides they said they'd announce stuff later in general; when it's clear if and when something will be finished rather than early like with the Air Marshal, Drop Tanks or the IAR.

 

I too expect the next module to be Korea, like a 60/40 chance, but there's no hard evidence at all. The most compelling evidence for me is the lack of alternative scenarios that haven't already been ruled out.

[jollyjack]

Pity the improvements on the existing scenarios seem to be set to a lower scale, as i would like to seen especially map improvements, and items to play with generally. I really enjoy DCS driving around as tourist in an unarmed player Willy's jeep etc.

 

 

However you got that German Flak halftrack if you have TC as well.

Edited October 16, 2023 by jollyjack

[Duckman]

On 10/13/2023 at 1:52 PM, SeaSerpent said:

Do it better than what?  Two completely hypothetical “survey sim” airplanes, that you won’t see for a few years even if they are actually making them, compared to hi-fi modules that have existed for years, that you might actually have to learn something about to fly and fight? I don’t think there is anything “sterile” about that sim.  Know that not everyone shares your opinion.  Do you even have those two planes?

 

DCS  is admirable in many ways but it's really the opposite of a survey or "complete" sim. Yes the individual aircraft are unequalled but the project lacks direction in the sense that there is no real push to do complete theatres or "worlds", even for the modern planes. And I assume that's fine with most DCS players who are either into the more complete modern stuff or more interested in the nitty gritty proceduralism of hardcore simming.

 

As for Il2, a new Korean War sim is extremely long overdue and I can't wait.

[CountZero]

5 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

It still is. The was officially hasn't ended and Kim Jong Un still plays with his toy rockets whenever he feels the Western media has been ignoring him for too long. Furthermore, the two sides of the conflict are still in place, with the NATO still up against China/Russia. In that sense, the Korean war is still current in many ways, perhaps even more so than WW2.

 

That's not correct; they're making all kinds of new stuff that's not related to the theme of the next module. E.g. they've announced upgrades to the UI, AI, graphics, etc. Besides they said they'd announce stuff later in general; when it's clear if and when something will be finished rather than early like with the Air Marshal, Drop Tanks or the IAR.

 

I too expect the next module to be Korea, like a 60/40 chance, but there's no hard evidence at all. The most compelling evidence for me is the lack of alternative scenarios that haven't already been ruled out.

but all that work is not upgrading thouse thing for this game, its for new game, he talks about 5 year to build IL-2 GUI ,from RoF one to IL-2 one, did they used it in RoF game or make new game with it, they made new game with it, same will be done here, they are not ugrading it for this game, they will use it for new game. They had planty upgrades to GB game engine and always it was done during early accec of next DLCs.

Spoiler

Only fear we have - the new GUI development. While Scale Form API is dead for 6 years allready - its become impossible to find developers for it. So evolution of current GUI have stuck. "Marshall sad story" - one of the cosequences of that.

Last year we have took decision which should be taken several years ago - to develop new IL-2 GUI using another API from the scratch to allow IL-2 gamedesign to evolve.

 

Why there is a fear? Because IL-2 GUI evolved during 5 years. New project, offcourse, have lesser deadlines and should be done way faster. And don't forget, that GUI is not just a visalizator, bur also it makes game logic - Career game mode have a half of itsalgorythms inside the GUI. And, from another side, this time we want to develop brand-new GUI look (everyone tired of existing "mobile-like" design), and some new functionality. So there is a risk while this development is very ambitious.

 

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, Duckman said:

 

DCS  is admirable in many ways but it's really the opposite of a survey or "complete" sim. Yes the individual aircraft are unequalled but the project lacks direction in the sense that there is no real push to do complete theatres or "worlds", even for the modern planes. And I assume that's fine with most DCS players who are either into the more complete modern stuff or more interested in the nitty gritty proceduralism of hardcore simming.

 

As for Il2, a new Korean War sim is extremely long overdue and I can't wait.

I do bring up DCS a lot. But that is just for explaining why I like it not for comparison. 
I did fly GB because of its simplicity and compared to opponents it held a historical realism. It’s flight model was/ is adequate ( to me good) but dm just a tad too simplistic. 
Latter ruins it a bit for me. 
The realism advocated every time one give critique to hollywoodish effects and damage is uncalled in my opinion. Same goes for settings. 
If I want cooling set to axis I want cooling set to axis. But because of realism and historical fact it is not allowed in Gb For some aircraft. 

while it is in clod and DCS.
I like both as flying fighter and bomber a better playability, at least in SP. 
I really did not mean to start a game war where answers directly goes to mention games. We who flies DCS a lot know better than the rest about its short comings. 
I do not want GB to become clod or DCS. But in some aspect I want it closer. Like how a SP campaign is more alive. Where you can interact with your wingman. Communicate with ground control. Have voice actors involved. Care for your buddies. AI is no worse and in some ways better than it’s competitive games. 

