Brief Room Episode 2: 2023 In Review, Plans For 2024, A Glimpse At The Upcoming Title

January 11, 2024

5 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

Not a chance any time soon, I didn’t say “ever”

It is obvious that Vietnam is not coming any time soon. Korea with subsequent conflicts has to be gutted out first.

P.S. Forwards ever, backwards never!

January 11, 2024

8 minutes ago, Bussard* said:

It is obvious that Vietnam is not coming any time soon. Korea with subsequent conflicts has to be gutted out first.

P.S. Forwards ever, backwards never!

I look forward to their Huey

January 11, 2024

9 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

I look forward to their Huey

Not only the Huey, but also delicious Missiles! Scroll a little further in the posted link, you know it well, don't you?

...... Forwards ever, backwards never! ......

January 11, 2024

11 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

It's Korea, be sure.

Sorry Mitchell.

It could be. They have some shared images of Korean era planes (early drafts I'd say). Oddly, after they said they'd not entertain discussions regarding the next module. So we have 3 pieces of iffy circumstantial evidence that would seem too suggest Korea. Too be fair, we don't even know for certain that the images in question were even produced by the developers, or if they were, that they were produced as part of the new project. For all we know, they could just be experiments with the new technology, and they are just sharing them with us, to show us they type of things that "could" be done with this new technology. Of course that is all speculation. All of these comments are speculation. We have not heard from the developers yet what the plan is. So it's all speculation at this point. Time will tell.

January 11, 2024

25 minutes ago, RNAS10_Mitchell said:

Of course that is all speculation. All of these comments are speculation. We have not heard from the developers yet what the plan is. So it's all speculation at this point. Time will tell.

True, indeed. It would be nice if we could see the second part of the developer video very soon. Perhaps it will shed a little more light on the matter.

January 11, 2024

37 minutes ago, Bussard* said:

True, indeed. It would be nice if we could see the second part of the developer video very soon. Perhaps it will shed a little more light on the matter.

I wouldn't count on that. It was specifically said they will not answer questions regarding the theater of the next project.

It will be revealed/confirmed in the spring. Unless they changed their minds, of course ?

January 11, 2024

6 minutes ago, Koziolek said:

I wouldn't count on that. It was specifically said they will not answer questions regarding the theater of the next project.

It will be revealed/confirmed in the spring. Unless they changed their minds, of course ?

That's clear. However, other information could be provided that might satisfy some of us here, e.g. technical information about the enginge, the integration of old content or backwards compatibility, etc. ?

January 11, 2024

6 hours ago, Bussard* said:

Korea with subsequent conflicts has to be gutted out first.

P.S. Forwards ever, backwards never!

So are you thinking a Cold War simulator with Starfighters and Delta Daggers intercepting Tu-95s over Alaska?

January 11, 2024

1 hour ago, Jaegermeister said:

So are you thinking a Cold War simulator with Starfighters and Delta Daggers intercepting Tu-95s over Alaska?

This stuff would be way better...

January 11, 2024

1 hour ago, Jaegermeister said:

So are you thinking a Cold War simulator with Starfighters and Delta Daggers intercepting Tu-95s over Alaska?

The first thing I wanted to say was, that I can't imagine that they develope an environment in the early fifties with the jets of that time and then immediately abandon it. They have never done that in the past, but expand the existing scenarios. For economic reasons, this also makes sense, as years of development will certainly result in high costs, that needs to be amortized. Hence my amusing reference to the Taiwan Straits crises. So if Korea is a fact, then I believe that sequels with subsequent conflicts are realistic and can be expected.

Your question triggers memories on Strike Fighters: Project 1 by Third Wire 20 years ago. I think the late fifties and sixties jets with their simpler avionics were cool and had their charm. Unfortunately, it was only offline, which wasn't enough for a long time survival. I could well imagine such jets and scenarios on online servers and I personally would enjoy them, as I love history. This may also attract WW2 pilots who don't like the cockpit fiddling with the avionics so much.

But I´m foremost a prophead and would prefer to stay in the forties. There´s much left and to do!

January 11, 2024

Korea is not that far removed from WWII. Props and early jets, and we already have analogous releases.
Thus Korea is essentially no different from another WWII module in most ways with regard to ‘dictating’ what comes afterwards.

Ground assets is your only (very thin) thread to hang on to there.

