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

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

2 hours ago, Han said:

Any development is a risk. Remember of Fuel Systems and Marshall

You failed with that, so what, you deliver dozen other futures which were announced. 

Nobody is perfect. Those not delivered items took time and resources, which one could say were waisted and rather invested in other things to improve the game but this can't be excuse to not talk about or show what are you have already or plan to do. Transparency benefits community, lack of - do not as you can see on this forum . People always will have tendency to see bad things and took what good for granted. You never make all happy, this is life, everything is good if majority is happy, and information about new things is one of its ingredients.

Those delivered futures outweigh those 2 which were not and community knows you were trying to give us what we asked for. If we would do not know about them, you think it would be better?  I believe not. 

[LuftManu]

Thanks for the info, Han! Those things are surely looking good. Can't wait to see what the team has under the sleeve.

 

 

[ZachariasX]

The state of combat sims today reminds me of the state of the shooter games in the mid 90's when binary space partition was still the means of chioce for processing 3D efficiently. Up to then, we just had to live with right angles and always, always a game level that reflected an interior, an inside of something because BSP doesn't really work for free movements in an open, dynamic 3D world. Not just that we lived well with that, it was even expected that a shooter has game levels like that. When first "open world" shooters appeared, they were not immediately successful, also in part that we got that much used to our limitations that new railguns or different looking monster sprites were enough to warrant a new game purchase. Asking for a forest rather than a cave to chase each other around was cause for pitty.

 

Today, the idea that a combat flight simulator can afford the luxury of providing LESS conceptually than a plain vanilla fligh simulator is just outlandish. And I am not takling about including every airport, VOR and DME in the world. Or having everything every single detail like the fence around your house rendered. But having a sim world that conceptually matches our world. That is the base to make formerly boring longer flights a challenge.

 

Simulator games are only as good as the world they simulate, regardless of their included content.

 

This is NOT good:

Yet it is still expected by many. But even they rightly sense themselves a "niche" clientele. One that is getting smaller every day.

 

Since repeating a point can actually help its cause, even if it takes a long time (Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam), I keep repeating it.

[simfan2015]

Thanks Han, you told me everything I wanted so much to know (and even more than I thought you guys would share with us at this time) !

Indeed, No Risk No Fun, but of course these Devs are taking all the risks involved, not us.

That is why whatever they come up with I will buy because I personally appreciate they try to improve beyond everything that was already possible with IL-2 GB.

Let's just wait and see ... I love surprises !

?

 

 

Edited September 24, 2023 by simfan2015

[kissTheSky]

Oh my. BSP trees. that’s a term I haven’t heard for quite some time! Next you’ll mention the priority queue/heap and I’ll pass out ?

[ZachariasX]

2 minutes ago, kissTheSky said:

Next you’ll mention the priority queue/heap and I’ll pass out ?

Out of reactions but ♥️

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

16 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

What does primary game mode design mean in this context?

No inside knowledge,  but would assume:

 

Primary game mode infers basic operation of the software.   Ie..main menu and shell for more specific functionality.

 

Design would infer conceptual thoughts,  not actual coding.

 

In other words,  trying to figure out how they want it to work, before they set about the tasks of activity related to actually writing the code to make it happen. 

 

This would be the typical process to follow to create a solid product.   The old programmer quote is, "If you don't know where you're going, ANY road will take you there."

 

 

 

 

[kendo]

6 hours ago, JG27_Steini said:

 

Hi Han, could you tell us wheter other modules except damage model are being worked on? Will we eg. have a better radio command system?

 

I don't want to tread on Han's toes - the caution in his own reply to you is clear, but:

 

Quote

So we doing from the scratch just several, most critical modules (GUI, Shading, Radio, new AI feature and couple other things). Many other modules are evolving using what we have before.

 

There's a lot of info in there, and some answers to debates the community has been having for months. So, it's in the plan that radio comms will be getting a rewrite from scratch, allied with "new AI feature". Very positive, and much needed.

