PDA

View Full Version : New(?) Maddox Interview (Russian)



Retrofish
02-27-2009, 03:41 PM
http://spread-wings.ru/index.p...view&id=154&Itemid=1 (http://spread-wings.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=154&Itemid=1)

Translated by Luthier (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=6494)

Retrofish
02-27-2009, 03:41 PM
http://spread-wings.ru/index.p...view&id=154&Itemid=1 (http://spread-wings.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=154&Itemid=1)

Translated by Luthier (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=6494)

Falcke
02-27-2009, 05:04 PM
Plenty of new screenshots, some even ingame and nobody even seems to notice. Hope somebody will make a proper translation for it. Thanks for posting this!

danjama
02-27-2009, 05:33 PM
Nice thanks alot http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

"AI in «BzB» will be more difficult. And even accounting for sick or tired pilot, sniper, he or pilotazhnik, sloven"

What are those last 2 words?

Choctaw111
02-27-2009, 05:35 PM
That should be on the 1C site, but I didn't see it. It's a shame really. So many people want to read about and see as much as they can get their hands on, and this interview isn't even on their site.

b2spirita
02-27-2009, 05:35 PM
http://spread-wings.ru/images/stories/Medoks_2/Ju-87B-2_dam2.jpg http://spread-wings.ru/images/stories/Medoks_2/Ju-87B-2_dam1_cm.jpg

http://spread-wings.ru/images/stories/Medoks_2/He-59C-2_02_cm.jpg

Looks nice.

danjama
02-27-2009, 05:41 PM
Thats a great capture!

Also he says maybe even 60% or more maybe, so can we expect....2 weeks?

Manu-6S
02-27-2009, 06:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by danjama:
Thats a great capture!

Also he says maybe even 60% or more maybe, so can we expect....2 weeks? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

60%?
Ok another 4 years of waiting...

Feathered_IV
02-27-2009, 07:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Manu-6S:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by danjama:
Thats a great capture!

Also he says maybe even 60% or more maybe, so can we expect....2 weeks? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

60%?
Ok another 4 years of waiting... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In my experience, there is usually a crash at 60% http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Choctaw111
02-27-2009, 08:49 PM
I am wondering what Oleg means by 60%. Sixty percent of the content finished is much different then saying 60% in time to completion. I figure that all of the really difficult stuff has been done with SoW, and the remainder of the programming should go relatively easy....I hope.

Stiletto-
02-27-2009, 09:36 PM
Wow, they only get half cubicles.. And look how small Olegs monitor is.

Codex1971
02-27-2009, 09:44 PM
It's interesting he has a model of the He-219 on the wall. I hope that will be included in a future SoW add on.

NAFP_supah
02-28-2009, 03:14 AM
Wow Oleg has a crappy office :| Though ofcourse its probably good sense to spend money on the product then on the building its made in.

Manu-6S
02-28-2009, 03:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Choctaw111:
I am wondering what Oleg means by 60%. Sixty percent of the content finished is much different then saying 60% in time to completion. I figure that all of the really difficult stuff has been done with SoW, and the remainder of the programming should go relatively easy....I hope. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Working to such big project make you spend the most of the time on analysis (using UML for example)... then you have the complete software "on paper" so you can procede with the code (easiest thing if the UML model was ok).

But in this case we have a lot of work with 3D models and textures: those two aspect need many hours/days of work (Oleg stated months!!!) out of the project analysis... so we don't know if the "code" is finished or what...

Are the engines (physic and graphic) completed yet (at least on paper)? In that case you need "only" to work on models (a long work again).

I've a bad feeling about this 60%.

ploughman
02-28-2009, 05:49 AM
Nice, some in game stuff (it does exist) and I found the surf very soothing, must've watched it 20 times. Om.

squareusr
02-28-2009, 07:43 AM
When creating software, each "10%" takes about as long as all the previous "10%"s together http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

vassilisukharev
02-28-2009, 04:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">AI in «BzB» will be more difficult. And even accounting for sick or tired pilot, sniper, he or pilotazhnik, sloven </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This snippet translates to:

AI in BoB will be superior. It will consider such factors as pilot strengths -- whether he's a better shot or better at flying, whether he's sick or tired, whether he's a disciplined soldier vs not so much... And other stuff.