January 11, 2024

10 hours ago, Enceladus828 said:

Wrong. A new BoB came out in 2019 with a Battle of France expansion last year: https://www.wingsoverthereich.com

I’m keen on a late war Eastern front and then late war PTO after Korea.

Battle of France is not Battle of Britain. And I guarantee you that a BoB game by this developer would have very good sales.

4 hours ago, RNAS10_Mitchell said:

It could be. They have some shared images of Korean era planes (early drafts I'd say). Oddly, after they said they'd not entertain discussions regarding the next module. So we have 3 pieces of iffy circumstantial evidence that would seem too suggest Korea. Too be fair, we don't even know for certain that the images in question were even produced by the developers, or if they were, that they were produced as part of the new project. For all we know, they could just be experiments with the new technology, and they are just sharing them with us, to show us they type of things that "could" be done with this new technology. Of course that is all speculation. All of these comments are speculation. We have not heard from the developers yet what the plan is. So it's all speculation at this point. Time will tell.

Yes, they could have invested a few thousand hours of dev time into a B-29 and IL10 model just to throw us off the scent. It's totally a mystery what is coming next.

January 11, 2024

8 hours ago, Bussard* said:

The first thing I wanted to say was, that I can't imagine that they develope an environment in the early fifties with the jets of that time and then immediately abandon it.

Some people seem to be wondering how Korea can provide more than one release cycle but to me it seems likely that it will be released with ~~F-86Cs~~ (Edit... F86-Es) and Mig15s. After more development, The F-86-F and the Mig-15Bis could be added along with carriers and supporting Naval aircraft like the Panther or the Skyraider. Taiwan Straights might provide additional map area as well for the later period you are actually referring to.

The Tu-95 comment was more of a joke really but that thing is still in service I believe. I would guess they have been shadowed by everything from Sabres to F-22 Raptors.

Edited January 12, 2024 by Jaegermeister

January 11, 2024

We all have our own likes and dislikes in combat aviation flight sims, nothing wrong with that, it's normal, we are not clones.

What has me scratching my head though is how some people can't bring themselves to acknowledge, or believe their own eyes that the dev's are moving away from WWII... (it may well be just for the Korean conflict, and then return to WWII once more)... the Russian forums apparently have people moaning about leaving WWII as well.

Believe it or not, there are people that enjoy several different eras of flight sims... WWI, WWII, Korean war, Vietnam etc, and I'm one of them, so anything new in that bracket gets my attention, and with all the new stuff coming to the flight sims I own, and new ventures as well, I'm pretty much spoilt for choice... good times ahead.

5 minutes ago, Jaegermeister said:

t seems likely that it will be released with F-86Cs and Mig15s.

You mean F-80c I presume...

Edited January 11, 2024 by Trooper117

January 11, 2024

I want to know what come after this. For me it will be a long hiatus or total abandonment of this Franchise. The more I read and think about this the less interest I feel. Of course I might have matured out of it and grown up. But I might have fallen for that dubious study sim bug.

January 11, 2024

Just now, Lusekofte said:

I want to know what come after this. For me it will be a long hiatus or total abandonment of this Franchise. The more I read and think about this the less interest I feel. Of course I might have matured out of it and grown up. But I might have fallen for that dubious study sim bug.

Well, they need to move beyond “Hit E to start”

That just doesn’t do it for many of us now.

No need to go crazy, just bump it up a tad.

January 11, 2024

Would I want to see the second Taiwan Straits, with MiG-17s and Sidewinder armed Sabres? No. There already is a sim for those kinds of battles.

13 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

Well, they need to move beyond “Hit E to start”

That just doesn’t do it for many of us now.

I think beyond a certain point, probably fighters in Korea (forget bombers and night fighters), complexity increases such that Survey Sim style aircraft might just feel too ‘lite’ and gamey to me. FC3 DCS planes don’t do it for me either.

Edited January 11, 2024 by SeaSerpent

January 11, 2024

1 hour ago, Bussard* said:

The first thing I wanted to say was, that I can't imagine that they develope an environment in the early fifties with the jets of that time and then immediately abandon it. They have never done that in the past,

Whilst I have no particular urge to speculate on what they might develop after Korea, it worth mentioning they have made things and then abandoned them. The water technology for the Kuban map comes to mind.

