PDA

View Full Version : Why new planes ?



Quelthanas
12-31-2004, 06:23 AM
May be a stupid question or many times asked but why waisting time to vreate completely new planes for IL2 FB series instead of focusing on making all planes flyable ? Models are in, sounds are in, Flying routing are in,... The only thing they need is a cockpit. By the time they create a new plane they could make at least 10 already in flyable.

I know all the plane in aren't really interesting but more than 75% are.

Quelthanas
12-31-2004, 06:23 AM
May be a stupid question or many times asked but why waisting time to vreate completely new planes for IL2 FB series instead of focusing on making all planes flyable ? Models are in, sounds are in, Flying routing are in,... The only thing they need is a cockpit. By the time they create a new plane they could make at least 10 already in flyable.

I know all the plane in aren't really interesting but more than 75% are.

EJGrOst_Caspar
12-31-2004, 06:43 AM
Do you think so?

1. Beave me, modelling a cockpit is more work than you think. I bet its more than making a external model.
2. most 3th party modellers don't like to work on cockpits (see #1.) but many do externals for hobby, so they are available
3. on most planes it takes ages to collect enough resources before you even can think of starting modeling a cockpit for it.

DuxCorvan
12-31-2004, 07:02 AM
Besides, many AI models are poorer in polygons than the flyable, just because they weren't supposed to catch so much attention. If they make them flyable, they'll have to re-make their externals almost from scratch, which it is so much work as building a completely new one. Besides, new, more complex, FMs, DMs, etc...

Not too big a difference. But you are right, I'd like to pilot everything I see in the game. But... it's not our decision.

F19_Olli72
12-31-2004, 07:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by EJGrOst_Caspar:
3. on most planes it takes ages to collect enough resources before you even can think of starting modeling a cockpit for it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yup, also for some planes there simply arent any references like the PE-8 for example.

TheEngine88
12-31-2004, 07:31 AM
And what new planes are you speaking of? There haven't been any new planes, as far as I know.

Bearcat99
12-31-2004, 07:59 AM
Welcome to our world...... IMO there are enough flyable planes to keep things interesting. Although I would love to see as many flyables as I can under these FMs the only thing really missing is the 88, the betty and the Avenger IMO that would round out the sim. Most guys only fly a few of the available planes anyway.

mortoma
12-31-2004, 08:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
Besides, many AI models are poorer in polygons than the flyable, just because they weren't supposed to catch so much attention. If they make them flyable, they'll have to re-make their externals almost from scratch, which it is so much work as building a completely new one. Besides, new, more complex, FMs, DMs, etc...

Not too big a difference. But you are right, I'd like to pilot everything I see in the game. But... it's not our decision. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Not necessarily, look at the polygons on the current crop of flyable Migs. Mig-3 were low poly from the get go, esecially 1940 model and that last uber model.

VW-IceFire
12-31-2004, 11:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Quelthanas:
May be a stupid question or many times asked but why waisting time to vreate completely new planes for IL2 FB series instead of focusing on making all planes flyable ? Models are in, sounds are in, Flying routing are in,... The only thing they need is a cockpit. By the time they create a new plane they could make at least 10 already in flyable.

I know all the plane in aren't really interesting but more than 75% are. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Which planes were you thinking of? There's some problems with making many of them flyable:

1) Lack of references. This is huge.
2) Time to implement....a multi-station bomber is a huge piece of work.

Quelthanas
12-31-2004, 11:58 AM
Well any twin engines, I love them. Me210, HS129, Ki-46

tascaso
12-31-2004, 12:46 PM
Again...I agree with Bearcat99...plenty of planes to fly...I have yet to master one of them much less two. Online you can see the folks riding one sled 99.9% of the time. Of course it would be nice to round out the PTO with a US and Japanese Torpedo plane for the frontline war. The Ju88 would be welcome in the east and west fronts.

I am still for more maps... Spanish Civil War the Med, Malta more eastern front.

Congrats to Maddox and 1C for giving us the sim we have dreamed about since BOB and SWOTL. Keep up the good work....Happy New Year! С о²Ñ"м ³о´ом

See you all in 2005!

123_Tony_123VEF

jdlnorcal
12-31-2004, 12:51 PM
Please oh Please how about Torp droppers, What is the pacific War without them?
Why were they left out for the most part?

Peter_Fitzwell
12-31-2004, 01:19 PM
They should make a sim with every single model of plane ever flown in WW2 by all countries involved and those not involved, including sub-variants and experimental types,prototypes that never went into production, and any aircraft drawn on a napkin during the war and call it SHUTUPFANBOY Flight-WW2


And someone would still be mad that the Wright Flyer and the GeeBee were left out because they wanted to start a squadron that flies those.

Hurribomber
12-31-2004, 08:34 PM
It's a shame they didn't make the Blenheim flyable.

She flew over the eastern front, Ardennes, Normandy, desert & Far East so there are a huge range of missions.

There are certainly references and even an airworthy example.

F4U_Flyer
01-01-2005, 12:37 AM
" I am still for more maps "

I'll drink to that !!

NZ_Coyote
01-01-2005, 01:25 AM
Nice Wallpapers F19_Olli72, thanks for sharing. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif