PDA

View Full Version : End of life for IL2?: a suggestion.....



NerdConnected
03-04-2007, 02:51 PM
A suggestion...

As an off liner I'm still very pleased with Il2, but now that BoB:SoW is in the making and Il2 will soon come to an end, I'm a bit curious what will happen to IL2.

It's a pity when such a good flight sim comes to an end, even after 5 years, when it's still one of the best that people can buy today. I mean, the graphics are still great and so are the fm and dm. I think they're still very good but more important, it's still great fun to play IL2. The scenery, the maps, the planes and all and it's smooth as silk.

But, things come to an end...

Okay, about IL2's future. Here are my thoughts:

Oleg said that if another organization or company would take it over (i.e. buy it) and guarantee the high quality and keep it closed the way it is now, he would consider it (correct me if I'm wrong...). I understand such a point of view because that's what made Il2 to what it is now.

I have some concerns however about someone taking over. I know, I shouldn't be concerned because SoW:BoB is around the corner, but still. I know the RTS from 1C is based on a heavily modified il2 engine, but I haven't seen another Il2 based game coming on the market and I'm a bit worried it will simply 'die'. To me that would be a real shame given the fact it's still a great game.

I understand the Il2 code was has grown beyond what it was meant for, has become harder and harder to maintain and Maddox is likely a bit hesitant to give others access to their code, but even when this is true, surely some parts could be opened up (to the community)?

I'm not that much interested in things like fm, dm and such because I like them the way they are and trust Maddox simulated them as close as one can get on a current PC. Worse, I'm not an aeronautical engineer or RL pilot, so I cannot say anything about these things. I trust Maddox when they say when they say the fm is pretty close to reality. To me, this code can stay closed as far as I'm concerned. I think other things should be opened up a bit.

It all depend on how it was coded of course and if things are a bit modular, but as an off liner my biggest gripe with il2 is merely the current AI. The AI is pretty good (yes, I know it cheats), but I'd still love to see some things differently. One on one, the AI can be very challenging (because of cheating..), but it gets a bit predictable when you play the game a bit longer and the AI sometimes simply make the wrong move or does something slightly stupid. Bottom line, it kills the immersion a bit and it shouldn't..

I understand it's very hard to write credible AI, but I think some things could and should be fixed. What I'm really missing is AI that's less predictable and AI that uses more real life tactics. Close escorts that actually try to behave like that, fighter escorts that have free roles and can attack whoever they like, fighter bombers that only make single passes and leave the area etc, etc. In addition, maybe some slight adjustments could be made so different flight formations are possible depending on the situation. Besides that, I'm thinking of preventing the AI from using emergency power all the time, enable over heat for AI, more realistic cruising speeds, more intelligent or slightly random attacking and defensive behavior, modify the all seeing eye for AI, head on attacks for fighters attacking bombers etc, etc. Personally, I wouldn't mind if it would lead to less planes in the air at the same time; faster cpu's are around the corner..

I believe if the AI code could be improved this way (maybe an extra thread on dual core cpu's?), Il2 could easily last several years or more. I know this is not directly beneficial for the sales of SoW:BoB, but 'killing' IL2 right now would be a real shame; the game still has much potential.

If this area could be opened up for the community, whereby Maddox keeps the ownership of the code (something like shared source ;-), we'd have an updated Il2 and Maddox could possibly profit at the same from the input of the community (provided the community is smart enough of course). I wouldn't mind if the rest of the Il2 code remained closed like it is now.

I'm not a programmer, so I do not know if a thing like this is even remotely possible, but to me it looks like such a path would not harm the on line IL2 community and would protect the high quality of Il2 and at the same time, one of key areas people usually moan about could be improved. 1C/Maddox would stay in control and have the right do whatever it wants with the code that's produced by the community and only promises to make it available in patches. Producing high quality and speedy code is entirely up to the community.

I don't know how many people here are smart enough to write acceptable AI code for IL2, but I would be very thankful if such a decision was made ;-)

Now, if the IL2 AI code is everywhere and nowhere at the same time within the Il2 millions lines of code and this is completely impossible, call me stupid and forget I ever wrote this ;-)

Still, I think it's a nice idea..

Regards,

Mark

XyZspineZyX
03-04-2007, 03:28 PM
Don't forget that BoB will only be BoB when it debuts.

It will not encompass the breadth of scope that '46 currently enjoys, at it's outset. It seems some folks forget that BoB will not take '46 and make it up to the BoB standard. Taking the content of this sim and getting it to BoB will take years

During those years, this sim will get quite a bit of use

slappedsilly
03-04-2007, 05:23 PM
Don't forget that BoB will only be BoB when it debuts.

I've wondered about that. It will seem, to some, very restrictive compared to 1946. I would think they would have to move pretty fast to get the crowd thats used to 300 plane interested. Maybe the detail will be enough, but everyones going to be itching for thier favorite plane.

LEXX_Luthor
03-04-2007, 05:46 PM
I have read that somebody, some say Luthier of PF fame, is making a Korean War sim out of Oleg's FB game engine.

slapp::
It will seem, to some, very restrictive compared to 1946.
Correct. However, the current FB/PF "crowd" is small. I assume Oleg is thinking to make BoB And Beyond to attract and (hopefully) maintain a much larger customer base, which means far beyond the recent and today's FB/PF players.

The first BoB releace will not be very restrictive to new players, those who never tried FB/PF, and perhaps less numerically important, those who have not played FB/PF in years. If the first BoB is very immersive and focused, with very wide options in skill settings available that also maintain immersion in air warfare gameplay, it should keep interested alot of new players. Well that's my theory anyways.

FritzGryphon
03-04-2007, 09:04 PM
I have read that somebody, some say Luthier of PF fame, is making a Korean War sim out of Oleg's FB game engine.

I've heard it's being made for SoW engine instead.

Personally I'm quite pleased with the small plane set for BoB.

Though only (only is not a good word) 10 or 11 flyables, it's very comprehensive and balanced. Every nation has 2 or more fighters of different performance, and at least one bomber. All major combat roles will be possible for all sides, and online wars will be possible right out of the box.

I don't see it having any disadvantage to the IL-2 series. I'm sure many of us will welcome the sweeping away of many bugs that have accumulated in the IL-2 series, partly because of all the flyables.

LEXX_Luthor
03-04-2007, 10:21 PM
Fritz::
I'm sure many of us will welcome the sweeping away of many bugs that have accumulated in the IL-2 series, partly because of all the flyables.
This is a common mis-conception based on the classic "study vs survey" sim argument seen on these ubi boards, and has led in the past to some very heated "debates" here, as many members of the combat flight sim community enjoy more than just the "popular" aircraft. Please do not assume that Oleg's next system of aircraft modelling will be as limited as that in FB/PF, which was originally designed around one (1) flyable aircraft, the IL-2, a sea level ground support aircraft, and so may have offered difficulties expanding to a full spectrum of other types of aircraft.

All, or almost all, common combat aircraft should be flyable in any combat flight sim, except dedicated "study" sims detailing one (or ideally, two opposing) aircraft, as all common combat aircraft made flyable offers increased gameplay variety. This is where Oleg's idea of opening of the next sim to outside aircraft modding may be coming from (not opening FB/PF, don't be confused by this, it won't happen, it can't happen).

From a business perspective, more flyable aircraft means more sustained and long term customer interest. For a (very) limited example, I do not consider F-16 Falcon even an option to purchase because I have absolutely no interest in playing a sim of F-16s, as there is no interest in that aircraft or its use for me.

A true detailed "study" sim will offer not just one aircraft to play, but the ability to play against it as well with its historical opponent. The best idea for such a detailed focus would be a sim with flyable F-4 and flyable MiG-21, starting with early versions and moving to later versions in addon packs. Another example may be a detailed WW2 "study" carrier ops sim offering flyable Grumman Cats and flyable Zeros, and various carriers, from 1941 to 1945 in several addon packs.

LEXX_Luthor
03-04-2007, 10:38 PM
Luthier Korea, made under BoB And Beyond? That has to be good. I always knew that 100% of the players here requesting FB/PF Korea would revolt at the current sim's poor high altitude grafix environment, espcially with its stunningly short 20km horizon distance (30km in Perfect Mode grafix). That short horizon distance was made under the concept of the sim's original design focus, the sea level flying IL-2. And they want to fly MiGs at 40,000 feet -- almost 20km itself. Most likely, the FB grafix alone would drive players down to flying MiGs and Sabres at sea level, where diving is not an option. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

NerdConnected
03-05-2007, 12:49 AM
BBB462cid,

"During those years, this sim will get quite a bit of use"

Yes, it will still be used by people but bug fixes or AI improvements won't be made any longer by Maddox when they're busy further developing BoB.

Very quickly IL2 will get the same status as e.g. EAW but will, contrary to EAW, still be great to play and a still a pleasure to look at.

I just believe it's too early for this game to end it. It was ahead of its time when it was released and even today it's still great fun to play.

Now, if only AI could be somewhat improved, we'd still have a great sim in 2008/9.

Mark

Mysticpuma2003
03-05-2007, 01:55 AM
A similar thread to this did the rounds about 3 months ago, but was lost in the server crash (I believe).

My thoughts were that IL2 still has many years of life left in it. If you think about all the campaigns and missions that have been made, and that you haven't played, well there's a start!

Secondly, I really like the US planes, and as was stated above, BoB will be BoB, it will not have the late war P-47's/51's or 38's (yet) as the US didn't take part until after the period of the BoB.
So if I want to fly them, I'll have to play IL2 and wait for the (hopefully expected) expansion packs like they have made for IL2, until I can fly US.

Thirdly, not everyone has a fully loaded bank account. If you want to see BoB in all it's glory, then the chances are, if you have an older system, you will need an upgrade (to get the quality visuals).
I mean a lot of people were getting stutters on 1946, and they had reasonable systems, so imagine the systems needed to run dynamic weather fronts and thermals with dynamic lighting, etc, etc.
So will you be upgrading your PC yet, because to be honest I wont just yet?

IL2 still has loads of life left in it, as an example look at the guys who play European Air War, still very popular, and made a long,long time ago.....

IL2...FOREVER!

Cheers, MP.

Browning50cal
03-05-2007, 04:04 AM
I for one am looking forward to the SoW series and the battle of Britain in particular.

If the fidelity of the aircraft can be maintained, and we can have combats involving accurate numbers of aircraft. And the AI issues above mentioned can be rectified. Then the 1C Maddox team has a winner.

11 flyable types would be great for the BoB scenario. There were so many different Squadrons, wings and Geschwaders that took part in the conflict, that I think campaigns will be interesting and varied.

If there can only be 30 or 40 aircraft at a time on a map. If AI's cannot be snuck up on or bounced. Or, if AI's can see through clouds, or stay at WEP for 30 minutes with their radiators closed. If friendly AI of the same type are 25mph faster than player aircraft of the same type, I will sell my SoW copy to a friend at %25 of the purchase price and ignore the sim.

B50

OD_79
03-05-2007, 04:05 AM
A coaster? Feng Shui device? Alsorts of possibilities!

OD.

AKA_TAGERT
03-05-2007, 07:24 AM
I'm all for some 3rd party take over of the IL2 code as long as none of the current planes FMs can be tweaked and no new planes can be added unless Oleg gets envolved with the addition. Allowing users to tweak existing planes or add new ones would be the death of this and any other flight sim.

AVGWarhawk
03-05-2007, 07:38 AM
I believe it will be a long time in coming for IL2 to bow out gracefully. For all we know BoB will not be out for a few years more than projected. You know how it is....two weeks, two weeks, two weeks.....

TgD Thunderbolt56
03-05-2007, 12:30 PM
The old girl still has some ***** left inner...AND, don't forget we still have another patch coming. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

I don't doubt for a second that BoB will address many of the issues (real and perceived) that have plagued the IL2 and FB series (i.e Allowable number of AC in the sky, higher altitude characteristics, dynamic weather, air-density modelling etc,..), but '46 is sooo well-developed and most people can get on and play NOW that I can't see the end for it for at least a couple more years.


TB

Bearcat99
03-05-2007, 01:14 PM
This sim will be flown for some time. Consider that as large as this community is there are still many simmers who have not discovered it. There ar still folks just getting into IL2. I know I will be flying this sim until I can fly a P-51 under the BoB engine.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

at least.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

LEXX_Luthor
03-05-2007, 09:11 PM
The goal of New Sim should be to attract and maintain a much larger number of new customers. Many of the Old Timers will continue to play FB/PF, but the new customer base will be starting out with BoB And Beyond...and Luthier Korea, if what Fritz says is true about L-Korea running on BoB+ game engine.

The analogies to older sims like EAW are interesting. FB/PF will be played for some time to come, especially by those enjoying the Eastern, Pacific, and P-51Dora fronts, until the later Beyond theaters after the first BoB releace catch up to (and exceed) where FB/PF went before.


TAGERT::
Allowing users to tweak existing planes or add new ones would be the death of this and any other flight sim.
One contrary example will suffice here: ThirdWire is now making good profits with online sales of its current sims, bypassing the retail console game stores, as the sims are fully open to aircraft and map modding, and beyond, except tragically, dynamic campaign engines, where even Master Lowengrin can only make "editors" to modify the stock ThirdWire dynamic campaign engine.

The sims do suffer from this lack of campaign engine modding ability, and only because of lack of a map-wide combat results text file like the EventLog file we use in the FB/PF sim. With respect to dynamic campaign generators, FB/PF is far more open to modding than ThirdWire sims.

AKA_TAGERT
03-05-2007, 09:18 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
One contrary example will suffice here: ThirdWire is now making good profits with online sales of its current sims, bypassing the retail console game stores, as the sims are fully open to aircraft and map modding, and beyond, except tragically, dynamic campaign engines, where even Master Lowengrin can only make "editors" to modify the stock ThirdWire dynamic campaign engine. That Strikes Fighters Project 2,3948? What are they calling that sim this week? They have sold the same POS three times in the stores! Folks finally caught on and and not falling for it anymore so had to start selling it online!

As for examples, check out the HL lobby for SFP1!

Dead!

Has been from day one.. in that there were mods for it from day one on! Im sure there are a few guys plying it offline that have tweaked thier F4 FMs to F16 FMs which makes them feel like an ace!


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
The sims do suffer from this lack of campaign engine modding ability, and only because of lack of a map-wide combat results text file like the EventLog file we use in the FB/PF sim. With respect to dynamic campaign generators, FB/PF is far more open to modding than ThirdWire sims. Like I said, I am all for modding anything as long as it is NOT the FM.

LEXX_Luthor
03-05-2007, 09:46 PM
TAGERT::
As for examples, check out the HL lobby for SFP1!

Dead!

Correct. ThirdWire sims are focused on Offline play by design, as that is where the paying customers are found without an Online Pay-To-Play business model. And unlike Oleg, the ThirdWire developer does not have Online dogfight gameplay as a personal Hobby.

AKA_TAGERT
03-05-2007, 10:01 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Correct. ThirdWire sims are focused on Offline play by design, as that is where the paying customers are found without an Online Pay-To-Play business model. And unlike Oleg, the ThirdWire developer does not have Online dogfight gameplay as a personal Hobby. A great 'game' business model too!

For 1992!

But the future of all games is online be it pay to play or the IL2 business model that has served Oleg so well.. Why change? If it aint broke, don't fix it!

If he wants to enable user FM tweaks and user plane addons for offline play to pick up a few more shut-ins.. FINE! I don't think it is a good idea.. but as long as none of those user FM tweaks or user plane addons can be used online Ill give the green light on it! Just treat them like he treats DeviceLink! All the shut-ins with thier homemade cockpits and F16 FMs can do what they want! No skin off of my back as long as none of that stuff is allowed online! By that I mean don't even make it an server option! I don't care if there are two shut-ins that found each other in the parking lot of a Best Buy picking up parts for there cockpits and want to play aginst each other online! You allow one and it will splinter the online comunity into 1000 different directions and thus kill the online aspects of the sim. Long story short, don't allow any aspect of user FM tweaks or user plane addons to be used online and the sim will live as long as IL2 has.. Allow any of that and it will last as long as CFSx has.