JG52Uther
02-28-2009, 04:41 PM
STILL can't give system specs?
I think this sim is still a long way off.

No41Sqn_Banks
03-01-2009, 02:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Manu-6S:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Choctaw111:
I am wondering what Oleg means by 60%. Sixty percent of the content finished is much different then saying 60% in time to completion. I figure that all of the really difficult stuff has been done with SoW, and the remainder of the programming should go relatively easy....I hope. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Working to such big project make you spend the most of the time on analysis (using UML for example)... then you have the complete software "on paper" so you can procede with the code (easiest thing if the UML model was ok).

But in this case we have a lot of work with 3D models and textures: those two aspect need many hours/days of work (Oleg stated months!!!) out of the project analysis... so we don't know if the "code" is finished or what...

Are the engines (physic and graphic) completed yet (at least on paper)? In that case you need "only" to work on models (a long work again).

I've a bad feeling about this 60%. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

One rule is that 80% of the work is done in 20% of the time, but the last 20% of the work takes 80% of the time.

Another rule is that if you ask the developer when he will be finished, let's say 2 weeks, multiply that with 2 to get the reasonable result, in this case 4 weeks.

In both cases 60% is a bad news ...

skarden
03-01-2009, 05:02 AM
Well at least the AI sounds like it could be a real handfull "straight out of the box"(I live in hope!)

x6BL_Brando
03-01-2009, 05:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Uther:
STILL can't give system specs?
I think this sim is still a long way off. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can't help thinking that this is fairly irrelevant if you think it through. Surely any reasonably modern gaming computer currently available will be able to run the game well, with the situation being that, as with FB, the better the spec the better the result?

B

rnzoli
03-01-2009, 01:34 PM
Okay, another interpretation is that 60% is supposed to send the message that they are more than half way through, so it makes more sense to complete the project than scrapping it. This could be a good message, if the interview was taken after the M$ announcement about its flight sim studio.

edit: Ohhhhhh, my EYES, my eyes, no mustache anymore??????

http://spread-wings.ru/images/stories/Meddox/1.jpg

squareusr
03-02-2009, 01:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rnzoli:

edit: Ohhhhhh, my EYES, my eyes, no mustache anymore?????? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

/me checks if IL-2 is still running

Skunk_438RCAF
03-02-2009, 02:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rnzoli:
edit: Ohhhhhh, my EYES, my eyes, no mustache anymore??????

http://spread-wings.ru/images/stories/Meddox/1.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cool, he's got a DVD of Dark Blue World on his desk.

ploughman
03-02-2009, 02:04 PM
Aha! So he does. Tre' bon, one can never have too many Spitfires in one's life.

danjama
03-02-2009, 05:17 PM
Dark Blue World http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

He does look strange without a moustache doesnt he?

Personally i hope it takes ages longer for the game to come out because then i might have more money to get a decent PC to run it.

Retrofish
03-04-2009, 06:58 AM
Luthier has put up a proper translation at 1C.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=6494

FlatSpinMan
03-04-2009, 07:38 AM
Great interview. thanks to you for posting it and to Luthier for translating it.

it's going to be good.

blairgowrie
03-04-2009, 08:10 AM
A really enjoyable read and some very interesting information. Sounds like they are on the right track.

b2spirita
03-04-2009, 08:48 AM
Q: After the Il-2 code was cracked, how seriously do you approach security when designing BoB? Will this be an entirely new protection scheme, or an improvement of the Il-2 method?

A: Online protection code will be all new. However, the sim code itself will not be protected as much, in order to allow others to create their own add-ons. This will not affect fairness online. We’re taking special measures for that. [Luthier’s note: standard set of features for online games will be protected and unchangeable; each online server will choose whether to only allow these locked Maddox-approved features, or whether to also allow user mods.]