 

Also, there will be re-use of old modules. That (and other comments - PBR) seems to confirm that the new release will be compatible with the existing Great Battles releases.

 

 

[354thFG_Rails]

7 hours ago, Han said:

Lets hope we're not.

At the moment every is going according to the plan.

 

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.

 

Graphics technologies are mostly done and content development is in progress. New airplane systems and damage model are near to be done but we still have some room in timeline for it (while new airplanes 3Ds are in development). Map - is in development for 10 months allready and its going well. Map development have some risks too while its most volumed content in the game and new map is way larger and variative than any other we done before - but we have allready developed new tools for the map team which should help them to met the milestones in time.

 

So we remember of ClOD destiny. ClOD started totaly everything from the scratch - there were too many risks. So we doing from the scratch just several, most critical modules (GUI, Shading, Radio, new AI feature and couple other things). Many other modules are evolving using what we have before.

 

So, we have a strong basis to hope, that everything will be done in time and this time will be not too long.

Does this mean you’re expanding on the current GB game engine, or building a new one for the new project?

[blitze]

Hopefully they will be able to move beyond the current GB game engine but take assets across from that to the new engine.

 

The current GB engine heralds from Rise of Flight flight sim.  It has been updated quite a bit to the current form we see atm but - it has limitations.  I am not sure how they would do it but coms, AI, and a more dynamic world on the ground and in the air would be nice without bringing our systems to their knees like flying over the Beaches of Normandy currently does.
 

Graphics wise, I like the current sim although in VR with HDR on, bloom is over cooked and terrain can look cartoonish but with HDR off, aircraft instruments are a pita to read.

 

Anyway, Single Play Il2 GB is my main course for VR / computer entertainment - at least it isn't like Activision's - Star Wars Squadrons which was abandoned not long after release.

[Dr_Molem]

56 minutes ago, 86th_Rails said:

Does this mean you’re expanding on the current GB game engine, or building a new one for the new project?

 

Indeed, this is the question that everyone is asking. 

 

A clear answer would relieve a lot of people.

[simfan2015]

@blitze

Star wars Squadrons was always going to end without any DLC. It was talked about before that game was released. It was more Like a hobby project that got fleshed out beyond the scope it was intended to. I still love that title... It is what I expected it to be! 

Edited September 24, 2023 by simfan2015

[Lusekofte]

On 9/23/2023 at 3:25 PM, Jade_Monkey said:

The only reason I havent fully switched to DCS for SP is because their AI is even worse and egregiously cheats flying backwards like UFOs just to stay on your tail.

I have not flown ww2 SP but I can imagine not everything is perfect. Flying with a wingman or as a wingman in choppers got some weird and suicidal moments. God knows DCS have a lot to desire. And many things just as awful 

[Mysticpuma]

Regarding clarity, publicity, communication, player numbers dwindling. 

I wrote this about Clod and the lack of communication, leading to apathy and player numbers falling. 

 

If you have a chance to read this post, while not everything is relative to BoX, a lot of it is the same in regards to lack of communication leading to player numbers falling dramatically. 

 

[BlitzPig_Bill_Kelso]

22 hours ago, Art-J said:

 

To sum it up, If the new product is good, it will sell. If it isn't, it won't. With or without devs interaction.

A bit of a storm in a teacup this thread is.

 

 

Festivus has come early this year!

I appreciate all of the airing of the grievances and people telling the Dev's how they have disappointed them in the previous year. However, as tradition states, the holiday can only begin when the Head of the table (Han) has been pinned to the floor during the "Feats of strength" and then, and only then can they release the information regarding the next project.

It's tradition folks, sorry. 

 

Edit: Is this when they celebrate Festivus in the East due to the different Calanders?

Oh, also

 

 

Edited September 24, 2023 by 1./JG54_Lang
clarification

[BlitzPig_Bill_Kelso]

Dang it, I forgot to air my disappointments to the Dev's...

