PDA

View Full Version : Nice review of IL-2



XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 04:25 PM
I found a nice review of IL-2. This site seems really harsh on games, but it looks like they love IL-2. My fav quote is "So far ahead of competition that it will not be matched for at least 5 years". I agree with this and it's about time somebody recognized just how good IL-2 is technically as well as gameplay wise. Checking the reviewer's profile shows that he rates Microsoft Flight Simulator as one of his top 10 worst games ever. I think I agree with that too. They also do a review of FA/18 Operation Iraqi Freedom which shows the difference between flight sims these days, ie. Oleg beats everyone else hands down.

http://hatekill.yojutsu.com/?viewarticle=review_il2
http://hatekill.yojutsu.com/?viewarticle=review_fa18oif

This is OT, but you should see the Doom 3 preview, it's really funny.

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 04:25 PM
I found a nice review of IL-2. This site seems really harsh on games, but it looks like they love IL-2. My fav quote is "So far ahead of competition that it will not be matched for at least 5 years". I agree with this and it's about time somebody recognized just how good IL-2 is technically as well as gameplay wise. Checking the reviewer's profile shows that he rates Microsoft Flight Simulator as one of his top 10 worst games ever. I think I agree with that too. They also do a review of FA/18 Operation Iraqi Freedom which shows the difference between flight sims these days, ie. Oleg beats everyone else hands down.

http://hatekill.yojutsu.com/?viewarticle=review_il2
http://hatekill.yojutsu.com/?viewarticle=review_fa18oif

This is OT, but you should see the Doom 3 preview, it's really funny.

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 05:51 PM
Not really a OT, good read.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
http://www.tamiya.com/japan/products/list/48plane_img/61027.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 08:25 PM
It really shows that site is made by amateurs.

I read the Preview of DOOM 3 and it really hilarious they think they got anything to base their preview from an unlegal ALPHA leaked version! I hope they get caught and locked down.

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 08:50 PM
This article seems a tad out of sync...


"Because the star aircraft are Russian there is a noticeable bias..."

....then....

"A particular long standing bug is the exploding P-40. When going into a very shallow dive the plane simply explodes for no reason. I suspect this bug could be fixed in seconds, so why isnt it?"

...the author seems to think that the P-40 being "American" means that it is put at a disadvantage - I doubt this clown has even played the game, or in any case is unaware of any of the historical parts of it - i.e. that the P-40 flew for the Russians!!!

This is my favorite:

"Every problem or bug stems from the attitude of the developers. Unfortunately they ignore feedback and frequently leave users feeling frustrated. Some of the bugs seem easy to fix but a quick read of the forums reveals they are left in for political reasons."

Is this guy for real??? Has he ever seen another game where the development team has made numerous patches with FREE add-on planes??? I imagine that the author knows NOTHING about the original IL2 and stopped into the forum at the height of whining in ORR and GD.



What a clown!

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 08:59 PM
I think the review is OK but some pretty basic errors: the review is titled IL-2 but he's actually reviewing FB (see comments re: P-40).

He praises FB but states:

"Every problem or bug stems from the attitude of the developers. Unfortunately they ignore feedback and frequently leave users feeling frustrated. Some of the bugs seem easy to fix but a quick read of the forums reveals they are left in for political reasons."

-----A quick read of the forums reveals that there is a contingent of the community FEELS that there is pre-soviet bias but this opinion is not shared by all posters. I also think that to say that the developer "ignores" feedback is false. There were 2 patches for Il2 which not only improved the box version precisely by taking into account feedback from the community. Very soon there will be a patch for FB based again on community feedback. Does Oleg agree with all demands? no, of course not.

"A particular long standing bug is the exploding P-40. When going into a very shallow dive the plane simply explodes for no reason. I suspect this bug could be fixed in seconds, so why isnt it?"

------ Here, too, the reviewer did not do all his homework. The P-40 explosion bug has been discussed in several threads and the upshot is that the problem doesn't occur to everybody- so it's probably not a bug that could be fixed in seconds. Also (there's no date on the review) the reviewer should be aware that the patch should address this,

Not a bad review (hey, he rated FB a "masterpiece" /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif ) but kind of sloppy in terms of research.