Looks like olegs ok with mods then.

joeap
03-04-2009, 09:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by b2spirita:
Looks like olegs ok with mods then. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...for SOW doesn't mean for Il-2. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Anyway, I am optimistic after reading the interview seems BoB-SOW will be the sim everyone wanted after all.

M_Gunz
03-04-2009, 09:34 AM
Consider the years of experience that Oleg and Team have when trying to understand what 60% means.
the ground they break is to them more known than new.

b2spirita
03-04-2009, 09:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeap:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by b2spirita:
Looks like olegs ok with mods then. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...for SOW doesn't mean for Il-2. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Anyway, I am optimistic after reading the interview seems BoB-SOW will be the sim everyone wanted after all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So hes ok with people modding his brand new release but not with his old game. yeah, seems logical.

Xiolablu3
03-04-2009, 11:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by b2spirita:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeap:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by b2spirita:
Looks like olegs ok with mods then. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...for SOW doesn't mean for Il-2. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Anyway, I am optimistic after reading the interview seems BoB-SOW will be the sim everyone wanted after all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So hes ok with people modding his brand new release but not with his old game. yeah, seems logical. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

SOW will be made to be modded from the start.

To Mod IL2 it had to be hacked.

b2spirita
03-04-2009, 12:00 PM
Yeah i know that. I just think that it stands to reason that if he was that bothered by it then he would make SOW even less accessible. So i reckon that ether he thinks the mods have done some good or maybe hes just being pragmatic.

TBH i really dont care whether he approves ether way, hes a great games designer and chances are itll be a great game ether way.

Urufu_Shinjiro
03-04-2009, 12:24 PM
May favorite part:

Q: You’ve mentioned in many interviews that your wife really helps you with work-related matters and inspires you. If that’s the case, can we ask if she’s ever flown Il-2, and if so, is she active online? The thing is, most Il-2 pilots being male, a lot of them experienced relationship problems due to the sim. Initial frustration on the female's part eventually either evolves into acceptance, since it’s obvious nothing can be done, or, which happens very rarely, the wife or girlfriend gets into Il-2 herself. So what does your wife think about this, not about your success, which probably can’t fail to impress any woman, but about your virtual flying and everything connected to it?

A: This reminds me of something. I was in the UK a few years ago attending a Flight Simulator show, dominated by Microsoft Flight Simulator stands and products. I’ve had a press conference on Forgotten Battles a little while before its release. About 300 people attended, which didn’t even fit the small conference hall. This was about 10 times as many as attended the Microsoft press conference an hour before.
I’ve spoken Russian during the conference, on purpose, and my good friend Ian Boys acted as an interpreter. After my speech I took some free questions, again assisted by Ian Boys. There was one question however where I didn’t wait for a translation and answered in English. The question was, what should a poor Il-2 fan do if his wife doesn’t let him play? My answer was very brief: get a new wife. The audience erupted in laughter. In any case, I’m very lucky to have my wife.

dwaindibley
03-04-2009, 12:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Q: Oleg, you’ve previously said that after Battle of Britain is released, you could be open to passing the IL-2 source code to third parties for future development, with your quality control. Are there any updates on the issue?

A: So far we have received no viable offers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why would another company now pay for access to hacked code? This probably says more about his attitude to what's happened with IL-2, it's cost him money.

Chivas
03-04-2009, 12:37 PM
The mods have taken alot of possible monies out of Oleg's pocket. He could have sold or rented the IL-2 engine to third parties, but the market is diluted with free addons. Unfortunately a double edged sword.

M_Gunz
03-04-2009, 01:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by b2spirita:
Yeah i know that. I just think that it stands to reason that if he was that bothered by it then he would make SOW even less accessible. So i reckon that ether he thinks the mods have done some good or maybe hes just being pragmatic.

TBH i really dont care whether he approves ether way, hes a great games designer and chances are itll be a great game ether way. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes but what *parts* will be accessible and how will they affect other customers differs from IL2 hacking.

Urufu_Shinjiro
03-04-2009, 02:22 PM
Everything is ok so far but I would like to say now before it gets out of hand, be careful. We've all been down the road this debate leads to re mods. A little discussion won't hurt anything if we're careful but please lets not turn this interview thread into an endless rehash of the old mod debate, please.