 

Make the AI so much better devs!!! All this talk about AI this and AI that in tech these days and how it's going to change the world, let's see it in action in games!!!

DOOOO IIT!!!

Make a much-improved D server and mission builder for the online folks and PAY Patrick for his hard work and include his dynamic campaign into the actual game, SRS as well! 

And get Jiri involved to make the sim work with Hyperlobby GOSH DANGIT!!!!

Powerful scripting and make an API that third parties can tap into!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

ahhh, much better.

AND MAKE A KNEEBOARD LIKE THE ORIGINAL IL2 DAG NAMITE!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ok, really done now. 

[Art-J]

4 hours ago, kendo said:

Also, there will be re-use of old modules. That (and other comments - PBR) seems to confirm that the new release will be compatible with the existing Great Battles releases.

 

To each his own, but I get exactly opposite impression. Some form of re-use of previous assets (mostly 3D models I presume)- sure, but backwards compatibility - nah, doesn't look like it to me. Just like nowadays - we do see RoF planes being refreshed and re-used in FC, but these sims still remain separate products. 

 

Well, let's wait and see what comes out of it.

 

[FuriousMeow]

Makes zero sense that any information is needed on the next project to continue playing and enjoying what is already available, and with known additional content coming for what is already available.

 

It's been 11 years, that's a much longer run than most air combat games and burn out is expected. Winter approaches with longer days inside for the northern hemisphere, maybe multiplayer will pick back up then. Still don't get how info on the next project has any impact on playing the current release. Being excited about a new project does literally nothing for what is currently playable.

[spreckair]

I have been flying IL-2 GB for about 2.5 years now; however, if I were to just discover it today, I would be buying all of the modules without hesitation because I think it is still the best and most fun combat flight sim existing today.  Thank you very much 1C.  And if 1C decided to pack it all up and retire, I would keep flying until something better comes along.  And that is how I see this current situation. 1C owes us nothing.  I don't need any advance info; I have the current game to keep me busy.  And if they come out with something awesome, or even a bit less so, there goes my money!  I am just really happy that they are working on something that they believe is going to be great.

[JG4_Moltke1871]

Only can speak for myself: I started with flightsims in 2020 so everything in great battles is relatively new for me. And with Flying Circus is still enough new in the pipeline (for those who like WW1) + collectors for WW2. That brings me to say so far I don’t care the next project. I will see the next project makes me slobber or not ? The management may have their reasons for their silence, is it clever for the relation to their customers? I think not… but to close the circle: I have still enough in the pipe ?

[dburne]

49 minutes ago, FuriousMeow said:

Makes zero sense that any information is needed on the next project to continue playing and enjoying what is already available, and with known additional content coming for what is already available.

 

It's been 11 years, that's a much longer run than most air combat games and burn out is expected. Winter approaches with longer days inside for the northern hemisphere, maybe multiplayer will pick back up then. Still don't get how info on the next project has any impact on playing the current release. Being excited about a new project does literally nothing for what is currently playable.

 

Perhaps because this very thread - is focused not on the currently already available but on the "next project"...

" The Status of the Yet To Be Announced Title"

Folks I think just want more info than has already been shared. On the next project.

Edited September 24, 2023 by dburne

[simfan2015]

IMHO whatever Han, whatever Jason, Whatever Buzzsaw and others are involved in these days can only be looked upon as a blessing for the flightsim community. 

At least we are no longer at a status quo... we are again moving... forward! 

[FuriousMeow]

34 minutes ago, dburne said:

 

Perhaps because this very thread - is focused not on the currently already available but on the "next project"...

" The Status of the Yet To Be Announced Title"

Folks I think just want more info than has already been shared. On the next project.

 

Yes, I know - except people keep bringing up that lack of info on that is somehow causing the currently playable product unplayable for some reason. It was fairly clear that was what I was commenting on.

[BraveSirRobin]

The reason people aren’t playing the game that I’m complaining about is ALWAYS because they haven’t changed the thing that I said they should change.

