Interview with Enigma

[Soto_Cinematics]

Check out the team's interview with Enigma on his channel.

 

 

 

 

[Lorena_Scout]

Great video! Awesome interview and videos

 

Luckily that will calm down some nerves with the inpatient community members.

[Blitzen]

We're ready!!!

51 minutes ago, Soto_Cinematics said:

Check out the team's interview with Enigma on his channel.

 

 

BTW:What is the link to his channel?

 

 

[Missionbug]

Just finished watching the interview, thanks very much to those involved, really appreciated.

 

Take care and be safe.

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.

[Jarboe]

Is it still possible to join the VR beta for the game?

 

Going to bust out Track IR and try it, but would love to give it a shot with the Quest 3.

[ST_Catchov]

8 hours ago, Lorena_Scout said:

Luckily that will calm down some nerves with the inpatient community members.

 

Nope. Once they're out of hospital it'll be situation normal.

[II./JG27_Rich]

Yep loved that interview. 

Edited April 13 by II./JG27_Rich

[Bussard_x]

Intro video shows a lot of hedgerows and telephone poles. Very nice.

[Dagwoodyt]

This is an extremely tedious video from a Youtuber who does multiplayer in 2D only. Any new DLC remains a distant goal.

 

🙄

Edited April 12 by Dagwoodyt

[Hiuuz]

It was an important video from a Youtuber who has a decent amount of followers. Maybe some of them who has the required capabilities will join and help TFS to speed up things, because we need that and not repetitive sourness.

[Mysticpuma]

Based on the 70% complete statement from Buzzsaw:

Desert Wings release 2020. Not taking into account the previous arrival of the source code and creation of the Blitz edition, which would be worse.

So from 2020, there have been approx. 1826 days to get to 70% of the VU/VR/ST update.
So for the extra 30% we would be looking at approx. 548 days.

From today (April 13th 2025), that puts the release around October 5th, 2026

 

All good things come to those who wait 🙏

Edited April 14 by Mysticpuma

[jdu]

1 hour ago, Mysticpuma said:

Based on the 70% complete statement from Buzzsaw:

Desert Wings release 2020. Not taking into account the previous arrival of the source code and creation of the Blitz edition, which would be worse.

So from 2020, there have been approx. 1826 to get to 70% of the VU/VR/ST update.
So for the extra 30% we would be looking at approx. 548 days.

From today (April 13th 2025), that puts the release around October 5th, 2026

 

All good things come to those who wait 🙏

Calculation method completely biased by ignorance of software development.  Even more so if peripheral environments (dev tools, os version, etc.) are not taken into account.  Perhaps some parts of the video have been misheard.  Here's a reminder: an important team member recently passed away.  I don't see this parameter in the calculation method.
This calculation may work for fully automated, autonomous and self-maintaining factory production, but in this case it's just blah-blah-blah.
Maybe the calculation method is based on Trump's magic formula for calculating tariffs. 🤔

 

[Dagwoodyt]

TFS' ability to complete the VU/VR update is problematic. Didn't need the interview to know that. Great if VR now works with the current game, but they refuse to release VR outside of their private "beta" group. Whether VR can ever be made to work with both tS and ST8/9 successfully enabled remains unknown. If it ever does only then will they have a genuine beta to test. As the interviewer's interest is multiplayer, SP enhancements weren't a focus of discussion. Over an hour of halting questions and responses  rehashing problems that almost everyone willing to put in the time to listen were probably already aware of. The situation remains unchanged: Blitz and DWT apparently have not been able to get the "population" to come "roaring back". but will have to suffice, likely for years to come.🫡

 

[Blitzen]

I am at a loss, like a few others ,to understand the commentator’s views ( or compltes lack of experience...)on VR…🤔

Edited April 13 by Blitzen

[354thFG_Leifr]

VR by Christmas 2025, you heard it here first.

GO TEAM FUSION GO!

[jdu]

4 hours ago, Blitzen said:

I am at a loss, like a few others ,to understand the commentator’s views ( or compltes lack of experience...)on VR…🤔

 

Why not ask the author of the video on YouTube?