The effort to engineer trans sonic aerodynamics for the 262 might be considered another…..

January 11, 2024

3 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

I think beyond a certain point, probably fighters in Korea (forget bombers and night fighters), complexity increases such that Survey Sim style aircraft might just feel too ‘lite’ and gamey to me.

Absolutely

January 11, 2024

So uh, Q&A?

January 11, 2024

43 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

You mean F-80c I presume...

Actually after looking it up I guess it was the F86-E model I was thinking about.

January 11, 2024

1 hour ago, Trooper117 said:

What has me scratching my head though is how some people can't bring themselves to acknowledge, or believe their own eyes that the dev's are moving away from WWII... (it may well be just for the Korean conflict, and then return to WWII once more)... the Russian forums apparently have people moaning about leaving WWII as well.

In my opinion, this is due to the fact that Korea was given the preference over other logical WW2 scenarios, e.g. Malta + Sicily, late Eastern Front with Operation Bagaration / Courland. At the same time, I see this approach as an assessment of the developers which results in a departure from the previous WW2 scenarios and a forward development towards Jets and other conflicts. That has confused some people here and elsewhere.

I have intentionally not listed PTO here, as the developers have ruled it out as the next project anyway. In a future development, I don't really believe in PTO, as in the usual course of events, three competitors would have to share the PTO cake. This I would consider from my point of view rather unrealistic.

Probably this is all a misjudgement from my part. I only wanted to explain my reasons behind my opinion, because the question was raised here as how people can come up with the idea that things are no longer going backwards. All good from my side!

January 11, 2024

9 minutes ago, Bussard* said:

In my opinion, this is due to the fact that Korea was given the preference over other logical WW2 scenarios, e.g. Malta + Sicily, late Eastern Front with Operation Bagaration / Courland. At the same time, I see this approach as an assessment of the developers which results in a departure from the previous WW2 scenarios and a forward development towards Jets and other conflicts. That has confused some people here and elsewhere.

I have intentionally not listed PTO here, as the developers have ruled it out as the next project anyway. In a future development, I don't really believe in PTO, as in the usual course of events, three competitors would have to share the PTO cake. This I would consider from my point of view rather unrealistic.

Probably this is all a misjudgement from my part. I only wanted to explain my reasons behind my opinion, because the question was raised here as how people can come up with the idea that things are no longer going backwards. All good from my side!

It could be ,rightly or wrongly that the developers Saw developments for the next additions at Cliffs of Dover, Desert Wings Tobruk ( i.e. the 1942 scenario featuring a B-17E,B-24, Typhoon, Mustang, Bf-109G , Lancaster ,etc. and the Pacific scenario of Combat Pilot, both due next year ( we'll just see about that shall we...)) as too much competition for the amount of development and money to rune after the same gamers OR as I mentioned earlier to try to capture more of the Asian market?

If so it's too bad .I think the sales Korea will be underwhelming esp. with jets left out initially. Even with jets, I believe the Korean Air War was very limited. Maybe this makes no difference, after all as good as Great Battles is it never has made any attempt to actually stage realistic, actual air campaign on any of its maps ( say a two week depiction of the air battles over Kursk in an admittedly limited way in various Scripted Mission format.).

Remember Masters of the Air 8th Air Force series debuts later this month raising interest in the 1943-1945 air battles and their aircraft of which we already have a large selection.

If I had me way I'd like them to finish all the campaigns we now have by filling out the aircraft involved ( esp. flyable medium bombers, Russian, British and American but others as well mentioned here, and yes of course , at least AI heavy bombers , all in larger formations than we have now.)Great Battles is one of the best Flight sims around now...why not finish it?

January 11, 2024

I am almost 1000x1000 sure that the team is working not on the Korea scenario, but rather on a title that is already looming on the horizon... IL2 GB "Battle of the Persian Gulf 1990/91"

January 11, 2024

2 hours ago, Jaegermeister said:

Actually after looking it up I guess it was the F86-E model I was thinking about.

As to the F-86, they will probably start with the A model and possibly move onto the E... if they do a follow up DLC, the F, (series 20 I think) will then turn up.

The F-80c should be in as within 2 days of the North Koreans kicking off on the 25th, they were in action over Korea, doing escorts and CAP for the extraction of US nationals.

January 11, 2024

59 minutes ago, ITAF_Artiglio said:

I am almost 1000x1000 sure that the team is working not on the Korea scenario, but rather on a title that is already looming on the horizon... IL2 GB "Battle of the Persian Gulf 1990/91"

Genius, that´s it. You nailed it, we haven't had the Gulf War this since Jane's USAF afaik. You would even catch ED with pants down with this. ?

January 11, 2024

1 hour ago, Blitzen said:

It could be ,rightly or wrongly that the developers Saw developments for the next additions at Cliffs of Dover, Desert Wings Tobruk ( i.e. the 1942 scenario featuring a B-17E,B-24, Typhoon, Mustang, Bf-109G , Lancaster ,etc. and the Pacific scenario of Combat Pilot, both due next year ( we'll just see about that shall we...)) as too much competition for the amount of development and money to rune after the same gamers OR as I mentioned earlier to try to capture more of the Asian market?

Let's avoid too much speculation. We do know that Korea was proposed back before Battle of Normandy (based on comments from the developers)... so the interest among the developers predates these developments.

Even the previous design team was starting to work on a Korea sim based on the Cliffs of Dover engine (before it was cancelled).

The other fact is we will have gone 25 years without a Korea sim... (i.e. the last Korean War flight sim was released 1/3rd of the way into the past that the actual war took place)! It is overdue. People said that the WWII airwar in the east would be underwhelming, and that there were good reasons it hadn't been done (excepting a couple of missions in Luftwaffe Commander), but then Oleg Maddox proved them wrong with Il-2... which became the most acclaimed flight simulator of its time...

January 11, 2024

1 hour ago, ITAF_Artiglio said:

I am almost 1000x1000 sure that the team is working not on the Korea scenario, but rather on a title that is already looming on the horizon... IL2 GB "Battle of the Persian Gulf 1990/91"

Honestly, I'd pay GOOD money for a quality modern survey sim with a good campaign and believable AI. Something for when I don't feel like going through the full motions in BMS (and lord knows DCS is a dumpsterfire when it comes to actual singleplayer content)

January 11, 2024

3 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

Battle of France is not Battle of Britain. And I guarantee you that a BoB game by this developer would have very good sales.

Yes, they could have invested a few thousand hours of dev time into a B-29 and IL10 model just to throw us off the scent. It's totally a mystery what is coming next.

A few thousand hours for simple screen shot of a skeletal B29? Lol.. right....

January 11, 2024

Excited for Korea. Rowan's Mig Alley was 25yrs ago(!!!) but it's still one of my personal flight sim high points.

Is there any time frame for this? Have the devs given any hints?

January 11, 2024

Hey guys!

Please behave and stop with the ad-hominem messages.

There is no need for some comments against eachother.

Kind regards,

January 11, 2024

33 minutes ago, Valis said:

Is there any time frame for this? Have the devs given any hints?

I take it you haven't been reading the forum much.

No on that one.

January 11, 2024

1 hour ago, RNAS10_Mitchell said:

A few thousand hours for simple screen shot of a skeletal B29? Lol.. right....

As a 3rd party 3D aircraft modeler, I can tell you that while it's nowhere near a thousand hours, it's WAY more than anyone is going to put in for a misdirection effort.

January 11, 2024

Perhaps, but it remains a gross exaggeration. That is my point. If someone tells a lie to make a point. Exactly what point are they making?

The forum narcissist gets old quickly..(not you btw).

So you have developed planes professionally? May I ask which one(s)?

Spoiler

Edited January 11, 2024 by RNAS10_Mitchell

January 11, 2024

1 hour ago, RNAS10_Mitchell said:

So you have developed planes professionally? May I ask which one(s)?

Another product.

I could tell you which aircraft that I helped finish recently. However it would sound like I'm stealing thunder from guys who put in years on it, so I can't do that I'd just come off as a chump.

I'm currently working on a ground-up build, but under NDA etc. I doubt I'll ever be able to say since I don't ever see "such and such aircraft, modeled by so and so person)

It's just by X 3rd party. I imagine for similar reasons to what I just stated given the overall work that goes into one of these things on the programming level aside from modeling. So just how it is. A cog on the machine. I can use it in my portfolio afterwards though.

January 11, 2024

33 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

As a 3rd party 3D aircraft modeler, I can tell you that while it's nowhere near a thousand hours, it's WAY more than anyone is going to put in for a misdirection effort.

6 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

Another product.

I could tell you which aircraft that I helped finish recently. However it would sound like I'm stealing thunder from guys who put in years on it, so I can't do that I'd just come off as a chump.

I'm currently working on a ground-up build, but under NDA etc. I doubt I'll ever be able to say since I don't ever see "such and such aircraft, modeled by so and so person)

It's just by X 3rd party. I imagine for similar reasons to what I just stated given the overall work that goes into one of these things on the programming level aside from modeling. So just how it is. A cog on the machine. I can use it in my portfolio afterwards though.

I think too much importance is being assigned to a cad drawing. This does not indicate anything definitively, other than someone (maybe not even associated with the IL 2 developers) has spent a minor amount of time playing with CAD software.

January 11, 2024

50 minutes ago, RNAS10_Mitchell said:

I think too much importance is being assigned to a cad drawing. This does not indicate anything definitively, other than someone (maybe not even associated with the IL 2 developers) has spent a minor amount of time playing with CAD software.

Well FYI it's not CAD, but 3D art software such as 3Ds Max, etc. I use Modo, which is then imported into Max.

That said, it's not in character for this team (or most teams that I know of) to just post models that are not actually part of their product. Thus I'd take their posted models at their word. These aircraft are from the upcoming release, which I have plenty of reasons to believe aside from this posting is Korea.

I'm with you Mitchell...waiting for Zero's, Oscars, P-40's, Wildcats, etc. I think we're going to happy in a few years in that regard, but not quite yet.

January 11, 2024

44 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

Well FYI it's not CAD, but 3D art software such as 3Ds Max, etc. I use Modo, which is then imported into Max.

That said, it's not in character for this team (or most teams that I know of) to just post models that are not actually part of their product. Thus I'd take their posted models at their word. These aircraft are from the upcoming release, which I have plenty of reasons to believe aside from this posting is Korea.

I'm with you Mitchell...waiting for Zero's, Oscars, P-40's, Wildcats, etc. I think we're going to happy in a few years in that regard, but not quite yet.

Cad/modo/max, either way, imo this shows someone has spent a minimal amount of time. It's not an example of a flyable aircraft. Not even close. I understand people are pumped and excited, but I'm not convinced it's anything definitive. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Enough info to form minimaly informed opinion, and imo nothing more.

January 11, 2024

11 hours ago, RNAS10_Mitchell said:

It could be. They have some shared images of Korean era planes (early drafts I'd say). Oddly, after they said they'd not entertain discussions regarding the next module. So we have 3 pieces of iffy circumstantial evidence that would seem too suggest Korea. Too be fair, we don't even know for certain that the images in question were even produced by the developers, or if they were, that they were produced as part of the new project. For all we know, they could just be experiments with the new technology, and they are just sharing them with us, to show us they type of things that "could" be done with this new technology. Of course that is all speculation. All of these comments are speculation. We have not heard from the developers yet what the plan is. So it's all speculation at this point. Time will tell.

This.

January 11, 2024

19 minutes ago, RNAS10_Mitchell said:

Cad/moto/max, either way, imo this shows someone has spent a minimal amount of time. It's not an example of a flyable aircraft.

That's beside the point really.

I think part of the problem is that you lack history here, what is done and not done etc etc.

Brief Room Episode 2: 2023 In Review, Plans For 2024, A Glimpse At The Upcoming Title

Recommended Posts

ACG_Bussard

Gambit21

ACG_Bussard

RNAS10_Mitchell

ACG_Bussard

Koziolek

ACG_Bussard

Jaegermeister

sevenless

ACG_Bussard

Gambit21

BraveSirRobin

Jaegermeister

Trooper117

Lusekofte

Gambit21

Guest deleted@83466

DD_Arthur

Gambit21

354thFG_Leifr

Jaegermeister

ACG_Bussard

Blitzen

ITAF_Artiglio

Trooper117

ACG_Bussard

Avimimus

Mtnbiker1998

RNAS10_Mitchell

Valis

LuftManu

Jaegermeister

Gambit21

RNAS10_Mitchell

Gambit21

RNAS10_Mitchell

Gambit21

RNAS10_Mitchell

354thFG_Drewm3i-VR

Gambit21

Browse All

Activity