Marketing.

[Panzerlang]

 

[Panzerlang]

I'd like to know what he's smoking in regard to the comparisons of terrain. Maybe my eyes have gone wonky with age but to me the only difference, if there's much of one at all, is artistic interpretation. BoX terrain is every bit 'as good' as that in DCS and will be even better in Korea (judging by WIP screenies to date).

Ditto plane details, at least at playable levels. A playable game or a screen-shot generator, puh.

[=MERCS=JenkemJunkie]

He is a content creator, so the unplayable screen-shot generator performance would be more important for him, but even with that I thought the terrain in Korea looked purdy and made me want to play the game, not think it would hold the game back.

[stburr91]

I think the youtuber is saying compared to some of the latest DCS terrains,the Korean terrain is lacking. While I don't see anything wrong with the Korea terrain, it does lack the detail of some of the recent DCS terrains. 

 

I agree with this youtuber that the marketing for this project is very lacking indeed, I know very little about the project, and didn't even know it's supposed to release this year until I saw this video. 

Edited August 7 by stburr91

[LukeFF]

14 minutes ago, stburr91 said:

I agree with this youtuber that the marketing for this project is very lacking indeed, I know very little about the project, and didn't even know it's supposed to release this year until I saw this video. 

 

I'm not quite sure what more you want us to do at this point, given the number of dev blog entries and videos we've released across just about every major social media platform out there. 🙂

[AEthelraedUnraed]

16 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

I'm not quite sure what more you want us to do at this point

MOAR EXPLOSHIUNS!!1!1!ONE!!1!

 

(Honestly. I like the current format of dev blogs and "brief rooms" but IMO these are more suited to a public that's already interested in IL2 Korea. I think some simple trailer of a MiG shooting down a Sabre or vice versa would go a long way towards reaching a more general public.)

 

[stburr91]

3 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

I'm not quite sure what more you want us to do at this point, given the number of dev blog entries and videos we've released across just about every major social media platform out there. 🙂

 

I don't "want" you to do anything, how many units of this product are sold has no affect on me. 

 

However I might suggest working with fluent/native english speakers to do more promotion, as the dev videos I've seen are not particularly watchable for english speakers. This is not a criticism of the developers, or the part of the world they are from, it's just a reality of the language barrier that exists.

 

The Russian language is very difficult to translate into english, that's all I'm saying, so people shouldn't read more into what I've said than that.      

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

MOAR EXPLOSHIUNS!!1!1!ONE!!1!

 

(Honestly. I like the current format of dev blogs and "brief rooms" but IMO these are more suited to a public that's already interested in IL2 Korea. I think some simple trailer of a MiG shooting down a Sabre or vice versa would go a long way towards reaching a more general public.)

 

We'll get there, don't worry. 🙂 It's just showing this stuff at the right place and right time.

 

59 minutes ago, stburr91 said:

However I might suggest working with fluent/native english speakers to do more promotion, as the dev videos I've seen are not particularly watchable for english speakers. This is not a criticism of the developers, or the part of the world they are from, it's just a reality of the language barrier that exists.

 

The Russian language is very difficult to translate into english, that's all I'm saying, so people shouldn't read more into what I've said than that.      

 

We do have something/someone in mind for enhancing our promotional work. More details on that later (rumors even say he's out there on our social media channels right now ).

As for the videos, they've come a long, long way since the first ones, so I'd encourage you to watch some of the more recent ones if you've not already done so. All the text is checked and edited by me (with the assistance of tools like Grammarly) and one of our marketing managers to ensure the proper message is being conveyed in the videos (Russian can be...messy sometimes when translating it to English). Until AI tech improves further, it's about as good as can be done right now with translation tools. 

[Dagwoodyt]

To me the DD's and blogs are excellent and I trust they'll continue till release. I've absolutely no complaint about the translations to English.👍

[Aapje]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

I'm not quite sure what more you want us to do at this point, given the number of dev blog entries and videos we've released across just about every major social media platform out there. 🙂

 

It's not about quantity, but that the content you put out is rather one-dimensional. It's all tailored to people who enjoy nerding out on specific technical details. Basically, those videos appeal to the development team and a subset of the community that is similar to them. Now, I am part of that subset, but even I feel dissatisfied with the other side being missing.

 

Now, it is understandable that you may not want to show off the game until sufficiently finished, but it does mean that your videos won't get major traction with the less nerdy people.

 

I also feel that the quality of the DDs and dev blogs is not optimal. For example, this paragraph from DD 40 has very poor readability:
 

Quote

Secondly, the story or static campaign, as it is also called. For all its advantages, such a mode deprives the player of the most important feature: replayability. Our simulators have always assumed that the player invests time not just to "complete" the game, but to discover something new and enjoyable in the product over a long period. Additionally, a static campaign with a historical plot is poorly suited for allowing the player to fly various airplanes; during the Korean War, very few people had the opportunity to fly piston, jet, and strike planes. This could have happened during WWII, but even there it was not within a particular battle, but instead throughout the war, which is almost impossible to realize with good quality as one story (it would turn out to be too long). To change the character in such personal stories, where the narrative is paramount, is to lose most of the advantages of this approach. We want to tell a story like this at some point, but as a primary mode, it’s not the best solution for the Korean War.

 

Even if I just feed it to ChatGPT with a request to make it more engaging, I feel that the readability improved a lot:

 

Quote

Secondly, there’s the story-driven or “static” campaign. While it offers some clear strengths, it lacks one of the most important elements for our players: replayability. Our simulators have always been designed with longevity in mind—not just to be completed, but to offer new experiences and discoveries over time. A static campaign with a fixed historical narrative limits that. It also restricts the variety of aircraft a player can realistically fly. During the Korean War, few pilots flew piston-engine fighters, jets, and strike aircraft all in one tour. That kind of variety was more plausible across the entirety of WWII, but even then, not within a single battle—making it incredibly difficult to craft a cohesive, high-quality story without it becoming overly long or disjointed. In narrative-focused campaigns, changing protagonists mid-story tends to break immersion and undermine the very storytelling that makes these campaigns appealing. We’re excited to tell a story like this someday, but for the Korean War, it’s not the ideal primary mode.

 

Although I think that it can be improved further (and there is a mistake in the ChatGPT version), for example by leaving out useless clarifications. Who doesn't understand the concept of a story driven campaign, so what is the point of clarifying that an alternative name is a static campaign?

 

As for the dev blogs, I think that an unscripted chat like that is highly dependent on the charisma of the presenter(s) and good charisma is somewhat rare, and super-charisma is very rare (there is a reason why so many YouTube channels put out a ton of content with the charisma-guy/gal and trying to offload work to other presenters often doesn't work). I think that the dev team didn't roll amazingly well on the charisma stat. The AI-translation probably makes it a lot worse too.

 

I do think that a missed opportunity is that you don't seem to partner with a high-charisma content creator. For example, Growling Sidewinder is a pretty big Youtuber, who does both DCS and IL-2 content, and both jet and piston content, so he seems perfect to get new people into IL-2 (hook them with with the Korean jets and once they are addicted, hit them with the piston drugs). But he's not done anything on Odessa & Leningrad yet and I'm not even sure that he is aware of the module. Given how many videos he makes and the breadth of them, it is probably hard for him to keep up.

 

So why not reach out to send him free game keys and whenever you release something new, send him a tailored mail with the new stuff that he can make videos about? For example, for EA S&L, that could be pointing out the I-153 and the best parts of the Odessa map that would look great in a video.

[LukeFF]

Points taken, thanks. 

 

As I alluded to above, we do have a plan to modify/change how we market the game, so you all should be seeing that soon. We are quite confident it will help increase the games visibility. 

[Panzerlang]

Puh. Youtube algorithm? I've put up hundreds of game-play videos over the years and they get very few views. The last 30 or so were one of my IL2 careers and the average views for each are around 60. It's the old chicken & egg scenario; more views get more views but to get more views you have to get more views. 😄 Not enough views, the algorithm hides your content.

So, even the IL2 dev channel is challenged in that regard. But yes, more action videos could only help imo.

[Aapje]

6 hours ago, Panzerlang said:

Not enough views, the algorithm hides your content.

 

No, the algorithm mainly looks at click-through rate (do people click on the video after it is recommended to them), watch-time (how much of the video do they watch) and retention (do they watch other videos on the channel).

 

Videos from tiny channels can get recommended to 'everyone' if that one video does great on the metrics (and keeps doing great if the video is recommended to ever more people).

 

Quote

I've put up hundreds of game-play videos over the years and they get very few views.

 

I only have to look at your video list to see that you are making major mistakes. Bad thumbnails and video topics that are way too diverse. And your gameplay videos have long periods where nothing happens that will tank your watch-time.

 

Doing something about 2 out of 3 of these things will require an investment in editing and such, so it's a choice whether you want to do that. The standard has become higher on YouTube than in the past, so it's very hard to get many views even if you don't make big mistakes.

Edited August 8 by Aapje

[Dagwoodyt]

The developers should be applauded for having the courage to leave the WWII FW190's and 109's in the rear view mirror. I've been hoping for a Mig Alley redo for decades.🙂

[Dagwoodyt]

[ArgonV]

I guess the guy never played Mig Alley... Or Chuck Yeager's Air Combat.

 

At any rate, I don't understand what he thinks is so low detail about the aircraft, textures and terrain? I also wonder video compression is being taken into account... I, for one, cannot wait for this!

[Panzerlang]

2 hours ago, Aapje said:

 

No, the algorithm mainly looks at click-through rate (do people click on the video after it is recommended to them), watch-time (how much of the video do they watch) and retention (do they watch other videos on the channel).

 

Videos from tiny channels can get recommended to 'everyone' if that one video does great on the metrics.

 

 

I only have to look at your video list to see that you are making major mistakes. Bad thumbnails and video topics that are way too diverse. And your gameplay videos have long periods where nothing happens that will tank your watch-time.

 

Doing something about 2 out of 3 of these things will require an investment in editing and such, so it's a choice whether you want to do that. The standard has become higher on YouTube than in the past, so it's very hard to get many views even if you don't make big mistakes.

Yes, I'm aware of all that and if I was trying to make money I'd fix all of it. Lol. But I'm not, it's pure boredom. 😁

[ST_Catchov]

3 hours ago, Panzerlang said:

I've put up hundreds of game-play videos over the years and they get very few views. The last 30 or so were one of my IL2 careers and the average views for each are around 60.

 

You know Panzer, it's a fact that most well known geniuses throughout the annals of history are not recognised for their brilliance until after their death. One day, the name Panzerlang will be revered, and spoken of in hushed tones with knowingly nodding heads of appreciation. Take heart lad.

 

The rest is fluff, soon forgotten and relegated to the dustbin of history.

 

[Juri_JS]

12 hours ago, stburr91 said:

I think the youtuber is saying compared to some of the latest DCS terrains,the Korean terrain is lacking. While I don't see anything wrong with the Korea terrain, it does lack the detail of some of the recent DCS terrains. 

There is certainly room for improvement when it comes to the terrain, but I am not sure how it could be done, when the devs can't work with modern aerial photos to create the terrain for a map showing Korea in the 1950s.

At the moment there are lots of interesting developments when it comes to the use of AI with geospatial data and GIS. Hopefully the devs will be able to profit from this in the future. It could make creating realistic looking landscapes much easier and faster.