ElAurens
03-04-2009, 07:03 PM
And, like I have been saying for some time, the new sim will be able to incorporate land and sea elements as well, more than just a flight sim.

We are on the verge of a brave new world.

IL2 is dead, long live SOW.

jannaspookie
03-04-2009, 10:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
And, like I have been saying for some time, the new sim will be able to incorporate land and sea elements as well, more than just a flight sim.

We are on the verge of a brave new world.

IL2 is dead, long live SOW. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed. I wonder if the "anything engine" will become a new trend for simulators...?

skarden
03-05-2009, 12:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
And, like I have been saying for some time, the new sim will be able to incorporate land and sea elements as well, more than just a flight sim.

We are on the verge of a brave new world.

IL2 is dead, long live SOW. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I almost agree with that El,I think when people start playing for a little after the intitial release it'll start dawning on people how much depth SOW has and the possibilities for it.

That said,I don't think IL-2 is dead at all,a quick look over at AAA and the amount of members or a look on hyperlobby proves to me that people will be playing IL-2 fro some time yet.

All in all a pretty good time for flight simmers atm http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

Copperhead311th
03-05-2009, 01:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Q: What new or different things will be see in BoB online compared to Il-2? Any surprises?

A: Pretty much only the Dogfight mode will remain from Il-2, and even that will be updated.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Damn Oleg no CoOp any more???!! WTF. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
Say it ain't so.

Chevy350
03-05-2009, 03:03 AM
what the hells an autogyro?

BaronUnderpants
03-05-2009, 04:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Copperhead311th:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Q: What new or different things will be see in BoB online compared to Il-2? Any surprises?

A: Pretty much only the Dogfight mode will remain from Il-2, and even that will be updated.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Damn Oleg no CoOp any more???!! WTF. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
Say it ain't so. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I think he means the setup for dogfight servers on SoW will be simillar to Il2, everythingelse will be new. Dont ask me to be specific but i would be suprised if there wasnt coops avalible, in one exiting form or another.

Or maby dogfight servers in SoW will be more like old IL2 coops, just guessing.

Imagine that, allways flying on a full DF server with a purpose. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Urufu_Shinjiro
03-05-2009, 05:02 AM
Oleg said in other interviews that the DF will be more dynamic than they are now, and that coops will be completely different i.e. you can join any time and occupy any position, also I believe he said when you die you could jump to a position previously occupied by AI.

And this is an autogyro:

http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/040426/040426_autogyro_hmed_1030a.hlarge.jpg

ElAurens
03-05-2009, 10:43 AM
http://www.airfields-freeman.com/PA/Pitcairn_Autogyro.jpg

A Pitcairn Autogyro on test by the USN sometime in the early 30s.

The US Army Air Corps tested a Kellett Autogyro at Wright field in 1931.

Autogyros cannot take off vertically as the main "rotor" is not powered. It uses the auto rotation principle to generate lift. Forward thrust is provided by a standard engine/propeller set up. They can fly at very low speeds, which is why military aviation showed a lot of interest in them for observation and maritime patrol.

I believe they were used by the RAF to calibrate the Chain Home radars, which is why Oleg is messing with them.

Da_Godfatha
03-05-2009, 01:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
And, like I have been saying for some time, the new sim will be able to incorporate land and sea elements as well, more than just a flight sim.

We are on the verge of a brave new world.

IL2 is dead, long live SOW. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In a way, yes and no. Untill the addons for other theaters are made, most people will stick with IL-2. BoB is fine, for a few weeks that is. Yes our English cousins will play the 'ell out of it, but for the rest of the world it will get boring very quick.

Me, I will wait untill at least the 3rd patch is out. But he needs to hurry, most of us may be dead from old-age before it is released. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

GF http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

Skoshi Tiger
03-05-2009, 05:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Da_Godfatha:

In a way, yes and no. Untill the addons for other theaters are made, most people will stick with IL-2. BoB is fine, for a few weeks that is. Yes our English cousins will play the 'ell out of it, but for the rest of the world it will get boring very quick.