LEXX_Luthor
03-05-2007, 10:11 PM
Correct. It broke out of the FB 1.0 box and has not served Oleg well, and he is fixing it by opening modding, probably including aircraft, for BoB And Beyond, at least for Offline play and some Online play options. This, among other things, will help maintain enough long term Offline play paying customers so the tiny Online community can continue to enjoy "free" Online gameplay and full developer support without paying a Monthly Fee to the publisher. Or at least that is what we are all hoping for (see ElAuren's PayPlay thread in PF forum).

AKA_TAGERT
03-05-2007, 10:14 PM
Not correct

LEXX_Luthor
03-05-2007, 10:21 PM
That's business.

More important, this...

TAGERT::
I don't think it is a good idea.. but as long as none of those user FM tweaks or user plane addons can be used online Ill give the green light on it!
Agreed 100$

The Case 1 servers will not include any independent 3rd Party aircraft mods.

csThor
03-05-2007, 11:28 PM
Lexx - Could it be that you're repeating the same stuff ever and ever again? Got a textfile for Copy & Paste? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif (just kidding)

I, quite frankly, am totally against any kind of user modding unless it was controlled tightly by a centralized "institution". Not just for quality but more for usefulness in terms of gameplay. To me Oleg's new way of allowing player modifications is going the wrong way - to me a tightly-controlled system with MG as the "last authority" and an decent set of rules would have made maximum use of the community's abilities.

Now that the "free for all ganbang" is made even easier it's hard to envision how history and relevance can become the basic fundament for 3rd Party developments. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 06:23 AM
Thor::
To me Oleg's new way of allowing player modifications is going the wrong way - to me a tightly-controlled system with MG as the "last authority" and an decent set of rules would have made maximum use of the community's abilities.
The one matching slipup Oleg is making is not allowing modding of full size maps, which will make alot of the proposed open modding less than fully useful for Oleg's customers. But I do understand where your coming from here. I'd expect endless mods of P-51Doras and Fw-190Doras, although I may be wrong. But, there are independent 3rd Party modders out there who would enjoy doing new things. For example, JG-Tuckie and his team that were forced to goto TargetWare after their Spanish Civil WAR project was long ago rejected by Oleg, during the time of Oleg's greatest blunder where for some reason (Online Dogfight focus?) Oleg abandoned Eastern Front to develop AEP fighter cockpits which created just another "Microsoft" 1944 West Euro theater.

Interestingly, the *best* and highest Quality 3rd Party cockpits made for StrikeFighters are almost all Soviet, and of them, they are cockpits of aircraft long before the industry standard "flight sim" Su-27/MiG-29. This development surprised me, but when you think about it, it demonstrates artistic freedom at its best, now that the Cold War is ancient history, at least for a very small but growing number of top quality modders. Only the best modders would even think of making Su-15 for SF or making CR.32 and Bf-109Dora for Oleg's BoB And Beyond. I see what you are saying, but good things can and have happened with open aircraft modding.

csThor::
Now that the "free for all ganbang" is made even easier
Pe-2 modeller Aggy22 is on board for open aircraft modding. I suggest you stop the insults against the combat flight sim community and Oleg's customers and contributors if you wish to talk further here with any credibility.

jasonbirder
03-06-2007, 06:54 AM
A great 'game' business model too!

For 1992!

But the future of all games is online


The forthcoming dominance of "online" gaming has been trumpeted many times before...and i can see why its supporters continue to herald it as the coming thing...exponential increase in cheap high speed home broadband coupled with higher spec home computers and a tech savvy customer base ought to have made online gaming a tremendously popular and growing marketplace...paving the way for pay per play and massively multiplayer options for games such as FB/AEP/PF etc...

But and frustrating though it is the vast majority of purchasers want Offline gaming...nearly every survey seems to indicate that online play hovers around the 5% mark...online games such as Target Tobruk and Aces High have a tiny customer base whereas traditional ut of the box offline games continue to dominate...

jasonbirder
03-06-2007, 06:58 AM
I, quite frankly, am totally against any kind of user modding unless it was controlled tightly by a centralized "institution". Not just for quality but more for usefulness in terms of gameplay.

Oh no!!! Not the "to mod or not to mod" argument all over again!

I'm all in favour of allowing modding of the sim...I just fail to see any possible downside...

Look at what the TSH team have done with Janes F/A18 or what the Superpak/Freefalcon teams did with Falcon 4.0 and tell me how mods like that won't increase the realism, depth, immersion and complexity of FB/AEP/PF...

csThor
03-06-2007, 07:01 AM
The thing for me is:

Any additional content for a combat flight sim has to be reviewed within the context of the game and what it is offering. It's not just to produce a nice and shiny aircraft model with a kick-@ss texture and a decent FM - no, this aircraft also has to match the "rest of the furniture". What do I need a brilliant A6M2-21 for when the game is representing the area and timeframe of the "Battle of Britain"? What do I need a P-51 for when we're near Stalingrad in August 1942? What do I need a B-17 for when we have a limited viewing distance and no buildings as target category?
The bottom line is gameing history and especially the history of the Il-2 line have proven more than once that 3rd Party Modellers go for the "KeWl factor" and rarely bother to investigate if a certain plane is even useful for the customer base within the game's limits. Of course they have every right to choose a model they like, but why not limiting the initial selection to something that's actually useful within the game's limits? With everyone being able to "manipulate" this - for me - fundamental question won't be even asked anymore, even though I don't think a lot of people will actually produce planes matching the technical requirements for the SoW engine.

To make my POV abundantly clear: I have nothing against 3rd Party developments. But I am convinced these few highly talented folks could certainly cooperate to produce an extensive package for additions including maps, aircraft, ground and sea objects as well as campaigns and/or missions. But in the end the models should be reviewed by a single non-community authority (= Maddox Games) simply because they have little to no motive for "balancing" anything or using inconclusive/biased data on FM/DM. Even the best equipped library with a sh*tload of data is still full of secondary sources, not primary ones. And accessing primary sources can be problematic and/or financially trying.

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 07:16 AM
Good points Thor.

Tuckie_JG52's Spanish Civil WAR team is one example of a focused and dedicated 3rd Party modding team. With an open BoB And Before sim, perhaps Tuckie+ will come back to us here? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Target Spain ~> http://www.targetware.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=P...file=viewtopic&t=196 (http://www.targetware.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=196)

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 07:17 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
That's business.

More important, this...

TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I don't think it is a good idea.. but as long as none of those user FM tweaks or user plane addons can be used online Ill give the green light on it!
Agreed 100$

The Case 1 servers will not include any independent 3rd Party aircraft mods. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Just to be clear here.. I said that no 3rd party stuff should be allowed online.

NONE!

NADA!

ZIP!

Actully I was clear but for some 'reason' you decided to NOT quote the part where I said NO 3rd party aircraft mods should be allowed online!

Be it CASE 1 to CASE infinity if they allow a server to fly 3rd party aircraft it will be the death of the sim and the online comunity.

I hope Oleg learns from the misakes of other sims like CFSx and the rest.. As a mater of fact I think he allready has in that looking back at his method of central/conrolled 3rd party addons worked so well for IL2 and has made it the best WWII flight sim for 6+ years now!

Thus I find it hard to belive Oleg would change (aint broke dont fix it) business model that made his sim so popular and the envy of the rest! So good it was that MS decided to give up and cancel CFS4

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 07:27 AM
Originally posted by jasonbirder:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">A great 'game' business model too!

For 1992!

But the future of all games is online


The forthcoming dominance of "online" gaming has been trumpeted many times before...and i can see why its supporters continue to herald it as the coming thing...exponential increase in cheap high speed home broadband coupled with higher spec home computers and a tech savvy customer base ought to have made online gaming a tremendously popular and growing marketplace...paving the way for pay per play and massively multiplayer options for games such as FB/AEP/PF etc...

But and frustrating though it is the vast majority of purchasers want Offline gaming...nearly every survey seems to indicate that online play hovers around the 5% mark...online games such as Target Tobruk and Aces High have a tiny customer base whereas traditional ut of the box offline games continue to dominate... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You went from talking about online gaming in general (which is what my 1992 was referring to) and than tried to use the online flight sim community as proof that online gaming in general is NOT working.

No can do!

In that the flight sim community 'relative' to all gaming has always been a very small fraction of gaming! Thus it is no surprise, and thus no proof, that online flight simming is smaller than the rest.

Always has been.. most likely always will be.

In that flight simming in and of itself does not fit well in the gaming mindset! Most people use games to escape their dull life's for a few moments and pretend to be a wizard casting spells or some WWF guy with a gun running around killing space cat monsters. Thus realize itself is tossed out the window from the start. Where as people who are into flight sims are looking for an escape.. but a real one! That is a hard balance to strike and a very small faction of people to boot. It is kind of an inverse equation.. In that to appreciate realism you have to be adult about it.. but the more adult you ae the less likely you will be playing a game. That is why the flight sim community is small relative to the rest and most likely to remain small relative to the rest. We who flight sim.. well we are child like adults! That is to say, we are the exceptions to the adult rule! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

jasonbirder
03-06-2007, 07:36 AM
I appreciate what you're saying about the total number of Online Flight Simmers being small because the total number of flight simmers is small...which obviously it is in comparison to the more popular RTS/FPS game genres...
But the ratios are still the same...most estimates have online play at or about 5% of the market...and thats refering to flight simmers as well...who are almost by defination people who are more tech savvy and prepared to spend significantly more on their gaming than the market as a whole...
How many copies of Il2/FB/PF/1946 have been sold compared to the number of people regularly on Hyperlobby or subscribers on Aces High or Target Tobruk/Rabaul?
Online is a tiny minority and truth be told, most sims in the market are aware of that - look at the other popular sims out there F4AF LOMAC/FC BOB-WOV SH3 they all seem to realise that the offline market is there core audience and online functionality is a bolt on...whereas for whatever reason in FB/AEP/PF/46 we seem to have the tail wagging the dog - online appears to be treated as more important by the developer than offline...

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 07:39 AM
TAGERT::
I hope Oleg learns from the misakes of other sims like CFSx and the rest
Correct. Oleg will not abandon support and development of his future sims, which is what killed CFSn. And he will not open the old FB/PF to modding as it can't be done.

The distinction between Case 1 and Case 2 servers is being made for a vast increase in the number of paying customers. For an example, I would hope Tuckie could come back and create a Spanish Civil WAR mod for BoB And Before, and this would, at least, operate under the "open mod" Case 2 servers, unless everything made by Tuckie's team were approved by Oleg's team and, essentially, included into the official sim. Then we could fly Spain under the "closed" Case 1 servers as well. If not approved, Tuckie's Spanish Civil WAR would still available to a vast new paying customer base in the Case 2 servers and more importantly (unless Oleg goes Pay-To-Play), in Offline play.

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 07:43 AM
Originally posted by jasonbirder:
I appreciate what you're saying about the total number of Online Flight Simmers being small because the total number of flight simmers is small...which obviously it is in comparison to the more popular RTS/FPS game genres...
But the ratios are still the same...most estimates have online play at or about 5% of the market...and thats refering to flight simmers as well...who are almost by defination people who are more tech savvy and prepared to spend significantly more on their gaming than the market as a whole...
How many copies of Il2/FB/PF/1946 have been sold compared to the number of people regularly on Hyperlobby or subscribers on Aces High or Target Tobruk/Rabaul?
Online is a tiny minority and truth be told, most sims in the market are aware of that - look at the other popular sims out there F4AF LOMAC/FC BOB-WOV SH3 they all seem to realise that the offline market is there core audience and online functionality is a bolt on...whereas for whatever reason in FB/AEP/PF/46 we seem to have the tail wagging the dog - online appears to be treated as more important by the developer than offline... Yes but there is an error in those statistic.. Usally are! In that they compare the total sales to the number of people playing online. They do a simple subtration of the two and 'assume' that all the offliners are happly playing at home. The fact is alot of people buy games.. install them.. play them for about 5min and than never paly them again! Only the people who love the game enough to get good at it eventually get board with the AI and want a bigger challenge. Be it a wizard, Quaker, or flight simmer the ones that are still playing it after a day or two seak out others like them online for a greater challenge.

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 07:45 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I hope Oleg learns from the misakes of other sims like CFSx and the rest
Correct. Oleg will not abandon support and development of his future sims, which is what killed CFSn. And he will not open the old FB/PF to modding as it can't be done.

The distinction between Case 1 and Case 2 servers is being made for a vast increase in the number of paying customers. For an example, I would hope Tuckie could come back and create a Spanish Civil WAR mod for BoB And Before, and this would, at least, operate under the "open mod" Case 2 servers, unless everything made by Tuckie's team were approved by Oleg's team and, essentially, included into the official sim. Then we could fly Spain under the "closed" Case 1 servers as well. If not approved, Tuckie's Spanish Civil WAR would still available to a vast new paying customer base in the Case 2 servers and more importantly (unless Oleg goes Pay-To-Play), in Offline play. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>CFS did not die due to lack of support it was the ability to use 3rd party addons online that killed it. People lost interest in a sim that promotes/supports/allows cheating by taking your P-51 FM and making it fly like a F-16. MS realised that and stopped supporting it.. In that nobody really cared if they did or did not.. In that hardly anyone was playing it for those reasons anyways

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 08:34 AM
jason::
Online is a tiny minority and truth be told, most sims in the market are aware of that - look at the other popular sims out there F4AF LOMAC/FC BOB-WOV SH3 they all seem to realise that the offline market is there core audience and online functionality is a bolt on...whereas for whatever reason in FB/AEP/PF/46 we seem to have the tail wagging the dog - online appears to be treated as more important by the developer than offline...
Yes, Oleg started out with a personal favorite, or personal hobby, of programming and flying Online gameplay. With the currently fairly small number of simmers, which can hopefully grow if attracted and their interest held, a business focusd on Online gameplay as a first priority can be successful only if Pay-To-Play, or if the Offline and Online customers together are sufficiently numerous over long term to cover the otherwise needed Monthly Fees.

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 08:36 AM
TAGERT::
<span class="ev_code_yellow">CFS did not die due to lack of support</span> it was the ability to use 3rd party addons online that killed it. People lost interest in a sim that promotes/supports/allows cheating by taking your P-51 FM and making it fly like a F-16. <span class="ev_code_yellow">MS realised that and stopped supporting</span> it.. In that nobody really cared if they did or did not.. In that hardly anyone was playing it for those reasons anyways.


This is new. In this case, we see that Microsoft abandoned its own sim because, naturally, Microsoft was concerned and worried about Online "cheating."

But even if that claim is made up or not, it does bring a good point to ponder. If Oleg sees Online customers worried about "cheating," Oleg will not just abandon his sim, but stop the cheating. But it also brings a danger and threat to the sim. For example the claims of "cheating" using elevator trim cheat were dealt with by Oleg crippling his own early FB flight models so elevator trim did not work, creating frustration for Offline and many Online customers who indeed felt quite abandoned by Maddox at the time.

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 08:50 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"><span class="ev_code_yellow">CFS did not die due to lack of support</span> it was the ability to use 3rd party addons online that killed it. People lost interest in a sim that promotes/supports/allows cheating by taking your P-51 FM and making it fly like a F-16. <span class="ev_code_yellow">MS realised that and stopped supporting</span> it.. In that nobody really cared if they did or did not.. In that hardly anyone was playing it for those reasons anyways.


This is new. In this case, we see that Microsoft abandoned its own sim because, naturally, Microsoft was concerned and worried about Online "cheating." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
WRONG!

The 'users' abandoned it because of concerns about onlie cheating.
'MS' abandoned it because there were no 'users'.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
But even if that claim is made up or not, it does bring a good point to ponder. If Oleg sees Online customers worried about "cheating," Oleg will not just abandon his sim, but stop the cheating.
The only way to STOP the cheating is to never START allowing 3rd party addons to be used online.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
But it also brings a danger and threat to the sim. For example the claims of "cheating" using elevator trim cheat were dealt with by Oleg crippling his own early FB flight models so elevator trim did not work, creating frustration for Offline and many Online customers who indeed felt quite abandoned by Maddox at the time.
A whole different senario.. Even if Oleg came up with a way to ensure that all the users on the server are using the same 3rd party addon it will still result in the death of the sim. In that if you allow people to use 3rd party addons online it will result in 100 different versions of a P-51D, thus 100 different servers with 1 person in that server.. The one person with his personal take on how the P-51D should be. Instead of 100 people in 1 server all flying 1 version of the P-51D.