[Dagwoodyt]

From what I heard in the YT video, topics of discussion were agreed upon beforehand. If the interviewer had little interest in SP enhancements or VR the team would likely have known that beforehand. If there were need to prompt the interviewer to broach other subjects the team could certainly have done so in advance. Anyone expecting enhancements to the SP aspects of the game may be disappointed should a release ever happen. Then too, the interviewer must know gamers who are interested in VR and could have provided input for discussion.🤨

[II./JG27_Rich]

9 hours ago, Blitzen said:

I am at a loss, like a few others ,to understand the commentator’s views ( or compltes lack of experience...)on VR…🤔

LOLOL I love that pic!!!   

[Aapje]

13 hours ago, Dagwoodyt said:

Then too, the interviewer must know gamers who are interested in VR and could have provided input for discussion.🤨

 

What other question(s) should he have asked?

 

The way I see it, they addressed the main question about VR that dominates the discussions here as well, which is whether the release has to wait for VR. And the answer is that not having VR will also keep many flat screen players away from the game, who fly in squads with VR players.

 

Keep in mind that this interview is by a channel that covers a great diversity of games, and many of the viewers will not have played any IL-2 game, let alone CoD, let alone follow the further development. So it was always going to be fairly shallow.

[Dagwoodyt]

3 hours ago, Aapje said:

The way I see it, they addressed the main question about VR that dominates the discussions here as well, which is whether the release has to wait for VR. And the answer is that not having VR will also keep many flat screen players away from the game, who fly in squads with VR players.

"Release" of TF6?🤣 How many years does that give TFS to work on VR integration with tS and ST8/9?

 

[Blitzen]

39 minutes ago, Dagwoodyt said:

"Release" of TF6?🤣 How many years does that give TFS to work on VR integration with tS and ST8/9?

 

If I undersdtood the interview , he says they are quite close.I hope so , although for me even with a new Oculus Meta Quest  2 headset I am having visual issues too often.Things are wonderful when everything lines up, but then can go wrong very quickly...sigh...

[Dagwoodyt]

1 hour ago, Blitzen said:

If I undersdtood the interview , he says they are quite close.I hope so , although for me even with a new Oculus Meta Quest  2 headset I am having visual issues too often.Things are wonderful when everything lines up, but then can go wrong very quickly...sigh...

This is what I suspected. Thanks!

[Volant_Eagle]

I for one was very surprised when they said "we've got VR to work just fine with the base game". My immediate thought (other than "What? I haven't heard about that yet!) was, ooof, that's going to generate a lot of griping about why they don't just release VR right this instant, and forget about getting it co-released with the VU.

 

For anyone thinking that way though, I'd like to say I think waiting might be the smarter way to do this. If they release VR officially, without the VU, there will be no taking back the VR update due to how committed certain people are to it. And if the compatibility problems with VR and the VU update items prove to be too difficult to handle for too long, that could be a disaster. Or at least mean this sim will get left in the dust behind any new sims that have a new generation of graphics and VR. Which is more or less a disaster for TFS.

 

Although, that still means they need to get both the VR and VU updates done in order to remain competitive in the future no matter which way you cut it. (and I do believe that completion of both those updates will make this game really competitive with anything else for a long time to come.) So of the VU is waayyy out there in the timeline, then maybe releasing VR alone is actually a good option? Obviously that conjecture depends on the VU being a long way out, which hopefully it isn't.

 

16 hours ago, Blitzen said:

If I undersdtood the interview , he says they are quite close.I hope so , although for me even with a new Oculus Meta Quest  2 headset I am having visual issues too often.Things are wonderful when everything lines up, but then can go wrong very quickly...sigh...

You are referring to the beta, correct? And the beta always includes at least some of the VU update progress, correct?

 

 

 

Oh, and be careful with these things! Some of us are often a few in before browsing through these forums.... if you know what I mean.

16 hours ago, Blitzen said:

 

[Aurora_Stealth]

So just to recap here they basically said they are aiming to release the VR/VU update by the end of this year... but that is dependent on whether integration of the other visual/audio elements goes as planned. It sounds like things are in fact progressing and the VR works well in standalone, but its taken years to just get the game code developed into a stable and performing state. Being cautious about timelines for integrating visual and audio features especially with consideration of the past issues is understandable.