Thanks for the link /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
C_g


Problems with sound

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 09:00 PM
Sounds like he cant handle the low firepower of the ME-109. Just gotta hittem close. Took me forever to learn how to use the ME-109 but I'd take it over most Russian planes. I'll give the LAGG3 its props it has awesome fire power but I'll take the ME-109 over it any day. I say this game is very unbias.

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 09:06 PM
How old's the guy who wrote this? Does he know what an alpha build is? I read his Jedi Knight 1 and 2 reviews as well. Basically, he's out for some good old fashioned Counter Strike action. Under the circumstances, I must say that I'm not pleased to hear that he thinks highly of Il2.

http://www.student.richmond.edu/~vk5qa/images/forumsig.jpg


"Come on in, I'll treat you right. I used to know your daddy."

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 09:06 PM
The reviewer is probably one of the old timer Noob whiners here (which I can be too I guess).

That said...the dude/dudette is right about one thing...

-- full mission builder is also provided. Its capable enough,
-- but would be faster and better using a windows interface.

Damn, even Flanker 1.0 DOS Mission Editor worked better than FMB and perhaps better than Flanker 2.51 Mission Editor, both much more recent programs. Sad when you think about it. (that's me, whining)

And then there is...

-- The single player campaigns are really good fun due to... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif



Message Edited on 07/29/0308:08PM by LEXX_Luthor

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 09:09 PM
@oeqvist

I think it is supposed to be funny... where is your sense of humour lol?


@Guelph2002

I get that p-40 bug too. I don't think it has anything to with political bias, it's just a bug? I don't get your "American" comment, where is that in the review?


I posted this coz I thought it was a really positive review. Just because it is critical of some points, it does not mean the reviewer is a clown! No offense, but I think it is pretty obvious he/she has played the game, and I think it is dumb to be completely against any critism.

Why are you guys so agressive? Please calm down...

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 09:59 PM
Not question of being aggressive, but THIS is just dumb:

"Every problem or bug stems from the attitude of the developers. Unfortunately they ignore feedback and frequently leave users feeling frustrated. Some of the bugs seem easy to fix but a quick read of the forums reveals they are left in for political reasons."

It is as wrong as it gets. Actually, not just wrong, but completely slanderous. A guy who doesn't know what he is talking about (or simply just too credulous of whatever he reads by whomever).

Freycinet
<center>
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/delfin/SD/2001/flight/spitbf109/ellehammer-crop-for-il2-forum-reduced.jpg</center>
<center>My Il-2 web-site:</center><center><BIG>"Za Rodinu!"</BIG> (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/delfin/SD/2001/flight/il-2/index.htm)</center>

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 10:31 PM
I don't think we're being too aggressive, and thanks for posting the link /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif .

It is obvious that the reviewer played FB pretty extensively, but he could have spent a little more time reading the forums before just picking up a few (unsubstantiated) points and extrapolating incorrectly from them.

Cheers,
Cold_gambler

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 11:21 PM
@Freycinet

I agree that it is partially wrong, but not totally... I think what other ppls comments about getting the wrong idea from the forums are right.

@Cold_Gambler

Yep I agree with you, you can see how a brief visitor could get the wrong idea. Someone email him and he might reply here and defend his "slander" lol

XyZspineZyX
07-30-2003, 04:43 AM
Hey there DoomsDoom,

First off, thanks for the link - obviously if I am clicking around in this forum, it is because I am interested in what's out there, so thanks. Please don't be put off by our seemingly aggressive attitude - we just thought some of the points, some would say his strongest, were unfounded, and for a review to be so subjective does nobody any favours in my opinion.

I should explain the "American" part of my post - The reviewer said that the P-40 bug was easily fixable right after he accused the development team of political bias toward the Russian side. It looked to me that he had lumped the P40 in with all the other "non-Russian" planes which suffer from his so-called political bias. I apologize if that was unclear, and I meant no disrespect by it.

So there, we're all calm and happy, just critical of stuff we see out there. After all, if we weren't, we'd just all be off playing CFS!!!

Cheers,

Guelph





Message Edited on 07/30/0308:07AM by Guelph2002

XyZspineZyX
07-30-2003, 12:57 PM
mgregor kindly emailed me to tell me about this thread. Here is my response to your comments. But before I start I am grateful you have taken the time to criticize my review.

@all

I'm glad you enjoyed the review. I really love IL-2 and it was hard for me to come up with any criticism because it is so far ahead of anything else.

@DOOMSDOOM

I agree, Oleg does beat everyone else http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Me and other people on the site try to be harsh because every other site/magazine is way too nice.

@oeqvist

The site is indeed setup by amateurs! It is the second site I have coded. The first was KDO Music, where non-licensed musicians could post their music (mostly Fast Tracker people). It no longer runs because the bandwidth was too much for me and the other to afford. Previewing that Doom 3 alpha is not actually illegal by the way. I am only trying to make a site where there is total freedom of speech.

@Guelph2002

The P-40 bit is not actually supposed to be linked to any bias comment, but it comes right after, so I see where the confusion comes from.

@Cold_Gambler

What you say about it feeling like there is a bias is absolutely spot on. I tried to reflect the community feeling, but got it wrong in places.

@UR_Spinne

I am 22 years old. You may have noticed the entire site is provocative. It is supposed to be. Above all though, it is designed to be more funny than informative http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

@Freycinet

In a similar way to Cold_Gambler you are correct. The patches are indeed excellent. I admire how the game is still being worked on. If only all developers worked that way!

@Guelph2002 (2nd post)

I hate CFS http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I tried to get across the reasons why IL-2 is so good.

@all

After reading your comments I am going to update the article. I am very pleased to see a lot of people here are sensible and make considered arguments. I now wish I had payed less attention to some of the 'whiners'.

Cheers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Tully__
07-30-2003, 01:16 PM
Cold_Gambler wrote:
- I think the review is OK but some pretty basic
- errors: the review is titled IL-2 but he's actually
- reviewing FB.....


The full titles of both games are:

IL2 Sturmovik

IL2:Forgotten Battles

Although common use on the forum is for IL2 to mean the original, it is a valid abbreviation of both titles.

<center> ================================================== ========================= </center>

<center> <img src=http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/Corsair.jpg> </center>

<center> The "under performing planes" thread (http://www.simhq.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=35;t=007540) /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </center>
<center> Forum Terms of Use (http://www.ubi.com/US/Info/TermsOfUse.htm) </center>
<center><font size="-2" color="#88aadd">IL2 Forums Moderator</font></center>


Salut
Tully

XyZspineZyX
07-30-2003, 01:24 PM
respect @ dog spawn


thanks for taking the time to write the article, then come back here to read this thread and then to register and post a response.


Mad


Cpt-Madcowz
Comsa (http://www.comsa.co.uk)



"When the hunter comes, the tiger runs with the deer."


http://www.comsa.co.uk/images/uploads/il2_ram.jpg

michapma
07-30-2003, 01:44 PM
I disagree, Tully&mdash;especially for the title of an online review. The title used was "IL-2 Sturmovik". Neither FB nor Forgotten Battles appeared anywhere, and I figure it should be specified where there can be confusion. FB or IL-2:FB should be used for Forgotten Battles, IL-2 means IL-2 Sturmovik. The title of the review should either be "Forgotten Battles" or "IL-2 Sturmovik: Forgotten Battles", in order to avoid confusion. Without the comment about the P-40, it would be just about impossible to see whether the review is for IL-2 or FB. I don't take the review too seriously, espeically if it's not meant to be.

Cheers,
Mike

<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="10"><tr valign="middle" bgcolor="#3e463b"><td height="40" colspan="3" align="center">The ongoing IL-2 User's Guide project (http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~chapman/il2guide/)</a></td></tr><tr bgcolor="#515e2f"><td width="40%">FB engine management:
Manifold Pressure sucks (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182081-1.html)
Those Marvelous Props (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182082-1.html)
Mixture Magic (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182084-1.html)
Putting It All Together (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182085-1.html)
Those Fire-Breathing Turbos (Part 1 of 6) (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182102-1.html)</td><td align="center">

SKULLS_Chap

<a href="http://www.skulls98.netfirms.com/il2/index.html" target="_blank" style="color: #191970; font-size: medium">The
SKULLS</a></p></td><td width="40%" align="right" valign="top">Hardware:
Flight Simulation Performance Analyzed (http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_062a.html)
Building a home-made throttle quadrant step by step (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=zkavv)
Sound Can Be Hazardous for Games (http://www6.tomshardware.com/game/20030405/index.html)</td></tr></table>

XyZspineZyX
07-30-2003, 01:45 PM
How cool of this guy to come here and answer everyone's post! The way I see it, this young man and his collegues are onto a good thing: reviews from the perspective of an average gamer. I love that it is amaturish, and I love that he said that he will adjust his comments, following continued research here.I'll be bookmarking this site. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://www.cherokee.org/Culture/images/proctorZeke.jpg

"My ancestors didn't come over in the Mayflower--they met the boat."


http://www.theinformationminister.com/press.php?ID=612345111

XyZspineZyX
07-30-2003, 01:51 PM
The only reviews I take seriously is the ones from PC Gamer magazine. All others are junk IMO.
Andy Mahood does the sims reviews and is always on the money from what I have experience. FB got over 90% and CFS low 70s. Can't fool this guy /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-30-2003, 02:05 PM
dog_spawn wrote:

After reading your comments I am going to update the article. I am very pleased to see a lot of people here are sensible and make considered arguments. I now wish I had payed less attention to some of the 'whiners'.

Cheers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

*************************************************


I`m always worried that new guys to this forum come here and see the whines then think exactly as this reviewer did. I`ve said this before, that whines on IL2/FB are of a `higher` level. They love the sim so much that they want more and know it`s possible from Olegg, so they try it on. To be honest alot of whiners really don`t appreciate how lucky they are.

Anyway the truth is they really LOVE it and wouldn`t fly another WWII sim.

Unfortunately it can give new viewers the idea that FB is not so good.


p,s, We appreciate your response, dog_spawn .

XyZspineZyX
07-30-2003, 04:17 PM
Dog_Spawn,
Glad to see you're taking the comments in good stride /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
Cheers,
Cold_g

XyZspineZyX
07-30-2003, 04:31 PM
Thanks for responding to my mail dog_spawn!

I really care for "my" /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif IL-2 and don't want anyone reading the review getting wrong ideas because you unfortunately happened to visit the forums when the whining was at its worst.

As far as I am concerned this is the best historic aircraft sim to date and there is no deliberate bias towards any side. Any incorrectness has been, or will be I'm sure, fixed by 1c:maddox team. I am really impressed by the responsability they are showing towards their customers. I just hope that Oleg and his team are not overcomed by the whiners.

Some of the threads are completely unreal. With hundreds of responses, each poster bashing away at the others, displaying a childish attitude and wanting that their favourite aircraft becomes the fastest/meanest/biggest so they can "kill" any other and boast their small egos.

Other threads have a much more constructive point-of-view, and I am sure that Oleg has taken a lot of responses seriously and implemented changes accordingly. Actually it seems that the majority of the posters in these forums are quite mature (poll showing an average age of about 40 I think?) and many have great knowledge and experience about both technical and historical aspects of aircraft and air warfare.

So don't let a few a$$hats miscolor your point-of-view. The sim is the best and deserves to be recognized as such.

Thanks again for visiting! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-31-2003, 06:03 PM
I updated the review (it probably still has some problems).

Me and some others are writing an article on what makes a good or bad FPS. In goes into it quite deeply with analysis examples, histoty, and will be up maybe in a week or something.

Later we will want to write the same sort of thing for flightsims. There will probably be quite a lot of problems with that, as I am researching about 10 different forums atm http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-31-2003, 07:53 PM
nice to see it!

Horrido!
http://image.photoloft.com/opx-bin/OpxFIDISA.dll?s=cano&src=/Photoloft/Asset21/2003/07/31/10931/10931767_0_6360.fpx,0,0,1,1,512,279,FFFFFF