The flight sim comunity was, is and most likly will allways be too small to support 100 different versions of the P-51D floating around the net. Even with 1 version of it we can barely fill but a few servers now on HL. Imagine spreading that head count over several different servers running several different versions of the P-51D. And that is just one example of one plane.. Now take that times the number of planes! In that I am sure there will be sevral versions of the Fw190 running around too.

If you want to kill the online flight sim comunity within a week or two.. Than allow 3rd party addons to be used online.

It really is that simple!

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 09:11 AM
TAGERT::
In that if you allow people to use 3rd party addons online it will result in 100 different versions of a P-51D, thus 100 different servers with 1 person in that server.
Won't happen, for reasons that all others here can see. To play online, players need other players.


TARGERT::
WRONG!

The 'users' abandoned it because of concerns about onlie cheating.
'MS' abandoned it because there were no 'users'.

Its too late for me to believe you now. You have changed your story too many times now in these threads. As far as I've ever known, Microsoft abandoned CFS3 because they didn't like making [*combat*] sims. I may be wrong, but that's all I've ever known.


TAGERT::
If you want to kill the online flight sim comunity within a week or two.. Than allow 3rd party addons to be used online.

It really is that simple!
I like it Complex. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif If for example Tuckie comes back and makes a good Spanish Civil War mod for BoB And Before, then people will play it Offline and Online, whether you as a bitter Old Timer CFS3 Online "cheat" victim want them to enjoy it or not.

Stand Tall, combat flight sim community.

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 09:42 AM
On the other hand, I too used to think of aircraft modding as best only for Offline use, but thinking of dedicated, enthusiastic, honest, and focused teams like Tuckie's made me realize that open aircraft modding may offer a role for Online play as well.

At least Oleg is giving the Old Timer Microsoft "cheat" victims their own option of playing in servers totally closed to modding. If I went online, the closed Case 1 servers would be my first choice because of consistent quality in Oleg Created or Oleg Approved flight models. But if honest and dedicated 3rd Party teams can make good air warfare simulation, especially some form of Online War covering Spain, Mongolia, or a fictional Japan vs Soviet Online War 1940-1942, where Oleg does not go, I would be attracted to them as well, even if not officially Oleg Approved.

This is business now, and not just Oleg's personal hobby anymore. And I *think* -- or hoping -- Oleg is finally moving beyond seeing Online "cheat" victims as being his primary customer base, especially if he does not go Pay-To-Play ("not yet time" ~Oleg at sukhoi.ru). This potential loss of elite status or "core" status among the Online cheat victims may be what they really mean by the endless use of the slogans "kill the sim"(tm) and "death of the sim"(tm).

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 10:23 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">In that if you allow people to use 3rd party addons online it will result in 100 different versions of a P-51D, thus 100 different servers with 1 person in that server.
Won't happen, for reasons that all others here can see. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Will happen. CFS is proof of that. Pick a plane and you can find several 3rd party add-ons to choose from. To make things worse, these 3rd party add-ons can be tweaked by the end user (the person who downloaded the 3rd party addon)


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
To play online, players need other players.
That has nothing to do with what I said so I wont bother to respond to it except to point out that it has nothing to do with what I said.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
TARGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">WRONG!

The 'users' abandoned it because of concerns about onlie cheating.
'MS' abandoned it because there were no 'users'.

Its too late for me to believe you now. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>So? Where you under the false impression that I care if you do? Know that I am not! I, like you, am simply looking out for my interest and trying to inform as many people as I can from these threads. So that when the day comes we can have a well informed bunch of users tell Oleg thanks but no thanks!


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
You have changed your story too many times now in these threads.
Not true and I challenge you to QUOTE an example of where you think I have. You wont be able to because I have not, or, you wont bother because you know that is not true and your just saying it in the hopes of trying to discredit what I have said in the hopes of gaining support for your point of view. I have been playing flight sims since 1990. I have made 3rd party add-ons for flight sims (AOTP (http://www.gamers.org/pub/games/uwp-uml/fltsim-mirror/AOTP/1946ii.txt)). I have seen PC flight sims grow from OFFLINE only to OFFLINE with the ONLINE option and the emergence of the pay-to-play sim. On that note I have played just about every pay-to-play flight sim made! (for example I played Air warrior when $12/hr).

So I have a lot of experience to behind what I am saying. Where as some people here only experience is the IL2 one. They don't know how good they got it and now want to spoil it by making it more CFS like. Then there are the people here that are motivated by the idea of making a buck off of a 3rd party add on they might develop and sell.



Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
As far as I've ever known, Microsoft abandoned CFS3 because they didn't like making [*combat*] sims. I may be wrong, but that's all I've ever known.
So MS does not like to make money? Please! The fact is nine tenths of what they need to make CFS can be lifted from FSX! The thing is the CFS series was more trouble than it was worth! To many complaints to make it cheat free which was in direct conflicted with the basic 3rd party add-on concept. Thus CFS4 was dropped! Like or dislike had nothing to do with it, it would have been to costly to make it cheat free.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I like it Complex. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Ill bet in that it is easier to hide an agenda in a complex story. Which is why I like to break it down into simple terms that all and understand.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
If for example Tuckie comes back and makes a good Spanish Civil War mod for BoB And Before, then people will play it Offline and Online, whether you as a bitter Old Timer CFS3 Online "cheat" victim want them to enjoy it or not.
Try as you might to discredit me but know that I never said I am against the idea of mission or map 3rd party add-ons.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Stand Tall, combat flight sim community.
Yes and resist 3rd party aircraft add-ons or tweaks of existing aircraft that can be used online. In that it will kill the sim just as it killed CFS and others.

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 11:34 AM
TAGERT::
Will happen. CFS is proof of that.
Same slogan relating to Microsoft, nothing new here. However, below is a new one...

TAGERT::
That has nothing to do with what I said so I wont bother to respond to it except to point out that it has nothing to do with what I said.


----------- http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



TAGERT::
Not true and I challenge you to QUOTE an example of where you think I have.
Even better, I challenge you to prove Microsoft abandoned CFS3 for the reasons you are now claiming. Maybe you are right, but your recent sloganistic behavior tells me first that you are trying to decieve the board and other simmers. More important, others here who have worked with Maddox carry far more credibility to me than you do on these boards, and they are supporting Maddox's descision. The key, for me at least, is they don't insult or exhibit hostility to other simmers like you and other Old Timer self-advertised Online gamer "cheat" victims are now doing. Any time you wish to talk with the combat flight sim community without hostility and insults, we are willing to talk with you. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Stand Tall, combat flight sim community (and developers)!

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Will happen. CFS is proof of that.
Same slogan relating to Microsoft, nothing new here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
FACTS are funny like that.. They tend to be and remain true


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
However, below is a new one...

TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">That has nothing to do with what I said so I wont bother to respond to it except to point out that it has nothing to do with what I said.
----------- http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nice of you to acknolage that I caught you there!


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Not true and I challenge you to QUOTE an example of where you think I have.
Even better, I challenge you to prove Microsoft abandoned CFS3 for the reasons you are now claiming. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nice try but no sale! I have exposed you as a liar, trying to change the subject now will not work on me


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Maybe you are right,
Based on 15+ years of experance and observations of the evolution of PC sims I think I am


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
but your recent sloganistic behavior tells me first that you are trying to decieve the board and other simmers.
Hardly, as noted I don't like to hide in some complex muddy water.. I spell it out clear and simple. That being you allow 3rd party aircraft addons to be used online and it will kill the online comunity


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
More important, others here who have worked with Maddox carry far more credibility to me than you do on these boards, and they are supporting Maddox's descision.
So


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
The key, for me, is they don't insult or attack others like you and other Old Timer self-advertised Online gamer "cheat" victims are now doing.
Again, nice try to change the subject troll.. but the fact is you can NOT prove what I challged you to prove in my last post to you!


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Any time you wish to talk with the combat flight sim community without hostility and insults, we are willing to talk with you. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Get a mirror son!

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 12:11 PM
TAGERT::
Again, nice to change the subject troll.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 12:35 PM
Maps = Aircraft

Interestingly, and somewhat related to csThor's worries, is that aircraft modding may not be useful under the artificial restriction of open map modding to "small" size maps only. Assume a team wishes to make aircraft and surface units for an early war China Offline dynamic campaign or Online War. They can't do it unless Oleg makes them a special large map with parts of China or Burma, as the large maps are "closed" for whatever reason, good or bad. Perhaps some teams can get Oleg to make them a map for their project, at least the teams that get all their aircraft and surface unit submissions approved and into the official sim.

The restriction of map modding to "small" maps implies they will be useful only for Online dogfight gameplay, which defeats much of the purpose of opening aircraft to modding (edit -- to me anyways, others may differ). Thus, aircraft modding may NOT work out well after all. Online gameplay will see lots of new aircraft mods in the Case 2 "dogfight" servers, causing a wild Panic among the ex-Microsoft Online cheat victims playing the Case 1 servers, yet true independent 3rd Party aircraft will still have no real role except in the "small" Online dogfight maps. Offline play will not benefit as much as it could from open aircraft modding with the restriction of open modded map size currently planned. So the attraction and maintaining of a larger customer base may not happen as I would hope.

This of course ignores the very useful potential of 3rd Parties filling in the planeset where Oleg cannot complete. Flyable bombers for Battle of Britain -- Do-17 and others for example. These will have the very large official maps to be used on through the life of the BoB+ series.

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Maps = Aircraft
Maps are equal to Aircraft?

If you truely belive that.. It would explane why alot of your LOGIC is.. is.. Well lets just say your LOGIC is 'special'

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Again, nice to change the subject troll.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Nailed it didn't I! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

NerdConnected
03-06-2007, 01:18 PM
slappedsilly,

"I've wondered about that. It will seem, to some, very restrictive compared to 1946. I would think they would have to move pretty fast to get the crowd thats used to 300 plane interested. Maybe the detail will be enough, but everyones going to be itching for thier favorite plane."

BoB surely will be a beautiful sim and most certainly it will be several steps beyond Il2, but given the insanely highly detailed planes, cockpits and highly resolution of maps, I doubt it will expand as fast as Il2 did. It will take more time to reach the very high standards BoB has set.

Inspite of Bob, Il2 is however still a very good flight sim and one of the best. Surely it can last another year or two provided some (off line) things are looked at.

If Maddox needs to focus all of their resources to BoB (quite understandable) maybe someone else could have a look at some parts of Il2 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

I haven't heard (or read) a definitive "No" and suspect Maddox is still thinking what to do.

Mark

NerdConnected
03-06-2007, 01:59 PM
csThor,

"...single non-community authority (= Maddox Games) simply because they have little to no motive for "balancing" anything or using inconclusive/biased data on FM/DM...."

Agree. Someone (i.e. Maddox) should be in control otherwise we'd have situation that would resemble something like Linux distro's. All very nice, but everyone is using a different version; No one really benefits from 'organized chaos' like that.

But I'm not that much interested in seeing Il2 having 500+ aircraft; Il2 has more than enough right now. To me DM and FM are very good and everyone seems to like them (whiners never die). Maps would be nice, but I understand some are no-go areas because of BoB. I'm also okay with that.

My point is, having very top notch AI is also "cool" and everyone would benefit from that, both off line and on line players.

Come to think of it, small things like ordering a "break left!" or a radio call from wingmen before they attack would also be very nice.

It's things like this I'd like to see opened up ...

Mark

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 02:13 PM
Originally posted by NerdConnected:
Agree. Someone (i.e. Maddox) should be in control otherwise we'd have situation that would resemble something like Linux distro's. All very nice, but everyone is using a different version; No one really benefits from 'organized chaos' like that.
Agreed 100%! And Linux is a good non flight sim example of what happens when everyone and anyone can tweak 'things' to thier 'liking'.


Originally posted by NerdConnected:
But I'm not that much interested in seeing Il2 having 500+ aircraft; Il2 has more than enough right now. To me DM and FM are very good and everyone seems to like them (whiners never die).
WRT the FMs I agree 100%! They are getting to a point of dimishing returns! That is to say they are so good that most people wouldnt be able to notice any improment in them. (NOTE alot think they can, but most of them are wrong to think so). Now the data that goes into the FM.. that is a different story! There will come a day soon that PC flight sim games wont have to depend on finding old WWII data to plug into the FM to make them fly.. Modern aerospace types of software that allow a simulated plane to fly before one ever leaves the drawing board will come down in price and allow PC flight sim game makers to get the data they need that is missing.. Or as a validation of the data they have.

But as far as DMs go.. that area is pretty much wide open! You could keep adding to that and never really ever run out of things to add! Things that also feed back into the FM! Same goes for AI! You could spend the rest of your life addig things to it and there would allways be room for more! Those are the areas where true IMERSION comes into play.. For example.. You seen one wing come off a Fw190 in IL2 and you have seen all the wings come off of a Fw190 in IL2. A more complex DM would make it such that you never see the same damage twice! Seeing it twice.. or the same bullet hole in the same place over and over pops my IMERSION bubble.


Originally posted by NerdConnected:
Maps would be nice, but I understand some are no-go areas because of BoB. I'm also okay with that.
Agreed 100%


Originally posted by NerdConnected:
My point is, having very top notch AI is also "cool" and everyone would benefit from that, both off line and on line players.
Agreed 100%


Originally posted by NerdConnected:
Come to think of it, small things like ordering a "break left!" or a radio call from wingmen before they attack would also be very nice.

It's things like this I'd like to see opened up ...

Mark
Agreed 100%

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 02:17 PM
Nerd::
Agree. Someone (i.e. Maddox) should be in control otherwise we'd have situation that would resemble something like Linux distro's. All very nice, but everyone is using a different version;
I'm now thinking how Oleg *might* be thinking. The control is through maps, and its brilliant.

Outside the Case 2 dogfight servers, the 3rd Party modded aircraft won't be very useful <span class="ev_code_yellow">except</span> on the large full size maps that come with official BoB And Beyond game releaces.

This puts some restrictions on the desirability to mod just any aircraft, and puts some some incentive for 3rd Parties to mod aircraft relevant to the theater gameplay covered by the official game maps, particularly the better modders. Additionally, this gives Oleg and UBI control over theater uses. Hopefully, this covers some of the fears that csThor has expressed. The idea still fully supports independent aircraft modding, both for Offline and Online play (except the Case 1 servers) that may help fill in the planeset (He-115 for Battle of Britain use for example).

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 02:21 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Nerd:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Agree. Someone (i.e. Maddox) should be in control otherwise we'd have situation that would resemble something like Linux distro's. All very nice, but everyone is using a different version;
I'm now thinking how Oleg *might* be thinking. The control is through maps, and its brilliant.

Outside the Case 2 dogfight servers, the 3rd Party modded aircraft won't be very useful <span class="ev_code_yellow">except</span> on the large full size maps that come with official BoB And Beyond game releaces.

This puts some restrictions on the desirability to mod just any aircraft, and puts some some incentive for 3rd Parties to mod aircraft relevant to the theater gameplay covered by the official game maps, particularly the better modders. Additionally, this gives Oleg and UBI control over theater uses. Hopefully, this covers some of the fears that csThor has expressed. Its not a bad idea, as it still fully supports independent aircraft modding, both for Offline and Online play (except the Case 1 servers). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Ok Ill bite.. Just what is it about the MAP that makes you think it will limit something if anything?

Before you say something like "only small maps can be simulated online" I would recomnd you do a google on Armed Assault (the follow on to OFP).

PS I noticed you had NOTHING to say about his Lynix example! You really like to avoid anything that does not aree with your preception of the world.. Don't you?

NerdConnected
03-06-2007, 02:47 PM
Tagert,

Not trying to start an OS war here, I'm not talking about the kernel; the kernel is okidoki http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

"But as far as DMs go.. that area is pretty much wide open!"

Wrt DM, if I recall the video made my Mystic Puma Oleg made some comments about BoB's DM. He said planes could only break up in a predefined number of ways because using actual physics would slow down the game too much. Adding DM based on real physics seems to be a tough one.

"...Those are the areas where true IMERSION comes into play.. "

Fully agree, but I'm just afraid we probably won't see them for Il2 anymore unless some decision is made about opening these areas up a bit.

It would be exciting to see what other would come up with (e.g. different attack patterns) and how things will change for game play.