Me, I will wait untill at least the 3rd patch is out. But he needs to hurry, most of us may be dead from old-age before it is released. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

GF http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It won't just be the English playing the sim. There will be the Germans, trying to get it right this time, and the Italians to start off with. And then there were some Scottish, and Welsh pilots too, they will be interested!

Then of cource theres the Poles, New Zealanders, Canadians, Czechoslovakians, Belgians, Australians, South Africans, French, Irish, and sim pilots from the United States, Jamaica, Palestine, and Southern Rhodesia.

There should be a lot of interest from around the world for this sim. Some of these countries had only a very few pilots that took part in the Battle of Britain, but they would be extremely proud of their involvement and (if they are anything like me) would want to buy this sim to get some (how ever small)taste of what their country men experienced during the war.

Also the plane set will have the early war spifires and 109's which (If I understand correctly) were evenly matched and better handling and nicer to fly (but not necessarily the better war machines)because the bloat hadn't started to set in to their designs yet.

Cheers http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Copperhead311th
03-05-2009, 06:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
http://www.airfields-freeman.com/PA/Pitcairn_Autogyro.jpg

A Pitcairn Autogyro on test by the USN sometime in the early 30s.

The US Army Air Corps tested a Kellett Autogyro at Wright field in 1931.

Autogyros cannot take off vertically as the main "rotor" is not powered. It uses the auto rotation principle to generate lift. Forward thrust is provided by a standard engine/propeller set up. They can fly at very low speeds, which is why military aviation showed a lot of interest in them for observation and maritime patrol.

I believe they were used by the RAF to calibrate the Chain Home radars, which is why Oleg is messing with them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right. wich is why even to day it's taught in rotory flight class. Becuse if a helo compleatly looses poer it can still land under a controlled decent using auto rotation. Just becuse a helocpter looses engine power doesn't mean it will just fall from the sky.

I've speent a lot of time around the Ft. Rucker area and have watch those guys train for hours just on hovering a few feet of the ground. US Army Aviation pilots are IMO the best in the world @ what they do. And after justa 10 min conversation with one Calvary Capt. At the Heart of Dixie show a couple years back i got a lot better understanding of what it is to do that job.

Still.....i dunno if i'm all to keen on the thing in a combat sim. I'm not kncocking it or trying to be negative...ehe hell it'll grow on me in time i guess. But i'd look for it to nothing more than just another target drone. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

As for coops....well i hope so. coop play is one of the best features of the sim. I'd hate to it go the way of the dodo.

Copperhead311th
03-05-2009, 06:05 PM
And why can't we get just one US plane in this thing. comon. yeah i know bob. But the p-40 was there, very late granted but it was there even if it was too late to see action. and the Wildcat was there as well. Now that's a fight i'd like to see in SoW. Early wildcats vs early 109's.

Frequent_Flyer
03-05-2009, 06:07 PM
The BOB has been done to Death. You essentially have three fighters that did the majority of the combat.They were slow, had poor range with little ammunition. As far as the bombers go, the JU-87 is no challange to defeat and the He-111 carried less ordanance than the Corsair. Heres hoping the MTO patch is released simultaneously

WTE_Galway
03-05-2009, 06:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Frequent_Flyer:
The BOB has been done to Death. You essentially have three fighters that did the majority of the combat.They were slow, had poor range with little ammunition. As far as the bombers go, the JU-87 is no challange to defeat and the He-111 carried less ordanance than the Corsair. Heres hoping the MTO patch is released simultaneously </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't forget the Dornier - for some reason it gets ignored, probably because there were none around to put in later movies.

As for fighters well you did have the Defiant http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif and one squadron still operational with Gladiators http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

Chivas
03-05-2009, 07:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Frequent_Flyer:
The BOB has been done to Death. You essentially have three fighters that did the majority of the combat.They were slow, had poor range with little ammunition. As far as the bombers go, the JU-87 is no challange to defeat and the He-111 carried less ordanance than the Corsair. Heres hoping the MTO patch is released simultaneously </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes BOB has been done before, but never like this, and its the most logical place to start a new WW2 air combat series. The Battle of France, Poland, and Spain will probably be done later by third parties.