And I want control system set to what the user actually got and not what developer think. 
And this is just my opinion, It is not ment as a demand. 

Edited October 16, 2023 by Lusekofte

[AEthelraedUnraed]

3 hours ago, CountZero said:

but all that work is not upgrading thouse thing for this game, its for new game, he talks about 5 year to build IL-2 GUI ,from RoF one to IL-2 one, did they used it in RoF game or make new game with it, they made new game with it, same will be done here, they are not ugrading it for this game, they will use it for new game. They had planty upgrades to GB game engine and always it was done during early accec of next DLCs.

  Hide contents

Only fear we have - the new GUI development. While Scale Form API is dead for 6 years allready - its become impossible to find developers for it. So evolution of current GUI have stuck. "Marshall sad story" - one of the cosequences of that.

Last year we have took decision which should be taken several years ago - to develop new IL-2 GUI using another API from the scratch to allow IL-2 gamedesign to evolve.

 

Why there is a fear? Because IL-2 GUI evolved during 5 years. New project, offcourse, have lesser deadlines and should be done way faster. And don't forget, that GUI is not just a visalizator, bur also it makes game logic - Career game mode have a half of itsalgorythms inside the GUI. And, from another side, this time we want to develop brand-new GUI look (everyone tired of existing "mobile-like" design), and some new functionality. So there is a risk while this development is very ambitious.

 

You're conflating two separate issues - the theme of the next "project" and whether or not it's a new game.

 

No-one disputes that they're creating (among other stuff) a new UI. It's one of the few things they *did* announce.

 

Neither does anyone dispute that building a new UI is a huge amount of work and takes a long time.

 

However whether this will be done in a new game or in a separate one remains to be seen. Given that they are building new AI, a new UI engine, and other difficult stuff, it'd take a huge amount of time regardless so the fact that it takes a long time can't be used as an argument for or against it being a new game. That's exactly my point.

 

Furthermore all of this is wholly unrelated to whether the next "project" will be Korea or not.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

37 minutes ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

However whether this will be done in a new game or in a separate one remains to be seen

How ? This is the same thing ,new game = separated one.

 

They build/use new tech for new game = new project.

 

 

Edited October 16, 2023 by 1PL-Husar-1Esk

[Guest deleted@83466]

3 hours ago, Lusekofte said:

I do bring up DCS a lot. But that is just for explaining why I like it not for comparison. 
I did fly GB because of its simplicity and compared to opponents it held a historical realism. It’s flight model was/ is adequate ( to me good) but dm just a tad too simplistic. 
Latter ruins it a bit for me. 
The realism advocated every time one give critique to hollywoodish effects and damage is uncalled in my opinion. Same goes for settings. 
If I want cooling set to axis I want cooling set to axis. But because of realism and historical fact it is not allowed in Gb For some aircraft. 

while it is in clod and DCS.
I like both as flying fighter and bomber a better playability, at least in SP. 
I really did not mean to start a game war where answers directly goes to mention games. We who flies DCS a lot know better than the rest about its short comings. 
I do not want GB to become clod or DCS. But in some aspect I want it closer. Like how a SP campaign is more alive. Where you can interact with your wingman. Communicate with ground control. Have voice actors involved. Care for your buddies. AI is no worse and in some ways better than it’s competitive games. 

And I want control system set to what the user actually got and not what developer think. 
And this is just my opinion, It is not ment as a demand. 

 

Many customers of IL-2 insist on having 10 aircraft for $80 (instead of 1 aircraft) while wishing the fm and dm, engine and system modeling is comparable with a DCS aircraft.  They also want a complete period map, and a campaign.  And they also want their controls simplified relative to DCS as well, so they can be using it in combat after 5 minutes, with minimal practice.  That’s a lot to ask from IL-2, current version or future version.

[ZachariasX]

?

[Guest deleted@83466]

6 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

?

 

The Swiss have a great Air Force, but their command and control system is getting antiquated.

 

 

?????

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

10 hours ago, jollyjack said:

Pity the improvements on the existing scenarios seem to be set to a lower scale, as i would like to seen especially map improvements, and items to play with generally. I really enjoy DCS driving around as tourist in an unarmed player Willy's jeep etc.

 

 

However you got that German Flak halftrack if you have TC as well.

DCS really is something graphically for such an old, broken game (overall). IL-2, being less complex, should look better and have more ancillary features than DCS like the above. It's a shame IL-2 isn't up to par in that department right now.

[Gambit21]

[MAJ_stug41]

[Mtnbiker1998]

Aren't you guys tired of going around in circles yet? This thread has been going for almost a month and we're not any closer to actually knowing what the new project is, aside from the few who are convinced they know what it is and everyone else is wrong ? (and who have to insist on saying as much every single time its brought up)

 

Seriously, don't you guys have jobs, or other hobbies?

[MAJ_stug41]

1 minute ago, Mtnbiker1998 said:

Seriously, don't you guys have jobs, or other hobbies?

No, why do you think im here?