Mark

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 02:59 PM
The map restrictions may put some incentive to model aircraft relevant to the full size maps. Nothing stops, for lack of a better word, "lesser" modders from making a Zero or P-51Dora for the 1940 Channel map, and there may be many such mods, but they may not be approved for the Case 1 servers for that reason, and most Offline customers will not enjoy Zeros without a Pacific map. Such out of place mods won't be as useful to many of the customers without the ability to make, for example, large Pacific or Germany maps.

3rd Party flyable Do-17 or He-115 would be more useful on the initial full size Channel map, particularly if Oleg would not be making them himself, and so hopefully encourage the "better" modders to mod aircraft for relevant gameplay for whatever stages the BoB And Beyond series has covered at any given time. However, we don't know the limitation on map sizes. I assume the "open" maps will be restricted to something similar to today's 50km dogfight maps, perhaps 100km if Oleg is feeling generous on the day of the terrain tool's releace. I may be assuming wrong.

I don't comment on the Linux "example" as Linux is not a combat flight sim. Real people and businesses use Linux to do real things, and the comparison is deceptive. More important is the Maps = Aircraft idea.


TAGERT::
Maps are equal to Aircraft?

If you truely belive that.. It would explane why alot of your LOGIC is.. is.. Well lets just say your LOGIC is 'special'
Your claims of "modding" other sims for years does not conceal your snotty computer gamer webboard behavior which causes such claims not to help your one-liner poastings when faced with the people here who have contributed to this sim. Your old "modding" work, that nobody has seen and nobody cares about, is irrelevant to the combat flight sim community, especially if that old modding work reflected your current rather sloppy spelling abilities. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

When you wish to talk to the combat flight sim community without insults and hostility, we are willing to talk to you without insults and hostility.


Stand your ground, combat flight sim community. You are the paying customers.

NerdConnected
03-06-2007, 03:05 PM
LEXX,

I'm not sure how Maddox would or could control additional planes by means of map choice. I think if someone submits a 'brilliant' plane for and cockpit that time period, Maddox would like use it out of respect of its creator(s) ;-)

However, if it would take them a lot of time to code the FM for this new plane, then it would not be added. Then of course we have the patents and license fees issue, so even if it's made by a genius, there are reasons not to add it.

Ps. I cannot see how someone else than Maddox write the FM code; that way things would get highly biased.

Mark

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 03:08 PM
Nerd, sorry about all the BoB poastings. GUILTY!

Back to IL-2. It would be very nice to see AI re-programmed by a dedicated 3rd Party team after the End Of Life scenario hits us. This has happened with some very old sims, after they died. But, they are such a diminishing community and no business market, and in some indirect competition with BoB maybe. I dunno. Also, we don't know how much code Oleg will be using for BoB And Beyond, and he may not want to open source this code. As for "normal" type of modding, FB/PF will never be opened to independent modding, as it was never designed for it.

I am really looking forward to advances in BoB And Beyond, although I will miss the Eastern Front, but I've been missing that (full developer support) since AEP went 1944 West Euro, and so have moved on to other things recently. Maybe, I'm just waiting for the Beyond part to get back to Eastern Front (and Pacific). So, its "easy" for me to say just wait for BoB+ to bring advances in AI programming, and it will, but I can see how neat it would be if Oleg open sourced his game code. I just don't think it will happen.

NerdConnected
03-06-2007, 03:51 PM
LEXX_Luthor,

"Nerd, sorry about all the BoB poastings. GUILTY!"

Hijacking is forgiven..

"..I can see how neat it would be if Oleg open sourced his game code. I just don't think it will happen.."

Not so much 'open sourced', but some parts 'shared sourced'. Not everyone should be fixing or adding to it, but a team of people with some time to spare and which have some knowlegde or interest in flight sim AI.

Afterall, we still have a entire year before BoB is released ;-)

Mark

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 03:56 PM
Maddox can't "control" what modders do (outside the Case 1 servers), but the closing of large BoB And Beyond maps to modding may offer incentives to the "better" modders to make planes that can be used on the existing official large maps -- as csThor would say -- planes relevant to gameplay. Its not "control" exactly, although it does offer both Oleg and UBI control over the ability to have virgin un-used theaters for later paid addon releace if the 3rd Parties cannot create their own theaters with full size maps.

Nerd::
Ps. I cannot see how someone else than Maddox write the FM code; that way things would get highly biased.

Mark
If you are talking about FB/PF, correct about the FM code.

If you are talking BoB And Beyond...

(1) Maddox writes the FM code. The sim appears to be designed to be moddable including aircraft. No code will be written by independent modders. Perhaps you are not aware of how open sims work.

(2) The claim that "things would get biased" is a deceptive webboard attempt to get around poasting "some things would get biased" and not admitting that "other things" would not get biased, depending on the modder. Thus you are poasting a biased statemment to this community. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

NerdConnected
03-06-2007, 04:43 PM
LEXX_Luthor,

"(1) Maddox writes the FM code. The sim appears to be designed to be moddable including aircraft. No code will be written by independent modders. Perhaps you are not aware of how open sims work."

I'm aware, but 'moddable' can mean many things.

"(2) The claim that "things would get biased" is a deceptive webboard attempt to get around poasting "some things would get biased" and not admitting that "other things" would not get biased, depending on the modder. Thus you are poasting a biased statemment to this community. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/QUOTE]

Everything is perception, biased and subjective, but that's not the issue.

It's about "trust". Who has the expertise and can scientifically proof something is right or wrong? I trust Maddox because they have all the relevant historical data, have worked in this field, are engineers, are highly experienced and have proofed this by writing a excellent flight sim. Others didn't or not that I'm aware of.

Mark

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 05:10 PM
Nerd::
Everything is perception, biased and subjective, but that's not the issue.

It's about "trust". Who has the expertise and can scientifically proof something is right or wrong? I trust Maddox because they have all the relevant historical data, have worked in this field, are engineers, are highly experienced and have proofed this by writing a excellent flight sim. Others didn't or not that I'm aware of.
Correct. Trust is the issue, and can be ruined by attempts at deception and trickery of others on a webboard. If you are correct, and truthful, you have no use for deception.

Oleg's team are business people first. And you cannot "scientifically" prove that your claim has any merit for a PC computer game. Oleg does a pretty good bang-up job, we both agree, some may not agree. Ignore them. We both also know that many modders are well qualified to create aircraft flight models under Oleg's proposed open aircraft system, and Oleg knows this as well, as he has proposed an Oleg Approval process for 3rd Party aircraft and their flight models to be included in the official sim and Case 1 servers. Yes, I do trust Oleg and his decision to open aircraft modding. Apparently, you do not?

And finally, one more time -- you do NOT have to download and play with any 3rd Party aircraft if you do not wish to do so. That my friend, is the greatest symbol of support and trust another may offer you. Take it, or leave it.


----------


Symbols. And TAGERT, Maps = Aircraft is a symbolic way of showing the relationship between aircraft and the maps they are used on. Its not maths. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif If this Aircraft = Maps was Oleg's idea, he's brilliant, a genius. Making example of and trading "insults" on a webboard is not fun and leaves a bad taste. As a modder myself, I would like to see your old modding work. Links?

And TAGERT, can you make the community a He-100D for BoB And Beyond? Please? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif (I don't do aircraft modding)

Despite the apparent bickering here, I would easily trust TAGERT to make flight models under an open BoB+ system if he/she were interested.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by NerdConnected:
Not trying to start an OS war here, I'm not talking about the kernel; the kernel is okidoki http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Nor am I. Just pointing out the analogy is simular. You allow people to make changes and they will.


Originally posted by NerdConnected:
Wrt DM, if I recall the video made my Mystic Puma Oleg made some comments about BoB's DM. He said planes could only break up in a predefined number of ways because using actual physics would slow down the game too much. Adding DM based on real physics seems to be a tough one. Roger.. too much for the current crop of PCs but in the near future won't be


Originally posted by NerdConnected:
Fully agree, but I'm just afraid we probably won't see them for Il2 anymore unless some decision is made about opening these areas up a bit.
Roger that.. was talking about future sims not IL2


Originally posted by NerdConnected:
It would be exciting to see what other would come up with (e.g. different attack patterns) and how things will change for game play.
Agreed.. DM and AI the imagination is the only limitaion.. Where as the FM is limited by the limited number of responces a plane actully has to a given input. Where as one can come up with a million different ways to break something.

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by NerdConnected:
LEXX,

I'm not sure how Maddox would or could control additional planes by means of map choice. I think if someone submits a 'brilliant' plane for and cockpit that time period, Maddox would like use it out of respect of its creator(s) ;-)

However, if it would take them a lot of time to code the FM for this new plane, then it would not be added. Then of course we have the patents and license fees issue, so even if it's made by a genius, there are reasons not to add it.

Ps. I cannot see how someone else than Maddox write the FM code; that way things would get highly biased.

Mark Agreed 100%!

You nailed it!

Thank god you see thorough the smoke screen that Lex and some others are putting up here to try and make a buck off a 3rd party plane addon at the expence of the online comunity!

Lets just hope others see it to and don't fall for that line of bull.

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
The map restrictions may put some incentive to model aircraft relevant to the full size maps. Nothing stops, for lack of a better word, "lesser" modders from making a Zero or P-51Dora for the 1940 Channel map, and there may be many such mods, but they may not be approved for the Case 1 servers for that reason, and most Offline customers will not enjoy Zeros without a Pacific map. Such out of place mods won't be as useful to many of the customers without the ability to make, for example, large Pacific or Germany maps.

3rd Party flyable Do-17 or He-115 would be more useful on the initial full size Channel map, particularly if Oleg would not be making them himself, and so hopefully encourage the "better" modders to mod aircraft for relevant gameplay for whatever stages the BoB And Beyond series has covered at any given time. However, we don't know the limitation on map sizes. I assume the "open" maps will be restricted to something similar to today's 50km dogfight maps, perhaps 100km if Oleg is feeling generous on the day of the terrain tool's releace. I may be assuming wrong.
Clearly you have never made a mission in IL2 in that any plane can be on any map. It is up to the user to put what ever he wants on a map.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I don't comment on the Linux "example" as Linux is not a combat flight sim. Real people and businesses use Linux to do real things, and the comparison is deceptive.
The point your missing is the analogy between Linux and flight sims.. You allow everyone and anyone to make changes and you will end up with as many different versions as there are people using them


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
More important is the Maps = Aircraft idea.
Disagreed 100%! That is a silly idea.. That being you want to take away the MODABILITY of the map/mission maker by limiting him to only using certain planes.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Your claims of "modding" other sims for years does not conceal your snotty computer gamer webboard behavior which causes such claims not to help your one-liner poastings when faced with the people here who have contributed to this sim.

Your old "modding" work, that nobody has seen and nobody cares about, is irrelevant to the combat flight sim community, especially if that old modding work reflected your current rather sloppy spelling abilities. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
Nice troll tatic to try and change the subject but the FACT remains that you said I have changed my story so many times that you no longer belive what I say.. I called you on that and ask you to give me and example by quoting just such a case. You FAILED to do so and thus exposed yourself as a liar saying anything to try and discredit anyone that does not agree with you.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
When you wish to talk to the combat flight sim community without insults and hostility, we are willing to talk to you without insults and hostility.
Insult? Is it and insult for me to ask you to show me where you claim I contridicted myself? I think not! Again, nice try troll but no sale!


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Stand your ground, combat flight sim community. You are the paying customers.
I hope they do and are SAVVY enough to realise that allowing 3rd party plane addons to be used online will result in killing the online comunity.

LEXX_Luthor
03-06-2007, 06:55 PM
TAGERT::
I hope they do and are SAVVY enough to realise that allowing 3rd party plane addons to be used online will result in killing the online comunity.
Covered already. The Case 1 servers will not allow independent 3rd Party modded aircraft, unless approved by Oleg, thus saving online play from itself, at least according to your claim.

I *think* Oleg may be looking to build a customer base far beyond the tiny number of old timer Microsoft Online "cheat" victims (who have now voted that Oleg's core support is not worth paying for).


TAGERT::
Nice troll tatic...
tatic ... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


Lets cover this again, when you are ready to respond to the community without computer gamer insults, we are willing to talk with you. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


---


I too used to think of aircraft modding as best only for Offline use, but thinking of dedicated, enthusiastic, honest, and focused teams like Tuckie_JG52's Spanish Civil War team made me realize that open aircraft modding may offer a role for Online play as well.

At least Oleg is giving the ex-Microsoft "cheat" victims the option of playing in servers totally closed to free modding. If I went online, the closed Case 1 servers would be my first choice because of consistent quality in Oleg Created or Oleg Approved flight models. But if honest and dedicated 3rd Party teams can make good air warfare simulation, especially some form of Online War covering Spain, Mongolia, or a fictional Japan vs Soviet Online War 1940-1942, where Oleg does not go, I would be attracted to them as well, even if not officially Oleg Approved.

This is business now, and not just Oleg's personal hobby anymore. And I *think* -- or I'm hoping -- that Oleg is finally moving beyond seeing Online "cheat" victims as being his primary customer base, especially if he does not go Pay-To-Play ("not yet time" ~Oleg at sukhoi.ru). This potential loss of elite status or "core" status among the Online cheat victims may be what they really mean by the endless use of the slogans "kill the sim"(tm) and "death of the sim"(tm).

I have no other explanation for the hostile and bitter webboard behavior of these gamers. At least you (TAGERT) have now stopped using the deceptive slogan "killing the sim" here, and now are using the honest claim of "killing the online sim," a claim that I actually believed at one time. The difference between then and now is realizing how important is Oleg's support for his sims, unlike Microsoft which abandoned its sims.

AKA_TAGERT
03-06-2007, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Covered already.
Yes and you still dont understand what I said!


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
The Case 1 servers will not allow independent 3rd Party modded aircraft, unless approved by Oleg, thus saving online play from itself, at least according to your claim.
Wrong again son!

I never said that!

What I said is if 'ANY' 3rd party plane addon or tweaked plane is allowed to be played online it will kill the online comunity. In that all the NON-CASE 1 servers will take away enough of the base to kill the online comunity by splintering it into too many small peices. The only way it will work is the way IL2 did it! The 3rd party addons have to be submitted to Oleg to be added to the basic sim. That is the only way you will get just ONE version of a P51D! Otherwise you will end up with 50 NON-CASE 1 servers each running a differnt version of the P51D (i.e 50 different versions of the P51D)


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I *think* Oleg may be looking to build a customer base far beyond the tiny number of old timer Microsoft Online "cheat" victims (who have now voted that Oleg's support is not worth them paying for).
Now your the one flip floping on what you said! Orginally you said Oleg is trying to incrase sales.. and it is your belive that most of the sales are to OFFLINE users.

Ok.. if that is true than they don't need to be able to use the 3rd party addons ONLINE! GOT YAH!

So don't kill the ONLINE comunity! Simply enalbed 3rd party addons to be ONLY USED OFFLINE! That will increase sales per your reasoning and logic!

You can NOT have it both ways! You can NOT in one breath say the SALES are in the OFFLINE crowd and that the ONLINE crowd is too small to cater too.. Than in the next breath say these 3rd party addons need to be used ONLINE too!

See on closer inspeciton.. Your LOGIC is full of holes!


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Lets cover this again, when you are ready to respond to the community without computer gamer insults, we are willing to talk with you. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Give up your troll tatics! Your the one insulting me by saying I am flip floping on my statments! It is not an insult to ASK you to provide the QUOTE where you think I did that! The fact that you have not done so and keep avoiding it by trying to accuse me of insulting you does not work on someone who is use to your troll tatics!

As for killing the sim.. You kill the ONLINE play and the OFFLINE will follow close behind due to a lack of intrest.

Ares_336sqn
03-06-2007, 07:50 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:


I *think* Oleg may be looking to build a customer base far beyond the tiny number of old timer Microsoft Online "cheat" victims (who have now voted that Oleg's support is not worth them paying for).



...At least Oleg is giving the ex-Microsoft "cheat" victims their own option of playing in servers totally closed to modding. If I went online, the closed Case 1 servers would be my first choice because of consistent quality in Oleg Created or Oleg Approved flight models. But if honest and dedicated 3rd Party teams can make good air warfare simulation, especially some form of Online War covering Spain, Mongolia, or a fictional Japan vs Soviet Online War 1940-1942, where Oleg does not go, I would be attracted to them as well, even if not officially Oleg Approved.