 

Good news is there seems to be huge depth to this game's features and scale even compared to Great Battles which I think has surprised people. There will be more unpredictable failures ahead that the team will have to handle in this process that we won't necessarily see. That's an unavoidable part of integrating a change like this into a complex and flawed game engine... we don't know how much coding may be required to ensure it performs and frankly neither will they until they come across these issues; even though I'm sure it can be worked through. Its right to test these elements step-by-step otherwise its so much harder to identify the point of failure.

 

In my opinion, you don't want to release visual upgrades in standalone or give premature expectations until you know you can follow through as a unified system with the right performance that people expect (including for VR). The visual systems upgrades are going to have to interact with VR one way or another, sooner or later; otherwise they are missing a key objective they have committed to and that most games provide. Not doing so, or not being sure of achieving it with good performance will end up impacting the community and it will further impact the game's reputation regardless of if you use it or not - which would be counter productive.

 

Their recent progress with the VR and the fact it can run well in standalone, with some good indications coming from integration of new visual systems means we shouldn't be too pessimistic. It appears the foundation of this upgrade is getting there and there's a route forwards, the overall look and feel of the game will be transformed.

Edited April 21 by Aurora_Stealth
typo's corrected, Dagwoodyt added to ignore list.

[Dagwoodyt]

8 hours ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

but that is dependent on whether integration of the other visual/audio elements goes as planned.

🤭

[paul_leonard]

I think Aurora_Stealth hit the nail on the head.  Right now there are seemingly three branches of the game.  The plain vanilla stable, but long not updated, 2D version, the visual updates to the 2D version which sounded like still needs some integration work with Truesky and Speedtree, and the VR version, which also needs integration work with Truesky and Speedtree.  Living with multiple branches created problems for DCS, which have arguably finally been resolved, and it seems like the desire to integrate to one version makes sense.  But TF doesn't have the same resources, so it takes longer which legitimately will always be too long for some/many.  Those who want improvement ask because it makes the game better and arguably more accessible. Hard to argue against either perspective.

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

I am glad TF is still kicking and going, but personally I am overall very pleased with GB and excited for Korea. CLoD just doesn't look very good or realistic to me anymore. 

[Dagwoodyt]

There are over one hundred viewer comments attached to the YT video. I have yet to find any comment referencing tS or ST8/9. If the VR WIP were truly stable and released to TFS customers, TFS would earn: credibility.

Edited April 16 by Dagwoodyt

[Mysticpuma]

7 hours ago, Dagwoodyt said:

There are over one hundred viewer comments attached to the YT video. I have yet to find any comment referencing tS or ST8/9. If the VR WIP were truly stable and released to TFS customers, TFS would earn: credibility.

But currently it is only stable without TS and ST.....so they could release it but you'd  have nothing on the landscape except tiles of grass, no clouds in the sky and none of the other visual upgrades. I guess that's why they have it only in Beta as if they released it like that, players wouldn't have a clue what was going on and where all their content went (unless they kept up with developments here and on Discord)?

[Aurora_Stealth]

12 hours ago, paul_leonard said:

I think Aurora_Stealth hit the nail on the head.  Right now there are seemingly three branches of the game.  The plain vanilla stable, but long not updated, 2D version, the visual updates to the 2D version which sounded like still needs some integration work with Truesky and Speedtree, and the VR version, which also needs integration work with Truesky and Speedtree.  Living with multiple branches created problems for DCS, which have arguably finally been resolved, and it seems like the desire to integrate to one version makes sense.  But TF doesn't have the same resources, so it takes longer which legitimately will always be too long for some/many.  Those who want improvement ask because it makes the game better and arguably more accessible. Hard to argue against either perspective.

 

Yep. The thing that really frustrates and complicates progress being made will be their capacity/team size. I think its unreasonable to expect people who are unpaid and handling arduous problems (as a second or part time job) to have the same output and progress of a full time team or one that does work packages on a well established game. Plus its hard to retain such a team (and the skills) under the circumstances they inherited in this particular game. Other studios can simply pay to outsource work where they need to. Its a different situation and dynamic. TFS don't have much flexibility so by necessity they can't afford to branch off without compromising more time and adding complexity ... they just don't have that resource to spend.