[kendo]

3 hours ago, Art-J said:

 

To each his own, but I get exactly opposite impression. Some form of re-use of previous assets (mostly 3D models I presume)- sure, but backwards compatibility - nah, doesn't look like it to me. Just like nowadays - we do see RoF planes being refreshed and re-used in FC, but these sims still remain separate products. 

 

Well, let's wait and see what comes out of it.

 

 

The quote talking about PBR seemed to imply that there will be re-use of 100+ playable objects and the 100+ AI objects created over the past 11 years, at least that's what it says to me.

 

14 hours ago, Han said:

PBR texturing requires to redevelop all existing objects textures. It is not possible to have PBR and non-PBR objects in one render. And GB have 100+ playable objets, 100+ AI objects, dosens of buildings, bombs, rockets, cliffs and ect. It have took 11 years to develop all this content. Yes, redevelop them to PBR not requires to repeat these 11 years while it is not 100% redo. But its still huge ammount of resources required to do this in GB.

[dburne]

24 minutes ago, FuriousMeow said:

 

Yes, I know - except people keep bringing up that lack of info on that is somehow causing the currently playable product unplayable for some reason. It was fairly clear that was what I was commenting on.

 

Hmm reading through seems most comments are pretty positive.

But that is ok, no biggie. People just crave more info.

 

[Gambit21]

15 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

I quite liked flying Korea in the 'old' IL2

 

Korea is good stuff.

 

La-11, Yak-9P, IL-10, MiG 15.

So if you’re a fan of Russian kit, this should make you happy.

Not to mention Sabres, Mustangs and Corsairs.

 

I love the MiG 15.

 

Sabre vs MiG is good stuff, but the early prop dynamic should not be overlooked. Even though it was brief in reality, it can be experienced in the sim in a more protracted fashion.

1946 is something I wish I could revisit.

[MiGCap]

If it is Korea, I would be more than happy. 

 

Is is one of the other two ... so what, I buy it anyhow.

[spreckair]

OK, so Korea is not high on my list by any stretch, but if it is, I will give it a try.  But then, where will they go after Korea?  I hope backwards in time to WWII--there is still a lot of ground to cover in Europe, the Med, and the Pacific.

[LF_Mark_Krieger]

It has already been said by @Art-J, @FuriousMeow, and others, but I'll say it too. I think there's an exagerated reaction about the consequences of the lack of information. Of course it can have some consequences, but one thing is the future and the other is the present and I think we shouldn't forget that. Would I like to know if the future game or project will have more complex orders for the IA in your flight, higher numbers of bombers in the formations and bigger scale of combat, complex management of the planes, portability of actual content and many other things? Yes, of course. I care a lot about that. But if I want to play a WWII combat flight sim TODAY, what can I play? For me, the best option overall is IL-2 GB. Is it perfect? No. Other sims have features that I would like IL-2 GB to have? Yes. But anyway overall IL-2 GB is the best for me, so now I play GB. I refly the single player campaigns that have been reworked, I play multiplayer missions with my friends, etc. Don't get me wrong. This doesn't mean that I just accept what I have and that I don't want improvements of GB or in the new project. I do. A lot.

But I think this last year it has been too much noise about that lack of information about the new project. As it has been said before, I think it's because a cultural change in the human comunications this last years. I'm 44, so I was used to play games that didn't even had patches and improvements and when the product was published, it was the final product and of course we didn't have previous info about it. Internet of course changed everything and in a lot of aspects, for the best. Nowadays the community of players can comunicate much easier than before with the developers and even help them. In fact, very important parts of the actual game exist thanks to the comunity (last clouds, 4k textures, free scripted campaigns...). And external tools that enrich the game a lot like Easy Mission Generator, Patrick Wilson Campaign Generator, Haluter's skin Downloader, Radio bot and RCI in Combat Box... So this interaction is good. Games can continue developing once released, and that's good too.