Il2 and the whole series failed to have the success (in customer numbers) it deserved because of the poor UBI promotion it had.
But it was adopted by those " ex-Microsoft "cheat" victims" as you call them who discovered it like me online through their friends. And promoted it to people they knew, adverised it through fligtsim forums etc.
I wonder if there would be a sim after the original IL2 without them.
The price to pay for this was that the offliners were neglected and did not get the context they should. Since then, they scream "murder" and they are partly right too.
The sad part comes when they join those "fix my plane or let me do it as i think" crusaders because they think that they will get the rich offline context they should have in the first place.
Which should explain to you the hostile and bitter webboard behavior you get here.
But, yes, Oleg is doing business now and he is obviously looking for a way to make offliners happy without killing the on-line gaming.
Even if he lets a part of online flying open to mods, that part will die or be left with few people after the original hype dies. As long as the other part is kept "safe" from hacking and is only enriched with FMs exclusively approved or designed by Oleg's team.
By the way, i only play online and hate fantasy FMs as an ex-Microsoft Online "cheat" victim.(played CFS2 up to 2001). But that does not mean i do not understand that offliners also have the right to enjoy the game as much as i do.

LEXX_Luthor
03-07-2007, 12:46 AM
Thanks Ares, that's very honest stuff. The core difference between Microsoft and Oleg is that Oleg will not abandon support for his online sims and his customers like Microsoft did.


TAGERT::
What I said is if 'ANY' 3rd party plane addon or tweaked plane is allowed to be played online it will kill the online comunity. In that all the NON-CASE 1 servers will take away enough of the base to kill the online comunity by splintering it into too many small peices.
Okay, that makes sense, and seems to be ElAuren's claim of having concern about Online "community split." But, we already have multiple "splits" in the division between Online dogfight gameplay and a smaller Online War gameplay segment, as well as all the server options available. I am assuming a larger customer base will fill out any community splits, and Oleg may be assuming the same thing, as he must if he is a business man hoping to grow his business.


TAGERT::
Ok.. if that is true than they don't need to be able to use the 3rd party addons ONLINE! GOT YAH!
I switched opinion here. I now think 3rd Party aircraft mods may have a role to play in a much expanded and far more populated (ie...attractive to customers) online gaming segment. See my above poast about the Spanish Civil War modders. Although the Maps = Aircraft idea would imply that groups such as Tuckie's would need Oleg to make a special large map to match their Spanish Civil War aircraft mods. This could imply the independent groups work more closely with Oleg to begin with, and that's always a good thing, and was Tuckie's original hope before being shunted away to the TagertWare sim. We are (hopefully) moving beyond the ex-MS cheat victims' status as core development focus. Join if you wish. We could use your He-100D Mod, as I think you could do great flight models under Oleg's proposed modding system, and even get them approved for Case 1 servers (I don't do aircraft modding).

Your original claim was there was little to no cheating in Microsoft CFSn sims, and that only mere accusations of cheating "killed" the [online] CFSn; a claim mysteriously accepted by your fellow ex-Microsoft cheat victims. Now you claim Microsoft abandoning its sims killed CFSn, due to player concerns of cheatinng. I don't believe you any more. Your previous attempts at tricking this community using the "death of the sim"(tm) slogan gives me pause in believing your claims, although you have stopped using that slogan now. That's a good sign! Maybe you are right about Microsoft, but its irrelevant as, unlike Microsoft, Oleg will not abandon his sims, especially if faced with customer concerns of cheating.

jasonbirder
03-07-2007, 02:52 AM
I have to confess that I really don't understand what objections there are to allowing more modding of the FB/AEP/PF game...

Alot of the games I play other than this series (Silent Hunter 3, Dangerous Waters, Falcon 4.0, Janes F/A18) have a long tradition of user modification...and far from detracting from the gaming experience they have only enhanced it...in every single case user modding has created a more complex, realistic, rich and immersive gaming experience

I'm thinking of mods like the - Free Falcon & Superpak for Falcon 4.0, LWami for Dangerous Waters, TeamSuperHornet for Janes F/A18 and The Grey Wolves Expansion for Silent Hunter 3 - all of these added immensely to the original games, expanding it for enthusiasts that wanted to take their simming experience to the next level...

These aren't community mods that were created because people wanted their F16 to be the equal of an F22 Raptor or their Type IX Uboat to have a performance equal to a USS Seawolf Class boat - if anything these mods made the gaming experience more challenging, so why would the Sim community here only be interested in creating a P51 with 8 cannons and a supercruise capability?

But for those that aren't interested, then there is no need to use any mods that are created - you will still have the stock out of the box game exactly as officially released if you want to stick with it!

I don't see how it will massively impact the online community either - for starters online play does not automatically mean Hyperlobby anyway - I have played sims online for many years and only very, very rarely have I played in a hyperobby (or equivilent come as you are type environment) game prefering to play both with people I know and In a more realistic and structured practice or mission based environment...but even for the hyperlobby crowd it is likely that a concensus on what "version/mod" to use will be reached and agreed upon...If indeed any - if as people seem to be implying, the online community are dead set against allowing user/community created mods into the game then surely they will just carry on playing a stock 4.08m (or maybe 4.09m by that point) version of the game, exactly as they are doing now...

Allowing us non-hyperlobby offline and co-op players to enjoy richer, more varied, more immersive expereince complete with new maps, new planes, new ships, new ground objects better AI, improved DMs etc etc etc...

tragentsmith
03-07-2007, 04:16 AM
I do think the thing that make that there are so few players on IL2 online is :

A really bad way finding online servers. You need ASE or HL to find a server. Nearly all other games dedicated to omnline gaming have a dedicated interface in the game to find servers, like COD or CS. Just put a server search engine in the game and you would allready have far more online gamers in IL2 (I had to wait for 2 years when I eventually discovered ASE and saw that IL2 was played online.

The second point is that there are plenty of gamers who are playing with friends, so 6 ppl on a server there, another 4 there, etc... It´s pretty difficult to find a server where there are many players, good rules and you are allowed to get in and it´s not laggy. In fact, I just know Warclouds and Spit vs 109. But the second one is really laggy sometimes, so I only play on WC...

If at least the first point is improved, there would be many more players online.

LEXX_Luthor
03-07-2007, 04:56 AM
jason::
I have to confess that I really don't understand what objections there are to allowing more modding of the FB/AEP/PF game...
Two things...

(1) Confession implies you have been accused. That does happen here, from time to time.

(2) FB/PF was never designed for open modding -- while most or maybe all "open mod" sims are!! Its generally believed that to mod FB/PF, especially aircraft, requires access to the source code or other deep game engine parts. That's not likely to happen.

LEXX_Luthor
03-07-2007, 05:02 AM
tragent::
If at least the first point is improved, there would be many more players online.
Something I have not considered as pure Offline player -- http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif -- better access to servers would help increase the number of Online players. We often see people asking for help getting online.

Wellcome to Forgotten Board tragent!

AKA_TAGERT
03-07-2007, 07:24 AM
Originally posted by jasonbirder:
I have to confess that I really don't understand what objections there are to allowing more modding of the FB/AEP/PF game...

Alot of the games I play other than this series (Silent Hunter 3, Dangerous Waters, Falcon 4.0, Janes F/A18) have a long tradition of user modification...and far from detracting from the gaming experience they have only enhanced it...in every single case user modding has created a more complex, realistic, rich and immersive gaming experience

I'm thinking of mods like the - Free Falcon & Superpak for Falcon 4.0, LWami for Dangerous Waters, TeamSuperHornet for Janes F/A18 and The Grey Wolves Expansion for Silent Hunter 3 - all of these added immensely to the original games, expanding it for enthusiasts that wanted to take their simming experience to the next level...

These aren't community mods that were created because people wanted their F16 to be the equal of an F22 Raptor or their Type IX Uboat to have a performance equal to a USS Seawolf Class boat - if anything these mods made the gaming experience more challenging, so why would the Sim community here only be interested in creating a P51 with 8 cannons and a supercruise capability?

But for those that aren't interested, then there is no need to use any mods that are created - you will still have the stock out of the box game exactly as officially released if you want to stick with it!

I don't see how it will massively impact the online community either - for starters online play does not automatically mean Hyperlobby anyway - I have played sims online for many years and only very, very rarely have I played in a hyperobby (or equivilent come as you are type environment) game prefering to play both with people I know and In a more realistic and structured practice or mission based environment...but even for the hyperlobby crowd it is likely that a concensus on what "version/mod" to use will be reached and agreed upon...If indeed any - if as people seem to be implying, the online community are dead set against allowing user/community created mods into the game then surely they will just carry on playing a stock 4.08m (or maybe 4.09m by that point) version of the game, exactly as they are doing now...

Allowing us non-hyperlobby offline and co-op players to enjoy richer, more varied, more immersive expereince complete with new maps, new planes, new ships, new ground objects better AI, improved DMs etc etc etc... That is the point! What people tweak OFFLINE is not the issue! They can tweak thier P-51D into F-15 all they want! There is no problem as long as none of those user tweaks or mods can be used ONLINE.

jasonbirder
03-07-2007, 07:31 AM
But, truth be, all the mods I have used over the years have made the sims i've played tougher...not easier!
Where is the idea that tweaking would result in people boosting their aircraft performance coming from?

AKA_TAGERT
03-07-2007, 08:46 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Thanks Ares, that's very honest stuff. The core difference between Microsoft and Oleg is that Oleg will not abandon support for his online sims and his customers like Microsoft did.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
What I said is if 'ANY' 3rd party plane addon or tweaked plane is allowed to be played online it will kill the online comunity. In that all the NON-CASE 1 servers will take away enough of the base to kill the online comunity by splintering it into too many small peices.
Okay, that makes sense, and seems to be ElAuren's claim of having concern about Online "community split." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes!


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
But, we already have multiple "splits" in the division between Online dogfight gameplay and a smaller Online War gameplay segment, as well as all the server options available.
Apples and Oranges! Those things you all splits are not splits at all! They are simply people exercising the options (different theaters of war, i.e. maps and plane sets). Granted there are more servers than people which results in only a few serves having more than 20 people in them during the week. But on the weekends they fill up nicely. On the weekends you will see four to five servers with about 50 people in them. The pay-to-play sims like Warbirds and Aces High barley have that many people online. Which goes back to the FACT that the flight sim community is very small relative to other games.

Cheating online kills games.. but kills flight sims even quicker in that they are trying to simulate something real in the first place. Thus when you see a P-51D flying level at 1,000mph you know something is up! Where as with other games who is to say the Wizzards casting spell can not kill 3 dragons instead of only 2 like it should'!

Thus cheating takes a very big toll on the flight sim community, much more than other games.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I am assuming a larger customer base will fill out any community splits, and Oleg may be assuming the same thing, as he must if he is a business man hoping to grow his business.
For Oleg's sake I hope your right.. but my 15+ years experience of playing flight sims OFFLINE and ONLINE tells me it wont work!

In that time I have learned one thing. Flight Simmers are a funny lot! They demand realism but at the same time a lot of them are always looking for an excuse for why they were shot down. Instead of just admitting they were bested they will whine on and on about how the FM is porked as if that was the reason why they got shot down.
This is why allowing 3rd party mods/tweaks online is such a bad idea! In that those types (squikie wheels) will have more ammo to whine! There will be the idea that someone other than Oleg has the ability to tweak the performance of their plane.

As with CFS it only takes a few of these types to kill the sim in that the sad part is most of the ONLINE flight simmers are whiny little children that can not look in the mirror and blame themselves! It is much easier to blame the other guy of using a modified aircraft.

For example.. Oleg fixed the print screen cheat years ago.. Yet I can not go a week without someone claiming that someone is using the print screen cheat!

So I will say it again.. If you allow 3rd party plane add-ons/mods to be used online it will kill the ONLINE community and the OFFLINE community will follow in that most of the hype that keeps a sim going stems from the vocal ONLINE community. In that if some shut in is happy playing the AI OFFLINE he is most likely not motivated to come ONLINE for any aspect. Which includes coming ONLINE to the forums to have give his input on things.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
Ok.. if that is true than they don't need to be able to use the 3rd party addons ONLINE! GOT YAH!
I switched opinion here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I know you did that is why I said you did.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I now think 3rd Party aircraft mods may have a role to play in a much expanded and far more populated (ie...attractive to customers) online gaming segment.
And I disagree 100%! That statement is based on interacting with the flight sim community for over 15 years ONLINE and OFFLINE.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
See my above poast about the Spanish Civil War modders.
I have already told you several times now that making 3rd party missions and maps and using them ONLINE is not the issue here.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Although the Maps = Aircraft idea would imply that groups such as Tuckie's would need Oleg to make a special large map to match their Spanish Civil War aircraft mods.
That maps = aircraft thing is a silly idea! Please tell me that is something you came up with and that Oleg did not imply that he was going to do that! Talk about limitations!


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
This could imply the independent groups work more closely with Oleg to begin with, and that's always a good thing, and was Tuckie's original hope before being shunted away to the TagertWare sim.
I don't know all the details of this Tuckie vs. Oleg thing. But if Tuckie was trying to get Oleg to allow him to add aircraft to his Spanish thing than I think Oleg did the right thing by shunting' him! Proof of that being a good idea is to take a look at the number of users paling Targetware at any time of day! That sim blew before Tuckie got there and still blows.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
We are (hopefully) moving beyond the ex-MS cheat victims' status as core development focus.
Nice dream.. but what you fail to realize is that it has nothing to do with MS and everything to do with human nature! You provide the conditions that MS had in a sim and you will created a whole new batch of cheat victims!


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Join if you wish. We could use your He-100D Mod, as I think you could do great flight models under Oleg's proposed modding system, and even get them approved for Case 1 servers (I don't do aircraft modding).
Thanks but no thanks! Been there done that! I have seen first hand how 3rd party addon kill off a sim! I want no part of it!


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Your original claim was there was little to no cheating in Microsoft CFSn sims, and that only mere accusations of cheating "killed" the [online] CFSn a claim mysteriously accepted by your fellow ex-Microsoft cheat victims.
Nice try troll but I have not changed from that statement, thus nothing orginal about it in that it still stands! You a few pages back tried to put words in my mouth and say that I said there was no cheating! I never said that! I said there was cheating, I just never saw it myself! But I saw the effects of knowing there was cheating going on! In that the few who did see it talked about it so much that after awhile anytime someone got shot down they would be attributed to cheating.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Now you claim Microsoft abandoning its sims killed CFSn, due to player concerns of cheatinng.
You sir are a liar! Or your don't know how to read? Or your trying to discredit me in the hopes of giving your point of view more credit.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I don't believe you any more.
So.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Your previous attempts at tricking this community using the "death of the sim"(tm) slogan gives me pause in believing your claims, although you have stopped using that slogan now.
Another lie!


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
That's a good sign!
Only in your confused mind! The confusing being that when I am being more specific it does not mean I changed my point of view! As I have already told you several times now.. It will kill the offline community and the online community will follow close behind. Now.. are you that thick that you can not understand that or are you just a liar trying to discredit me in the hopes of giving your idea more credit?


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Maybe you are right about Microsoft, but its irrelevant as, unlike Microsoft, Oleg will not abandon his sims, especially if faced with customer concerns of cheating.
So which is it? Clueless boob or troll? I recommend you go back and actually read what I wrote. Hopefully you will realize how silly you sound in that I have already explained this to you several times. Ill give you a little hint.. QUOTE me where you FEEL' I have said any of those things you accuse me of saying! Go ahead.. give it a try! I guarantee you wont be able to do it because I never said that! This only exists in your confused little mind! So with that said I expect your next post will consist of one of two things..

1) An apology to me where you admit your mistake
2) You continue on accusing me of things I never said thus proving what a troll you are and how weak your point of view is that you have to resort to falsely accusing me of things I never said.

My guess is it will be number 2 in that you clearly have an agenda here.

AKA_TAGERT
03-07-2007, 08:47 AM
Originally posted by jasonbirder:
But, truth be, all the mods I have used over the years have made the sims i've played tougher...not easier!
Where is the idea that tweaking would result in people boosting their aircraft performance coming from? From 15+ years of experance in the flight sim comunity

jasonbirder
03-07-2007, 09:30 AM
I appreciate what you're saying about the possibility of unrestricted modding/tweaking causing problems for the dogfight/come as you are segments of the online community (although we are only talking about a subset of a minority of the community there - albeit a very vocal one!)
However, whilst I don't have your 15 years+ experience of Flight Sims (8 years for me - ever since the release of Janes F15E & Microposes Falcon 4.0) I have never really encountered this desire for people to make their planes (or ships..subs...tanks...helicopters...) more capable at the expense of realism. In fact it tends to be the direct opposite - all of the commonly used mods i've come across have either made it more difficult by adding extra complexity (and hence realism!) or have toned down capabilites...by tweaking sensor parameters/weapons performance etc etc...
What is it about this community that makes you so certain it would be any different here?

AVGWarhawk
03-07-2007, 09:43 AM
Originally posted by jasonbirder:
But, truth be, all the mods I have used over the years have made the sims i've played tougher...not easier!
Where is the idea that tweaking would result in people boosting their aircraft performance coming from?

All I can tell you is CFS2 got stupid with modded planes. Hell, I remember one mod that would make the virtual bullets hit like howitzer and repeat firing like a gatlin gun. Not to mention prop planes flying like an F-22. It killed online gaming for me concerning the CFS series. SH3 modding is fine because most play is done off line where you can mod to your tastes and not ruin online games with a VIIC that does 40 kts. In short, the modded hack that enters an online DF flies around killing everyone in sight making it a bad time for others. Here is one of my favorites in COD, the aimbot mod(no miss no matter where you shoot) and the see through the wall mod. Real sweet and a real hack. These ruined COD for me as well. Some games just do not need to be modded because these games get hacked fast and loose the following of the community. At least for me anyway.

LEXX_Luthor
03-07-2007, 10:23 AM
AVGWarhawk::
Not to mention prop planes flying like an F-22.
For those with such concerns, Oleg is planning the Case 1 servers for BoB And Beyond that will not allow the freely modded aircraft available in the "open" mod Case 2 servers. That developer support is the difference between Oleg and Microsoft.


jason::
But, truth be, all the mods I have used over the years have made the sims i've played tougher...not easier!
Where is the idea that tweaking would result in people boosting their aircraft performance coming from?
Something targent poasted about -- small private servers (and LANs) with friends playing Online together. Perhaps AvBear at Avsim was right: fly with people you know. That potentially large but hidden segment of very small private servers and LANs may be where Oleg's idea of open aircraft mod Case 2 servers fits well while the larger "public" Case 1 servers can offer the option of no modded aircraft.


TAGERT::
For Oleg's sake I hope your right.. but my 15+ years experience of playing flight sims OFFLINE and ONLINE tells me it wont work!
Agreed! Oleg may be taking a chance, but that's called business and something new has to be tried as Online play is stagnating according to rnzoli (at least for the large servers). Although Oleg has made huge blunders in FB, I'd trust Oleg's 15+ years of experience in engineering and business alot more than I'd trust your current bitterness towards other players who may not desire to play with your options.

TAGERT::
Thus when you see a P-51D flying level at 1,000mph you know something is up!
:
:
I said there was cheating, I just never saw it myself!

We now "feel" there was cheating in Microsoft CFSn Online. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

AKA_TAGERT
03-07-2007, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">For Oleg's sake I hope your right.. but my 15+ years experience of playing flight sims OFFLINE and ONLINE tells me it wont work!
Agreed! Oleg may be taking a chance, but that's called business and something new has to be tried as Online play is stagnating according to rnzoli (at least for the large servers). Although Oleg has made huge blunders in FB, I'd trust Oleg's 15+ years of experience in engineering and business alot more than I'd trust your current bitterness towards other players who may not desire to play with your options.

TAGERT::
Thus when you see a P-51D flying level at 1,000mph you know something is up!
:
:
I said there was cheating, I just never saw it myself!

We now "feel" there was cheating in Microsoft CFSn Online. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
As I predicted.. You went with option 2! Congrats TROLL

AKA_TAGERT
03-07-2007, 10:39 AM
Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
All I can tell you is CFS2 got stupid with modded planes. Hell, I remember one mod that would make the virtual bullets hit like howitzer and repeat firing like a gatlin gun. Not to mention prop planes flying like an F-22. It killed online gaming for me concerning the CFS series. SH3 modding is fine because most play is done off line where you can mod to your tastes and not ruin online games with a VIIC that does 40 kts. In short, the modded hack that enters an online DF flies around killing everyone in sight making it a bad time for others. Here is one of my favorites in COD, the aimbot mod(no miss no matter where you shoot) and the see through the wall mod. Real sweet and a real hack. These ruined COD for me as well. Some games just do not need to be modded because these games get hacked fast and loose the following of the community.
Exactally


Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
At least for me anyway.
As it was for many!

AKA_TAGERT
03-07-2007, 10:40 AM
Originally posted by jasonbirder:
I appreciate what you're saying about the possibility of unrestricted modding/tweaking causing problems for the dogfight/come as you are segments of the online community (although we are only talking about a subset of a minority of the community there - albeit a very vocal one!)
However, whilst I don't have your 15 years+ experience of Flight Sims (8 years for me - ever since the release of Janes F15E & Microposes Falcon 4.0) I have never really encountered this desire for people to make their planes (or ships..subs...tanks...helicopters...) more capable at the expense of realism. In fact it tends to be the direct opposite - all of the commonly used mods i've come across have either made it more difficult by adding extra complexity (and hence realism!) or have toned down capabilites...by tweaking sensor parameters/weapons performance etc etc...
What is it about this community that makes you so certain it would be any different here? From 15+ years of experance in the flight sim comunity

LEXX_Luthor
03-07-2007, 10:53 AM
I didn't catch the bitterness and anger, as I and many others stop reading your one-liners about half way through.

TAGERT::
So which is it? Clueless boob or troll? I recommend you go back and actually read what I wrote. Hopefully you will realize how silly you sound in that I have already explained this to you several times. Ill give you a little hint.. QUOTE me where you FEEL' I have said any of those things you accuse me of saying! Go ahead.. give it a try! I guarantee you wont be able to do it because I never said that! This only exists in your confused little mind! So with that said I expect your next post will consist of one of two things..


1) An apology to me where you admit your mistake
2) You continue on accusing me of things I never said thus proving what a troll you are and how weak your point of view is that you have to resort to falsely accusing me of things I never said.

My guess is it will be number 2 in that you clearly have an agenda here.

Option (3)

Its not like you to play the role of "victim" status here, as most become your victims except Stiglr, but you always reminded me of him/her, for some reason, and you two make the most "energetic" fun to watch together here -- unstoppable object colliding with immovable object. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

AKA_TAGERT
03-07-2007, 11:08 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I didn't catch the bitterness and anger, as I and many others stop reading your one-liners about half way through.

TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">So which is it? Clueless boob or troll? I recommend you go back and actually read what I wrote. Hopefully you will realize how silly you sound in that I have already explained this to you several times. Ill give you a little hint.. QUOTE me where you FEEL' I have said any of those things you accuse me of saying! Go ahead.. give it a try! I guarantee you wont be able to do it because I never said that! This only exists in your confused little mind! So with that said I expect your next post will consist of one of two things..


1) An apology to me where you admit your mistake
2) You continue on accusing me of things I never said thus proving what a troll you are and how weak your point of view is that you have to resort to falsely accusing me of things I never said.

My guess is it will be number 2 in that you clearly have an agenda here.

Option (3)

Its not like you to play the role of "victim" status here, as most become your victims except Stiglr, but you always reminded me of him/her, for some reason, and you two make the most "energetic" fun to watch together here -- unstoppable object colliding with immovable object. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Congrats again TROLL!

AVGWarhawk
03-07-2007, 11:20 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jasonbirder:
I appreciate what you're saying about the possibility of unrestricted modding/tweaking causing problems for the dogfight/come as you are segments of the online community (although we are only talking about a subset of a minority of the community there - albeit a very vocal one!)
However, whilst I don't have your 15 years+ experience of Flight Sims (8 years for me - ever since the release of Janes F15E & Microposes Falcon 4.0) I have never really encountered this desire for people to make their planes (or ships..subs...tanks...helicopters...) more capable at the expense of realism. In fact it tends to be the direct opposite - all of the commonly used mods i've come across have either made it more difficult by adding extra complexity (and hence realism!) or have toned down capabilites...by tweaking sensor parameters/weapons performance etc etc...
What is it about this community that makes you so certain it would be any different here? From 15+ years of experance in the flight sim comunity </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have experienced it since Jane's WWII. I find that players that can hack and go to any lengths to win will do so just to show superiority. You claim that most mod to make the game better or the simulation more exact. Look around this forum and tell me EVERYONE is going to agree this is how plane X should be and this mod makes it that way, all is well in the land. It will never happen. Heck, there is even a argument with two major mods for SH3 and it is this: when a uboat is submerged and stationary the boat rise. The other modders say it will sink. ON and on the argument goes. If IL2 is left for developers to mod only, these things will not come around and ruin yet another flight sim. Fortunate for SH3 it is by enlarge played by single players and modding only affects the player and no others.

LEXX_Luthor
03-07-2007, 12:00 PM
For BoB And Beyond, the Case 1 servers will be available for those who "can't agree," while the Case 2 server options will be useful for those who can agree, perhaps smaller groups of players. More important than "agreeing" on flight models is the potential for new 3rd Party flyable aircraft that Oleg will not be creating, Do-17, WhirlWind, or TAGERT's He-100D Mod for examples.


AVGWarHawk::
Look around this forum and tell me EVERYONE is going to agree this is how plane X should be and this mod makes it that way, all is well in the land.
This forum, well maybe NOT! Perhaps some parts of this forum, maybe. Other smaller forums and other communities, perhaps yes! That's where Oleg may be going in his thinking, and since that is by definition other communities besides this one (which voted that Oleg's support for Online play is not worth paying for), we become angry, bitter, and hostile to the others who may enjoy different gameplay options.

AVGWarhawk
03-07-2007, 12:06 PM
I think case 1 and case 2 are the wrong way to go. The game should be left as is with tweeks and FM changed done only by the developers. Just my personal opinion on the matter. Everyone is on the same level playing field concerning online play. The only difference is the computer equipment the virtual pilot has and skill of a virtual pilot if he has any at all.

LEXX_Luthor
03-07-2007, 12:32 PM
AVGWarHawk::
Everyone is on the same level playing field concerning online play

Sounds good! But the Case 1 servers will cover the "level playing field" concern. Other customers besides you and I may enjoy something different, such as a flyable He-115 or TAGERT's flyable Dora, and we are again focusing only on "the same flight model"(tm) while ignoring the potential for new flyable aircraft modded by some of the old FB/PF contributors (Aggy22, Gibbage, etc...) that Oleg will not make.

Oleg *might* be looking at one (1) method of attracting and maintaining additional long term customer interest, and by that I mean we "old timers" have to admit we are not pulling the weight for Oleg's business (lack of numbers, voting against paying Oleg for prime Online gameplay design focus), and at one time, a few Online players here suggested, in all seriousness, that Oleg should make his sims for free, at no charge or sale, to "keep the genre alive," because Oleg "likes" combat flight sims. After all, Oleg is a nice guy.

NerdConnected
03-07-2007, 01:07 PM
LEXX_Luthor,

"Correct. Trust is the issue, and can be ruined by attempts at deception and trickery of others on a webboard. If you are correct, and truthful, you have no use for deception.

I wasn't referring to anyone here on the boards. I mean I trust Maddox enough to be an authority in this area. Of people who like to 'mod' I'm not so certain. They first have to show they're capable modders in every aspect. Some have shown they really are, but up until now I believe each and everytime Maddox was in control. What will happen if QA is out the window, remains to be seen.

"Oleg's team are business people first. And you cannot "scientifically" prove that your claim has any merit for a PC computer game. Oleg does a pretty good bang-up job, we both agree, some may not agree. Ignore them.... Apparently, you do not?

I think Maddox and collegues are by all means flight sim or sim 'geeks' first, then so-called business men. Supporting a game 5 years or more is not exactly standard business procedure nowadays. UBI on the other hand are however real business men.

BTW, I don't quite follow you when you conclude "Agree, not agree, ignore... Apparently, you do not?". Please explain to me what you're trying to say here.

"And finally, one more time -- you do NOT have to download and play with any 3rd Party aircraft if you do not wish to do so. That my friend, is the greatest symbol of support and trust another may offer you. Take it, or leave it."

I'd very much prefer to choose have a single, high quality well balanced game without going through all the independant and different downloads, addons, tweaks and tricks.

In the end someone or some group has to be in control. They'd have to write a plan of things they would like to fix, how they try to fix them and when they plan to release their fixes and addon's.

Then, if Maddox QA's have taken a look at it all and the entire thing has been repackaged, these 3rd party addons can be released as community patches. I just believe, you have to do it properly or don't do it at all..

Maddox has nothing to gain from reduced game quality. Il2 is still their (and UBI's) brand. It's their product.

Mark

stalkervision
03-07-2007, 01:46 PM
Il-2 will end because the developer will not allow anyone to take over the code and build a better game out of it to compete with what they are developing. Funny that even Microsoft allows further game developments by individuals in their Combat flight sim 3 series.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

AVGWarhawk
03-07-2007, 02:09 PM
Originally posted by stalkervision:
Il-2 will end because the developer will not allow anyone to take over the code and build a better game out of it to compete with what they are developing. Funny that even Microsoft allows further game developments by individuals in their Combat flight sim 3 series.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

It was the FURTHER game developments by individuals on the CFS series that buried it for me. These further developments became crazy until someone in my squad said, IL2 can not be modded and cheating can not happen as a result. I should try it. I never looked back because I'm on the level playing field with others concerning online play. Supersupersuper Marine Spitfires are not what I call fun to DF with. This is what the CFS series became. Now do not get me wrong, there are some groups that stick to realism as best they can but from my experience there are more looking for the edge to win every encounter they can and will stop at nothing to get it.

stalkervision
03-07-2007, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
Il-2 will end because the developer will not allow anyone to take over the code and build a better game out of it to compete with what they are developing. Funny that even Microsoft allows further game developments by individuals in their Combat flight sim 3 series.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

It was the FURTHER game developments by individuals on the CFS series that buried it for me. These further developments became crazy until someone in my squad said, IL2 can not be modded and cheating can not happen as a result. I should try it. I never looked back because I'm on the level playing field with others concerning online play. Supersupersuper Marine Spitfires are not what I call fun to DF with. This is what the CFS series became. Now do not get me wrong, there are some groups that stick to realism as best they can but from my experience there are more looking for the edge to win every encounter they can and will stop at nothing to get it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Never encountered any of that but then I never did online play in CfS 3..

AVGWarhawk
03-07-2007, 07:15 PM
Originally posted by stalkervision:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
Il-2 will end because the developer will not allow anyone to take over the code and build a better game out of it to compete with what they are developing. Funny that even Microsoft allows further game developments by individuals in their Combat flight sim 3 series.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

It was the FURTHER game developments by individuals on the CFS series that buried it for me. These further developments became crazy until someone in my squad said, IL2 can not be modded and cheating can not happen as a result. I should try it. I never looked back because I'm on the level playing field with others concerning online play. Supersupersuper Marine Spitfires are not what I call fun to DF with. This is what the CFS series became. Now do not get me wrong, there are some groups that stick to realism as best they can but from my experience there are more looking for the edge to win every encounter they can and will stop at nothing to get it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Never encountered any of that but then I never did online play in CfS 3.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

CFS3 was a whole different story. The nice lobby and game room sponsored by MS was never put up. Plus the game had many issues. As much as I attempted to work them out it was just not happening. Meanwhile I had IL2 collecting dust as I could not get a good running game with it. I loaded it up and worked like hell to get it going. I accomplished that and never looked back. What has kept me in IL2 is the unmodibility and the great support by Oleg and crew.

AKA_TAGERT
03-07-2007, 09:09 PM
Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
I have experienced it since Jane's WWII. I find that players that can hack and go to any lengths to win will do so just to show superiority. You claim that most mod to make the game better or the simulation more exact. Look around this forum and tell me EVERYONE is going to agree this is how plane X should be and this mod makes it that way, all is well in the land. It will never happen. Heck, there is even a argument with two major mods for SH3 and it is this: when a uboat is submerged and stationary the boat rise. The other modders say it will sink. ON and on the argument goes. If IL2 is left for developers to mod only, these things will not come around and ruin yet another flight sim. Fortunate for SH3 it is by enlarge played by single players and modding only affects the player and no others. AMEN Brother


Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
I think case 1 and case 2 are the wrong way to go. The game should be left as is with tweeks and FM changed done only by the developers. Just my personal opinion on the matter. Everyone is on the same level playing field concerning online play. The only difference is the computer equipment the virtual pilot has and skill of a virtual pilot if he has any at all. Bingo!

That is a BIG part of what made and makes IL2 so popular!

So if it aint broke, dont fix it!

It being only allowing the developers to add or tweak planes that can be used online.


Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
It was the FURTHER game developments by individuals on the CFS series that buried it for me. These further developments became crazy until someone in my squad said, IL2 can not be modded and cheating can not happen as a result. I should try it. I never looked back because I'm on the level playing field with others concerning online play. Supersupersuper Marine Spitfires are not what I call fun to DF with. This is what the CFS series became. Now do not get me wrong, there are some groups that stick to realism as best they can but from my experience there are more looking for the edge to win every encounter they can and will stop at nothing to get it. Thank God!

For a moment there I thought I was the only one to understand this simple truth!

So maybe there is hope of convincing Oleg to not allow this?

We few need to stick togther on this!

AVGWarhawk
03-08-2007, 06:59 AM
I believe Oleg closely guarded code should remain guarded. As soon as SUPER SPIT starts acting like the F-22 is the time I move on. IMHO the game is perfect w/o the modders changing things. In my thoughts, Oleg attempted to make a sim/game as close to RL as possible. As a result, a large community sticks by it and enjoy it this way. Super Salami with wings will kill this like a opossum in the headlights! I hope it remains the same and the community can flame each other with this is wrong and that is wrong but, everyone has to deal with what is wrong, not just a few who do not know how to mod or where to get the mod. Again, level playing field. It boils down to achieving through trial and error, practice, etc. Not tweeking this file so the plane flies on rails and has hitting power of an 88mm.

AKA_TAGERT
03-08-2007, 07:02 AM
Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
I believe Oleg closely guarded code should remain guarded. As soon as SUPER SPIT starts acting like the F-22 is the time I move on. IMHO the game is perfect w/o the modders changing things. In my thoughts, Oleg attempted to make a sim/game as close to RL as possible. As a result, a large community sticks by it and enjoy it this way. Super Salami with wings will kill this like a opossum in the headlights! I hope it remains the same and the community can flame each other with this is wrong and that is wrong but, everyone has to deal with what is wrong, not just a few who do not know how to mod or where to get the mod. Again, level playing field. It boils down to achieving through trial and error, practice, etc. Not tweeking this file so the plane flies on rails and has hitting power of an 88mm. Son

You have a way with words!

Agreed 100%!

Instead of getting good at the planes they have.. These guys would simply tweak the planes to make themselfs good.

These are the same kind of smacktards that will buy a game.. Go online to find the cheat codes.. Using the cheat codes finish the game in a few hours.. Than go online to the game forum and complain about how short the game was!

The 'level playing field' sums it up nicely!

Anyone that can not grasp that simple concept and why it is so important for the online comunity is either thick or has an agenda they are trying to hide IMHO! Like potentially making money of selling a 3rd party add-on.

jasonbirder
03-08-2007, 09:28 AM
So, essentially what you Online guys are saying is that the FB/AEP/PF community, unlike the community associated with every other Sim I have played (and that's plenty while I was never into Jane's WW2 Fighters or the CFS series I've spent hundreds of hours on European Air War, Jane's F15E, Jane's F/A18, Falcon 4, Lock On, Silent Hunter, Dangerous Waters etc etc...) is not made up of people with an interest in experiencing as realistic a simulation of historic world war 2 aerial combat as possible, but essentially are a gang of untrustworthy children who want to shoot each other down in a kind of First Person Shooter, but with wings?
Is that why you seem so obsessed with the concept of a level playing field? Well hello...I don't want a level playing field, real life wasn't a level playing field...If you were the Russians in 1941 or the Germans in 1945 or flying a Gladiator from Malta (etc etc...the examples are endless) it wasn't a level playing field I don't want my game to be balance...I want it to be historic and if that means battling against difficult odds in an uncompetitive plane where the best I can hope for is merely survival then so be it!
I would take issue with the statement Oleg attempted to make a sim/game as close to RL as possible the game is vastly over simplified...and this is the area modding could address...What if the game added individual and realistic start up procedures to each plane? Realistic Engine Management? Realistic Fuel management (how great would it be to have to select fuel tanks or end up with an unbalanced and difficult to control plane?) More realistic navigation and weather (How amny palnes were lost through navigation error and running out of fuel in world war 2...and how many are in FB/AEP/PF)...faulty compasses & instruments...cascading damage...random failures how great would it be to occasionally suffer from poor quality fuel, dodgy instruments, jammed guns etc? Surely these would add greatly to the game vastly increasing its realism and immersion...

stalkervision
03-08-2007, 10:27 AM
Originally posted by jasonbirder:
So, essentially what you Online guys are saying is that the FB/AEP/PF community, unlike the community associated with every other Sim I have played (and that's plenty while I was never into Jane's WW2 Fighters or the CFS series I've spent hundreds of hours on European Air War, Jane's F15E, Jane's F/A18, Falcon 4, Lock On, Silent Hunter, Dangerous Waters etc etc...) is not made up of people with an interest in experiencing as realistic a simulation of historic world war 2 aerial combat as possible, but essentially are a gang of untrustworthy children who want to shoot each other down in a kind of First Person Shooter, but with wings?
Is that why you seem so obsessed with the concept of a level playing field? Well hello...I don't want a level playing field, real life wasn't a level playing field...If you were the Russians in 1941 or the Germans in 1945 or flying a Gladiator from Malta (etc etc...the examples are endless) it wasn't a level playing field I don't want my game to be balance...I want it to be historic and if that means battling against difficult odds in an uncompetitive plane where the best I can hope for is merely survival then so be it!
I would take issue with the statement Oleg attempted to make a sim/game as close to RL as possible the game is vastly over simplified...and this is the area modding could address...What if the game added individual and realistic start up procedures to each plane? Realistic Engine Management? Realistic Fuel management (how great would it be to have to select fuel tanks or end up with an unbalanced and difficult to control plane?) More realistic navigation and weather (How amny palnes were lost through navigation error and running out of fuel in world war 2...and how many are in FB/AEP/PF)...faulty compasses & instruments...cascading damage...random failures how great would it be to occasionally suffer from poor quality fuel, dodgy instruments, jammed guns etc? Surely these would add greatly to the game vastly increasing its realism and immersion...

All very good points.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

AVGWarhawk
03-08-2007, 10:32 AM
So, essentially what you Online guys are saying is that the FB/AEP/PF community, unlike the community associated with every other Sim I have played (and that's plenty while I was never into Jane's WW2 Fighters or the CFS series I've spent hundreds of hours on European Air War, Jane's F15E, Jane's F/A18, Falcon 4, Lock On, Silent Hunter, Dangerous Waters etc etc...) is not made up of people with an interest in experiencing as realistic a simulation of historic world war 2 aerial combat as possible, but essentially are a gang of untrustworthy children who want to shoot each other down in a kind of First Person Shooter, but with wings?

I did not state a gang of untrustworthy children, but given an option to exploit, some will. Seen it in CFS2 and bickering on your a cheat, etc. Take out the opportunity to cheat and the bickering goes away. The games that I have played online all went to hell with mods. Just my experience. Given the tools to exploit and people will exploit. Human nature.

"Is that why you seem so obsessed with the concept of a level playing field?"

Not obsessed, I do not like having inhancments to the players "liking" so said player will not learn simulate flying but make changes for the players shortcomings. A crutch if you will.

"I would take issue with the statement Oleg attempted to make a sim/game as close to RL as possible the game is vastly over simplified...and this is the area modding could address...What if the game added individual and realistic start up procedures to each plane? Realistic Engine Management? Realistic Fuel management (how great would it be to have to select fuel tanks or end up with an unbalanced and difficult to control plane?) More realistic navigation and weather (How amny palnes were lost through navigation error and running out of fuel in world war 2...and how many are in FB/AEP/PF)...faulty compasses & instruments...cascading damage...random failures how great would it be to occasionally suffer from poor quality fuel, dodgy instruments, jammed guns etc? Surely these would add greatly to the game vastly increasing its realism and immersion"

What more realistic navigation? Tie a clipboard to your thigh and navigate like they did in RL. I see a compass on the instrument panel. Dynamic weather coming with BoB. Start up procedures could be worked on, sure. Quite a bit could be worked on but IMHO it should be left to Oleg. Too many modders spoil the pot. I see spoilage with modders making mods too their liking. I'm not saying ALL will mode for advantage but from my past experience the game will be spoiled by those that wish to exploit. I have seen it in CFS/MOH/COD.


What I am obsessed with is my wife/kids/scotch...and not always in that order. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

AKA_TAGERT
03-08-2007, 11:29 AM
Originally posted by stalkervision:
All very good points.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif Disagree 100%

Ares_336sqn
03-08-2007, 04:48 PM
If someones thinks a plane is "balanced", all he has to do is to present the in-game against the real life data. Now, i am not an aero-engineer so i do not have an opinion about FM that should matter to anyone else than myself.

So, i have to find someone i trust. And Oleg has gained my trust. Not because i think he is always right-nobody on this planet is always right!- but because he seems to try to do his best.And he knows his subject. That is all i need and the best a human can expect from another human. Wellcome to the real world.

But who are all these guys who seem to know everything about how a WW2 plane performed? What have they done and how many games have they done? Did they once "fixed" a plane in some game that some others found ok... and? So what..? Big deal. They probably consider themselves extremely "important" within their small world.

Now, i still think that as long as there is a part of the online game locked and safe, the other part will eventually "die" just like other similar sims did. In fact, ALL of them!! So, i am not really worried about that... at least with the extremely limited info we have until now http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

What happened to the other sims is a hard fact (concerning the online part) for everyone to see out there... if he only wants to see. But then again, read my signature...

LEXX_Luthor
03-08-2007, 06:10 PM
Ares336::
Now, i still think that as long as there is a part of the online game locked and safe, the other part will eventually "die" just like other similar sims did. In fact, ALL of them!! So, i am not really worried about that... at least with the extremely limited info we have until now
Rather than "die," the open mod Case 2 servers will be another thriving community different from the closed mod Case 1 server community, although many customers will cross over between the Case 1 and Case 2 servers. We insist on "forgetting" that Oleg wishes to increase the number of paying customers beyond the (according to rnzoli) stagnated Online community that we have today. The alternative may be Oleg going Online Pay-To-Play ("but not yet time" ~Oleg at sukhoi.ru), or even better, placing Offline sim support in front of Online sim support, thus (theoretically) eliminating any need for Pay-To-Play to fund the Online support.


Ares336::
What happened to the other sims is a hard fact (concerning the online part) for everyone to see out there... if he only wants to see.
The difference here is Oleg's willingness to support his Online sims, unlike Microsoft -- "if one only wants to see". However, your claim may not be such a hard fact anymore, as TAGERT now claims never to have seen any cheating in Microsoft Online sims. I dunno about THAT. I do know that Microsoft abandoned its Online and Offline customers.

LEXX_Luthor
03-08-2007, 06:17 PM
jason::
So, essentially what you Online guys are saying is that the FB/AEP/PF community, unlike the community associated with every other Sim I have played....is not made up of people with an interest in experiencing as realistic a simulation of historic world war 2 aerial combat as possible, but essentially are a gang of untrustworthy children who want to shoot each other down in a kind of First Person Shooter, but with wings?
Yes! We have seen this hostile gamer behavior here in the recent past; See below...this is amazing stuff, and as we see, easily exposed as mere snotty gamer behavior.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sept, 2006
Afterall this is a combat flight sim game
by nearmiss ~> http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9421040874/p/9


FB/PF community enjoys Total War series ~> http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7591025584/p/1

FB/PF community misses old EAW Air War simulation features ~> http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6791091584



In this thread here, many of this community tried to blame Oleg's market failure on lack of interest among "shooter gamers," but they refused to talk about serious people who are very interested in non-shooter games such as the Total War series, who are bored by simple Dogfight simulation, with or without "realistic accurate" flight/damage/weapon models, and bored by the lack of Air War simulation in FB/PF, and in modern combat flight sims in general...
------------------------------------------------

Some examples, from page 5...

ElAurens:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But the majority of electronic gamers are not interested in history, or learning a difficult skill like flying, they simply want some quick, close quarter, automaic weapons play. So most developers design and market to that demographic.
Lexx::
Gamers are very interested in purchasing the Total War series, the Civilization series, and space strategery games, and their later upgrades. The publishers of these games know this and make profit without having to sell "shooter" games as you suggest they have to do.
------------------------------------------------

Stiglr (sudoku1941)::
The real question here is, "can we have a better all around combat flight sim?" not "can we be the most popular and lucrative niche, outselling <span class="ev_code_yellow">Nintendo and Madden's NFL</span>". Nobody's even going there. And for good reason: that's NEVER going to happen.
Lexx::
Also not trying to "outsell" Nintendo and MaddenNFL are the creators of the Total War series, the Civilization series, space strategery games, and the Silent Hunter series.
------------------------------------------------

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif Ugly_Kid::
Now go fish for <span class="ev_code_yellow">the gamers folk and easy to start people</span> who just want to fire it up and go a-shooting and you loose the hardcore folks.
Lexx::
Kid, your "gamer folk" statement has no meaning in a webboard discussion about customers who purchase and sustain interest in non-shooter game PC software such as the Total War series, the Civilization series, the Forgotten Battles/Pacific Fighters series, space strategery games (very hardcore science fiction fans), and the Silent Hunter series.

------------------------------------------------

We see now why we can't talk about serious, military and history oriented PC gamers who are bored with combat flight sims' focus on simple Dogfight shooting -- we are among these people, and we would have to talk about ourselves; always a difficult thing. They are us. We are these people playing Total War and missing Air War simulation features from EAW.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
END

AKA_TAGERT
03-08-2007, 06:26 PM
Poooor Nancy

AVGWarhawk
03-08-2007, 06:43 PM
LEXX
Yes! We have seen this hostile gamer behavior here in the recent past; See below...this is amazing stuff, and as we see, easily exposed as mere snotty gamer behavior.

Snotty gamer behavior. You have a class and name for a gamer. Dude, I'm sure in the not so far past you were just a "GAMER". I suspect you have evolved into "SIMULATION MAN" Now you want to open up the code for all the GAMERS to start modding like nuts. Opening up code for free for all modding creates snotty nosed gamers. Keeping the code locked forces people to learn to live with what is handed to them. Either these people stay and learn or they find something else. Yes, we can argue all day and slam charts on the forums but it still remains, it is what it is, learn to fly it or go down in flames.

PS. These GAMERS are paying customers like you. Push the gamer out along with the gamer dollars and developers stop making games because game making does not pay.

LEXX_Luthor
03-08-2007, 06:57 PM
AVGWarHawk::
Now <span class="ev_code_yellow">you want to</span> open up the code...
I stopped reading your poast at that accusation.

When you wish to talk about the accusations and insults quoted above that were made by gamers against other people who are intereseted in simulating military history, we may talk again.

If you wish to talk with the combat flight sim community without accusations and insults, we are willing to talk with you.

NerdConnected
03-09-2007, 03:32 AM
LEXX,

I do not wish to have a discussion about so-called case1/2 servers for BoB right now because it will take quite some time before that gets relevant.

I merely suggest to open up IL2 a bit in certain areas.

Since you, just like me, care so much about Il2 and likely still enjoy this game, could you, provided Maddox agrees opening it up of course, tell me how and in what way you would like to see it 'opened up'?

I'm just interested to hear your thoughts on what would like to see opened up, how and why and which parts you'd prefer not to see modified.

E.g. should someone should stay in control of QA or not? Do you think it should be open-sourced or shared sourced? Should everyone be able to mod or only a 'trusted' group of modders? Do you like to see private servers that are completely 'modded' and non-moddable restricted servers? Eg. should anyone be able to make maps? Should people be able to create multiple maps of the same area?