 

That being said, its understandable people technically compare the sim to others they play and demand progress - that's natural, but as a community we just have to be mindful of what is being asked under the circumstances.

 

Regarding DCS, let me flip the coin and play devil's advocate for a moment to add a perspective... specifically regarding its WW2 content. Its an established game - people pay comparatively a great deal of money for its content and it requires a high end PC to run it well. Despite DCS making a number of environment and other changes (damage model) etc to the game over the years, its still surprisingly crude in some regards. Yet players still only have access to very limited actual tailored WW2 content... whether its aircraft types, missions, new features, improved game mechanics which has trickled very slowly over the years (but in terms of flight modelling is high fidelity). So despite the time and money invested, DCS players are still left with a very fragmented overall WW2 combat experience so you can't take much for granted.

 

With IL-2 shifting much of its remaining focus to Korea by the end of the year (I am still really looking forward to the Odessa, Gulf of Finland maps and the aircraft though), the question is which studios or teams are actually positioned/willing/focused to deliver substantial new WW2 content in future. I think the interview indicates that TFS could fill some of that upcoming void and that relying on DCS probably isn't necessarily a great alternative. At least we know the upcoming VR/VU update is free, and that we have a pretty solid understanding of TFS objectives, vision, a genuinely interesting roadmap and are showing transparency to how this will be achieved.

Edited April 16 by Aurora_Stealth

[Dagwoodyt]

6 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

But currently it is only stable without TS and ST.....so they could release it but you'd  have nothing on the landscape except tiles of grass, no clouds in the sky and none of the other visual upgrades. I guess that's why they have it only in Beta as if they released it like that, players wouldn't have a clue what was going on and where all their content went (unless they kept up with developments here and on Discord)?

Credibility is everything. If TFS says that VR now runs stably without tS and ST8/9, I'd assume they are saying that the environment includes all objects present in the current Blitz/DWT game. I'd love to fly the game in VR, with clouds or without. If however, that's not the definition of the VR success being touted, then that should have been clarified by TFS.

[Dagwoodyt]

On 4/16/2025 at 4:13 AM, Mysticpuma said:

But currently it is only stable without TS and ST.....so they could release it but you'd  have nothing on the landscape except tiles of grass, no clouds in the sky and none of the other visual upgrades. I guess that's why they have it only in Beta as if they released it like that, players wouldn't have a clue what was going on and where all their content went (unless they kept up with developments here and on Discord)?

 

So what is the actual state of the VR WIP? Is the current game "completely functional" in VR or not? I am not describing it as a beta because it lacks tS and ST8/9 which would need to be functional in order for the "beta" designation to be appropriate.

[Blitzen]

I can only wish that the "moderator "would heve asked why the team doesn't release more "in progress" screenshots and/or vidsIt would go very far in keeping interest alive and knowing progress was being made! This can't be too difficult a request?!

Edited April 22 by Blitzen

[Dagwoodyt]

 

A group of multiplayer addicts commiserating over their victimization at the hands of VR addicts. 🤣

Note the Team' chuckling when they discuss VR. That was a good idea?

 

[Mysticpuma]

16 hours ago, Blitzen said:

I can only wish that the "moderator "would heve asked why the team doesn't release more "in progress" screenshots and/or vidsIt would go very far in keeping interest alive and knowing progress was being made! This can't be too difficult a request?!

 

[Trooper117]

Is VR one of the main hold ups for the delay?

[Mysticpuma]

49 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

Is VR one of the main hold ups for the delay?

I think Buzzsaw missing for a month may also be an issue?

 

Here:

ATAG:

 

 

Discord:

Edited May 11 by Mysticpuma

[Dagwoodyt]

1 minute ago, Mysticpuma said:

I think Buzzsaw missing for a month may also be an issue?

missing?

[Mysticpuma]

Just now, Dagwoodyt said:

missing?

See above

[ST_Catchov]

Well, that's it then. It's finished. It's all over. Finito. Kaput. Terminado.