There's a dark side too, unfortunatelly. Sometimes a lot of products that are released in really bad conditions, what I think is a lack of respect for the players (Cyberpunk and Star Citizen for example). And I think this last 10-5 years it has risen a kind of culture of the hype that personally I must say I don't enjoy a single bit. A kind of overexcitement of what future will bring us. Everybody in tension, expecting a reward, a new product... and when this new product appears, a lot of people gets tired of it really soon or even feels frustrated. Come on, Normandy was released just one year ago and there's people that says can't enjoy the game if they do not know some aspects of what 1CGS will release in 2025 or 2026? I think this is not a good way to enjoy games and even life. What we have today to play is what matters most. Tomorrow we could be dead.

Perhaps some more information from the developers would be good? I think it would, but I understand what Han says. In fact I felt very frustrated when they said they renounced at the Marshall system and complex fuel management that were previously anounced, although I understood the reasons they said why it couldn't be done, too. Can't we talk about the future project? Of course we can. I enjoy doing it too. But please, don't loose the perspective and don't forget to enjoy the actual game.

 

See you in the skies!

Edited October 20, 2023 by LF_Mark_Krieger

[Youtch]

Going to Korea is a niche market.

 

I believe that a huge percentage of players (and not necessairely the most active on forum) are into this game because they are passionate about ww2. Check your shelves, how many book on ww2 vs Korea war?

 

IL2 is THE reference for ww2 combat sim, and the competition is still quite below IL2 level. I am afraid that if IL2 moves to Korea, then another competitor will fill the gap, and he will take most of the player base, regarless of how nice the new engine might be, Korea theater does not drive the same appeal as ww2.

Edited September 25, 2023 by Youtch

[tattywelshie]

42 minutes ago, LF_Mark_Krieger said:

It has already been said by @Art-J, @FuriousMeow, and others, but I'll say it too. I think there's an exagerated drama about the consequences of the lack of information. Of course it can have some consequences, but one thing is the future and the other is the present and I think we shouldn't forget that. Would I like to know if the future game or project will have more complex orders for the IA in your flight, higher numbers of bombers in the formations and bigger scale of combat, complex management of the planes, portability of actual content and many other things? Yes, of course. I care a lot about that. But if I want to play a WWII combat flight sim TODAY, what can I play? For me, the best option overall is IL-2 GB. Is it perfect? No. Other sims have features that I would like IL-2 to have? Yes. But anyway overall IL-2 GB is the best for me, so now I play GB. I refly the single player campaigns that have been redone, I play multiplayer missions with my friends, etc. Don't get me wrong. This doesn't mean that I just accept what I have and that I don't want improvements of GB or in the new project. I do. A lot.

But I think this last year it has been too much noise about that lack of information. As it has been said before I think it's because a cultural change in the human comunications this last years. I'm 44, so I was used to play games that didn't even had patches and improvements and when the product was published, it was the final product and of course we didn't have previous info about it. Internet of course changed everything and in a lot of aspects, for the best. Now the community of players can comunicate much easily with the developers and even help them. don't forget that very important parts of the actual game exists thanks to the comunity (last clouds, 4k textures, free scripted campaigns...). So this interaction is good. Games can continue developing once released, and that's good too.

There's a dark side too, unfortunatelly. Sometimes a lot of products that are released in really bad conditions, what I think is a lack of respect for the players (Cyberpunk, for example). And I think this last 10-5 years it has risen a kind of culture of the hype that personally I must say I don't enjoy a single bit. A kind of overexcitement of what future will bring us. Everybody in tension, expecting a reward, a new product... and when this new product appears, a lot of people gets tired of it really soon or even feels frustrated. Come on, Normandy was released just one year ago and there's people that says can't enjoy the game if they do not know some aspects of what 1CGS will release in 2025 or 2026? I think this is not a good way to enjoy games and even life. What I have today to play is what matters most. Tomorrow I could be dead.

Perhaps some more information from the developers would be good? I think it would, but I understand what Han says. In fact I felt very frustrated when they said they renounced at the Marshall system and complex fuel management that were previously anounced. Although I understood the reasons they said why it could be done, too. Can't we talk about the future project? Of course we can. I enjoy doing it too. But please, don't loose the perspective and don't forget to enjoy the actual game.

 

See you in the skies!

Really good reply this. Like yourself, i'm mid 40's and cut my teeth on games like SWOTL and MSCFS, and I agree, these games were released fully developed and ready to go, with nice big thick user manuals etc etc. However, and this is key I think, in terms of how IL2 in particularly is developed now, these games were produced by absolutely massive companies (Lucasfilms and Microsoft), they had massive budgets, and they were released at a time when combat flight sims were at the zenith in terms of popularity.

1C is no where near the size of these producers, so has to reply on constantly upselling products to fund the game development. It's just a different ball game really in terms of the difference of how IL2 is developed and how the games of the 90s are developed.

IL2 is by no means perfect, but overall, its definitely the best game out there for WW2 simmers and I think sometimes, it pays to take a step back maybe and really appreciate what a fine game has been developed by what is, a relatively small production company. 

[Algherghez]

@LF_Mark_Krieger

But projections of the future affects the present. 
Confidence about a product growth can change my decision to buy it or not. I wouldn’t spend my money on IL-2 if I’m convinced that the product I’m buying is not going to improve but slowly decay, I would spend my money elsewhere. I wouldn’t convince my friends to spend their money on a product I have no confidence in. Multiplayer also has a great deal of influence. What if the ones that put a lot of effort to give us great multiplayer experience decide to go elsewhere because they don’t trust the project anymore? 
Nowadays games are not solid blocks anymore, like it or not; and mutual trust on the project is key to keep it alive.

[Mysticpuma]

30 minutes ago, Youtch said:

Going to Korea is a niche market.

 

I believe that a huge percentage of players (and not necessairely the most active on forum) are into this game because they are passionate about ww2. Check your shelves, how many book on ww2 vs Korea war?

 

IL2 is THE reference for ww2 combat sim, and the competition is still far away. I am afraid that if IL2 moves to Korea, then another competitor will fill the gap, and he will take most of the player base, regarless of how nice the new engine might be, Korea theater does not drive the same appeal than ww2.

Don't disagree, but you then bring in Aircraft Carriers, Helicopters, Prop aircraft and Jets....it's a large amount of scope?

[JG27_Steini]

9 minutes ago, Mysticpuma said:

Don't disagree, but you then bring in Aircraft Carriers, Helicopters, Prop aircraft and Jets....it's a large amount of scope?

 

Might be a huge amount, but the world is not only america. WW2 affects many more countries. Whole europe, much of africa, asia and america was involded. Many player have an personal interesset in WW2 because of their on relations. Korea is not well known and it affects less player for not involeved in this conflict. USA has a big impact, thats right, but i think that many current europe player struggle with it. In europe the Korea conflict is not much present like it is in the USA. If we really get an Korea module, what will be next? Does Korea offer enough for more modules about this conflict like WW2 does?

Edited September 25, 2023 by JG27_Steini

[ITAF_Rani]

Korea is out of my interest..please Devs stay on WW2...!!

Edited September 25, 2023 by ITAF_Rani

[tattywelshie]

4 minutes ago, ITAF_Rani said:

Korea is out of my interest..please Devs stay on WW2...!!

 

I think they will, Han's comments about "phase of the war", or words to that affect I think pretty much rule out Korea.

[Trooper117]

16 minutes ago, tattywelshie said:

"phase of the war"

 

Read up on Korea... there are events and phases be sure... 

[Trooper117]

1 hour ago, Youtch said:

and the competition is still far away. I am afraid that if IL2 moves to Korea, then another competitor will fill the gap, and he will take most of the player base

 

If competition is still far away, then why are you afraid another competitor will fill the gap if they move to Korea?

[tattywelshie]

25 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

 

Read up on Korea... there are events and phases be sure... 

Ahhh, fair shout, never thought of that!