Mark

jasonbirder
03-09-2007, 03:40 AM
OK! What I need to get into my head is that for the Onliners Flight Model & Damage Model are the be all and end all of this game...and I call it a game advisedly as it appears that the broader Historical & Flight Simulation aspects of FB/AEP/PF definitely take a back seat in priority where the onliners are concerned...Fast action, short ranged, rapidly re-flying dogfighting missions predominantly between two opposing sets of fighters typically made up of scattered individuals or small groups with no overall plan or co-ordination, typically joining the game at scattered times is a hell of a long way from what I consider to be a flight simulation it is more of a completely artificial duelling type arena. And an environment in which fairness and balance game driven concepts, rather than simulation aspects obviously take priority.
But Hyperlobby based Online, come as you are dogfighting makes up only a tiny proportion of people playing , far more people play the game offline or play online by hosting their own games and flying with people they know...
It also explains why Onliners become immediately hostile when the possibility of opening up the game or modding the game is mentioned...as FM & DM are of such vital importance to them...they instantly assume that tweaking those parameters would be the only thing of interest to any interest to prospective modders...
But modding can be far broader in scope than merely tweaking FMs & DMs...
This is what excites me the possibility that with or without access to the source code a group could take on development of the game and improve it in all areas making it a richer, more rewarding, more complex, more realistic and more immersive gaming experience...

jasonbirder
03-09-2007, 03:53 AM
Since you, just like me, care so much about Il2 and likely still enjoy this game, could you, provided Maddox agrees opening it up of course, tell me how and in what way you would like to see it 'opened up'?

I'm just interested to hear your thoughts on what would like to see opened up, how and why and which parts you'd prefer not to see modified.


From my point of view things I would like to see opened up would be -

Creation of new bigger maps...(I'm sure the Pacific guys would like this too!) We have some great maps in the game...but why oh why are so many of them so tiny! How hard would it have been to extend the Normandy map northwards and include the south coast of Britain? Or a nice Slot map includin Rabaul...Or a nice big Malta/Italy/North Africa map...we have way too many small dogfight maps, many of which are essentially useless for historic scenarios and campaigns without a tremendous amount of imagination!
More relaistic Engine & Fuel management - forcing you to actually concentrate and think about flying your plane...switching between fuel tanks to keep your plane balanced, managing the engine to maintain performance and prevent damage, making the act of flying your plane a more integral part of the game - it is supposed to be a Flight Simulation after all!
Start up sequences for the planes - pressing the magic I button just kills it for me immersion wise! I have been spoiled by to many Falcon 4 ramp starts I guess!
Modelling of random failures and cascading damage.
A better campaign engine than the extremely sterile DGEN
Better AI
Improvements to the weather engine and something that would make navigation more difficult - it all seems a little too easy in this game, whereas in real life weather and getting lost/running out of fuel were as big a hazard as enemy action!
Better damage models for the non-plane objects like tanks, bridges, building and most especially ships! And while we're at it can we programme them with better AI - get them maneuvering and evading like they did in real life!
Obviously I would also love to see more realistic loadouts for many of the planes we have...More ground objects...more ships and don't even get me started about more planes...be that AI only or flyable!

joeap
03-09-2007, 03:59 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
If you wish to talk with the combat flight sim community without accusations and insults, we are willing to talk with you.

Jeezus, I try to get a long with everyone on this forum, but WHO IN BLAZES ELECTED YOU AS SPOKESMAN FOR THE COMMUNITY??? Such arrogance that rivals some of the so called "FM experts" here. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

I myself am interested in war simulation as well btw.

stalkervision
03-09-2007, 05:36 AM
Originally posted by jasonbirder:
OK! What I need to get into my head is that for the Onliners Flight Model & Damage Model are the be all and end all of this game...and I call it a game advisedly as it appears that the broader Historical & Flight Simulation aspects of FB/AEP/PF definitely take a back seat in priority where the onliners are concerned...Fast action, short ranged, rapidly re-flying dogfighting missions predominantly between two opposing sets of fighters typically made up of scattered individuals or small groups with no overall plan or co-ordination, typically joining the game at scattered times is a hell of a long way from what I consider to be a flight simulation it is more of a completely artificial duelling type arena. And an environment in which fairness and balance game driven concepts, rather than simulation aspects obviously take priority.
But Hyperlobby based Online, come as you are dogfighting makes up only a tiny proportion of people playing , far more people play the game offline or play online by hosting their own games and flying with people they know...
It also explains why Onliners become immediately hostile when the possibility of opening up the game or modding the game is mentioned...as FM & DM are of such vital importance to them...they instantly assume that tweaking those parameters would be the only thing of interest to any interest to prospective modders...
But modding can be far broader in scope than merely tweaking FMs & DMs...
This is what excites me the possibility that with or without access to the source code a group could take on development of the game and improve it in all areas making it a richer, more rewarding, more complex, more realistic and more immersive gaming experience...

Apparently this the real reason why avgwarhawk (Hay dude) is as hostile to the idea about open sourcing the code as he is. He is worried the multiplayer community will be spoiled for him. I say.."Hay dude, that is way uncool you like want to keep the code locked all for yourself and are like trippin on not sharing the pie man... Let your off-line sky surfer buddies enjoy some narley new sky action if they want man. Hay man,Don't be such a tool and a maddox uber-capitalistic sky nazi about the code dude." http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

stalkervision
03-09-2007, 06:04 AM
The ocean of Il-2 is a vast sea. There is plenty enough narley wave action for all. Don't let a few very uncool dudes lock all the new free beaches with even better more intense breakers waiting to be found out there because they are selfish and don't want to share the waves.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

AVGWarhawk
03-09-2007, 06:51 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
AVGWarHawk:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Now <span class="ev_code_yellow">you want to</span> open up the code...
I stopped reading your poast at that accusation.

When you wish to talk about the accusations and insults quoted above that were made by gamers against other people who are intereseted in simulating military history, we may talk again.

If you wish to talk with the combat flight sim community without accusations and insults, we are willing to talk with you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No accusations.(SEE BELOW) Apparently you want the code open from what I read. My point is you have a clandestine desire to put down GAMERS. Somehow I do not see gamers as below simmers. When you decide not to look down you nose at gamers like they are some lepers maybe I will entertain conversation with you! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

DOES THIS LOOK FAMILIAR?

I too used to think of aircraft modding as best only for Offline use, but thinking of dedicated, enthusiastic, honest, and focused teams like Tuckie_JG52's Spanish Civil War team made me realize that open aircraft modding may offer a role for Online play as well......Lexx

BTW it is 'post' not poasts. I have no idea what a 'poasts' is....

AKA_TAGERT
03-09-2007, 07:46 AM
Originally posted by joeap:
Jeezus, I try to get a long with everyone on this forum, but WHO IN BLAZES ELECTED YOU AS SPOKESMAN FOR THE COMMUNITY??? Such arrogance that rivals some of the so called "FM experts" here. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif Agreed 100%

LEXX_Luthor
03-09-2007, 07:33 PM
NerdConnected::
LEXX,

I do not wish to have a discussion about so-called case1/2 servers for BoB right now because it will take quite some time before that gets relevant.

I merely suggest to open up IL2 a bit in certain areas.

Since you, just like me, care so much about Il2 and likely still enjoy this game, could you, provided Maddox agrees opening it up of course, tell me how and in what way you would like to see it 'opened up'?

I'm just interested to hear your thoughts on what would like to see opened up, how and why and which parts you'd prefer not to see modified.


Mark
Nothing. FB was never designed for open modding ability. It can't be opened to deep modding for the general community. Others here like WWMaxGunz may better explain why. The best Oleg may do is sell his old sim to another company -- technically, a unique trusted 3rd Party -- but that may create conflict with sales of BoB And Beyond if the 3rd Party creates WW2 stuff.

I had thought the new (rumored) Luthier Korea sim would be based on FB/PF (a disasterous sim engine for high altitude 1950s jet combat) but apparently not, as recently I saw poasted that LK will be made under the BoB And Beyond sim engine.

LEXX_Luthor
03-09-2007, 07:48 PM
jason::
OK! What I need to get into my head is that for the Onliners Flight Model & Damage Model are the be all and end all of this game...and I call it a game advisedly as it appears that the broader Historical & Flight Simulation aspects of FB/AEP/PF definitely take a back seat in priority where the onliners are concerned...Fast action, short ranged, rapidly re-flying dogfighting missions predominantly between two opposing sets of fighters typically made up of scattered individuals or small groups with no overall plan or co-ordination, typically joining the game at scattered times is a hell of a long way from what I consider to be a flight simulation it is more of a completely artificial duelling type arena. And an environment in which fairness and balance game driven concepts, rather than simulation aspects obviously take priority.
There is real community modding effort at making immersive Online War available for FB/PF but its very difficult without top support from Oleg, who, in my opinion, has in the past been focused on Online Dogfight and online "flight model" competition. According to csThor, that may change for BoB And Beyond.

You "forgot" Weapons Model, which is the Third LeGG of Online Dogfight, the other two being FM and DM, as you have noted. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LEXX_Luthor
03-09-2007, 08:03 PM
AVGWarHawk::
No accusations.(SEE BELOW) Apparently you want the <span class="ev_code_yellow">code open</span> from what I read.
:
:
DOES THIS LOOK FAMILIAR?

I too used to think of aircraft modding as best only for Offline use, but thinking of dedicated, enthusiastic, honest, and focused teams like Tuckie_JG52's Spanish Civil War team made me realize that <span class="ev_code_yellow">open aircraft modding</span> may offer a role for Online play as well......Lexx
Microsoft CFS3 was open mod.

joep, was Microsoft CFS3 open source code?

---------

FB/PF may require open source code for open aircraft modding (ask WWMaxGunz), and that is one reason Oleg will not open aircraft modding to the general community. However, BoB And Beyond apparently is being designed for open aircraft modding, and obviously without needing the source code to be opened for the community to mod aircraft. You are learning.

Ares_336sqn
03-09-2007, 11:58 PM
I do not know how you got the impression that online flying is just an endless dogfight. the majority play both online wars and scripted or no scripted dogfight maps.
I am most interested in Online wars.

Now imagine this.
People spend enormous amound of time and a lot of money to prepare and maintain an online war site. They spend hours and hours programming , preparing map templates, fixing bugs, preparing plane sets for each map etc. etc. etc. They also pay for the site space and bandwidth needed.
Players pay for good internet connections so that they can participate without spoiling it for everybody.
Then people gather in HL slots, prepare the missions they are going to fly, discuss it, look at the current map condition and decide what kind of action they should take.
Then the mission starts. We look at the map and planes we have and decide the tactics we are going to follow. Who is going to do what, who is going to fly with whom, who will fly low or provide high cover, where the enemy is probably going to come from, whether they will attack from low altitude with high cover or..... etc. etc. etc.
Then we hit fly , take off,fly for 20 minutes or so...And THEN...
Now, imagine this... A F-22 appears , hits the ground targets, shoots down everybody and heads home!!!! A single plane flown by a kid with a severe case of acme and low self esteem (his age could be anything from 15 to 75 years old) destroys everything.

At that moment, online gaming is dead.

Yes, it is a scary thought. It is a nightmare.

NerdConnected
03-10-2007, 02:10 AM
Ares_336sqn,

"Now imagine this....
Then we hit fly , take off,fly for 20 minutes or so...And THEN...
Now, imagine this... A F-22 appears , hits the ground targets, shoots down everybody and heads home!!!! A single plane flown by a kid with a severe case of acme and low self esteem (his age could be anything from 15 to 75 years old) destroys everything."

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

I think we can safely add: 'short attention span' and 'no understanding of history and the world we live in whatsoever' ;-)

Agree, I'm against this kind of modding, but I think most of us are (ie. I don't see many real 'kiddies' on these boards ;-).

Mark

AVGWarhawk
03-10-2007, 05:40 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
AVGWarHawk:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">No accusations.(SEE BELOW) Apparently you want the <span class="ev_code_yellow">code open</span> from what I read.
:
:
DOES THIS LOOK FAMILIAR?

I too used to think of aircraft modding as best only for Offline use, but thinking of dedicated, enthusiastic, honest, and focused teams like Tuckie_JG52's Spanish Civil War team made me realize that <span class="ev_code_yellow">open aircraft modding</span> may offer a role for Online play as well......Lexx
Microsoft CFS3 was open mod.

joep, was Microsoft CFS3 open source code?

---------

FB/PF may require open source code for open aircraft modding (ask WWMaxGunz), and that is one reason Oleg will not open aircraft modding to the general community. However, BoB And Beyond apparently is being designed for open aircraft modding, and obviously without needing the source code to be opened for the community to mod aircraft. You are learning. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


That is the point Lexx, opening up code or anything for general comsumption ruined the CFS series and many other games that allowed a free reign. Sure, there are few hardcore who attempt to keep it clean but more often than not, modders get crazy with changes until what was a decent game is now a mixed bag of rubbish. You think it is bad now with the bickering on what plane could do this and that plane could do that, hand over everything to the armchair jockey and see how the bickering begins. Look at this way, we, for the most part, accept Oleg interpretion of FM as a benchmark. We live and die by it. This makes everyone equal. Allow a modder with this own ideas/FEELINGS on how a plane should fly and the game is toast. Reason being he FEELS the P51 should do 550mph and meanwhile little old me is puttering around with the original FM getting slapped like a red headed stepchild. This is how the CFS series ended for me and a majority of the the others. Furthermore, there is always that shadow of doubt in the back of the brain that someone has a cheat. Trust is always compromised when the key to crapper is handed out.

joeap
03-10-2007, 06:45 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:

joep, was Microsoft CFS3 open source code?



I never said anything about open source code or not, of course CFS3 was not "open source." I just don't like your speaking on behalf on the community rather than LEXX to wit:


If you wish to talk with the combat flight sim community without accusations and insults, we are willing to talk with you. <------- pretty presumptuous

If you had written:


If you wish to talk to me without accusations and insults, I am willing to talk with you. <------ normal debate

Then I would have said nothing. Well remind everyone to be polite, maybe even support certain things, like say keeping FMs and DMs under the control of 1C, but allowing an open door to more realistic campaign systems and virtual war ... thanks for the deflection.

AKA_TAGERT
03-11-2007, 09:18 AM
Originally posted by Ares_336sqn:
I do not know how you got the impression that online flying is just an endless dogfight. the majority play both online wars and scripted or no scripted dogfight maps.
I am most interested in Online wars.

Now imagine this.
People spend enormous amound of time and a lot of money to prepare and maintain an online war site. They spend hours and hours programming , preparing map templates, fixing bugs, preparing plane sets for each map etc. etc. etc. They also pay for the site space and bandwidth needed.
Players pay for good internet connections so that they can participate without spoiling it for everybody.
Then people gather in HL slots, prepare the missions they are going to fly, discuss it, look at the current map condition and decide what kind of action they should take.
Then the mission starts. We look at the map and planes we have and decide the tactics we are going to follow. Who is going to do what, who is going to fly with whom, who will fly low or provide high cover, where the enemy is probably going to come from, whether they will attack from low altitude with high cover or..... etc. etc. etc.
Then we hit fly , take off,fly for 20 minutes or so...And THEN...
Now, imagine this... A F-22 appears , hits the ground targets, shoots down everybody and heads home!!!! A single plane flown by a kid with a severe case of acme and low self esteem (his age could be anything from 15 to 75 years old) destroys everything.

At that moment, online gaming is dead.

Yes, it is a scary thought. It is a nightmare. Bingo!

striker-85
03-17-2007, 11:05 AM
Originally posted by Ares_336sqn:
Now, imagine this... A F-22 appears , hits the ground targets, shoots down everybody and heads home!!!! A single plane flown by a kid with a severe case of acme and low self esteem (his age could be anything from 15 to 75 years old) destroys everything.

At that moment, online gaming is dead.

Yes, it is a scary thought. It is a nightmare.

I'm not sure I understand this comment, from what I have read about BOB the Server will control what planes/mods will be allowed, a client can not join a server and 'bring' his own plane.

So my question is, who would be playing on a server that has an F-22?

I would be playing online on servers that are locked down to stock a/c and specialty servers with stuff from groups like Tuckie_JG52's Spanish Civil War team.

Not looking for flames, I'm just trying to understand...