Oleg is keeping his cards close to his chest, but the MTO would be the most logical next addon that would be atleast a year after the release of BOB. Hopefully they will have the technology to have one detailed map stretching from Gibralter to Alexandria.

You could develope the next fronts or strategic air wars in any order you wanted as they all overlapped.

We will probably see the Korean War based on the SOW engine before the MTO as a third party has been developing it for sometime. Although they are sidetracked at the moment helping to complete BOB.

danjama
03-05-2009, 07:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Frequent_Flyer:
The BOB has been done to Death. You essentially have three fighters that did the majority of the combat.They were slow, had poor range with little ammunition. As far as the bombers go, the JU-87 is no challange to defeat and the He-111 carried less ordanance than the Corsair. Heres hoping the MTO patch is released simultaneously </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes they're the main planes, but dont forget the other airplanes that flew during the period, but were not directly involved in the day time activities....

e.g. Bolton Paul Defiants, Blenheims and others. These are some of the more interesting operations IMHO and i would like them to be included, even if we have to create the missions ourselves.

ElAurens
03-05-2009, 09:00 PM
The idea that no one but Brits and Germans will fly SOW is nonsense.

Once folks try the new engine going back to IL2 will be like going back to Pong.

And the idea that the planes from the BoB period are slow and will not be popular is rubbish. By that logic everyone would be flying Lock On by now. And why are so many drooling at the prospect of Rise of Flight? Just so they can tear up the sky at 110mph?

These tired old arguments don't hold water.

WTE_Galway
03-05-2009, 09:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
The idea that no one but Brits and Germans will fly SOW is nonsense.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Come on ... only Russians and Germans flew IL2. We all remember what a huge flop it was until the P51 turned up !!!

jannaspookie
03-05-2009, 11:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Copperhead311th:
And why can't we get just one US plane in this thing. comon. yeah i know bob. But the p-40 was there, very late granted but it was there even if it was too late to see action. and the Wildcat was there as well. Now that's a fight i'd like to see in SoW. Early wildcats vs early 109's. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you serious? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif I don't think one could make a strong argument that those types had an impact on the BoB. Besides, why does it matter what country the planes are from?

Copperhead311th
03-06-2009, 01:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jannaspookie:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Copperhead311th:
And why can't we get just one US plane in this thing. comon. yeah i know bob. But the p-40 was there, very late granted but it was there even if it was too late to see action. and the Wildcat was there as well. Now that's a fight i'd like to see in SoW. Early wildcats vs early 109's. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you serious? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif I don't think one could make a strong argument that those types had an impact on the BoB. Besides, why does it matter what country the planes are from? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No i agree they didn't have much of in impact...but from a personal stand point...and i've said thsi a million times it it was relased that it SOW will start with BoB....YAWN.
I agree done to death. I don't fly spits or 109's much now as it is. just doesn't intrest me. Sure i'll fall right in line and be beating down the door for my copy on relaese day.... if for nothing else to get away from all the damn hackers we have now. But thrilled about the theater & plane set...i am not.

IMO SoW couldn't get to the MTO, ETO, Korea, or the PTO fast enough. Again that just me. the theater and planset holds little intrest to me...i'll buy it just to support Oleg...but i'll probly not spend a lot of time flying till we break out of BoB.

Da_Godfatha
03-06-2009, 07:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
The idea that no one but Brits and Germans will fly SOW is nonsense.

Once folks try the new engine going back to IL2 will be like going back to Pong.

And the idea that the planes from the BoB period are slow and will not be popular is rubbish. By that logic everyone would be flying Lock On by now. And why are so many drooling at the prospect of Rise of Flight? Just so they can tear up the sky at 110mph?

These tired old arguments don't hold water. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you really think that? After the "AAHHHAA" effect is over, it will get old very quick. Unless shortly after the main release, he (Oleg M) releases a addon, most will use it very little. That old argument it is a Maddox game is getting OLD. Some of the players of IL-2 don't care about BoB. You have alot that bought this game (myself included) for the East Front. And then those who got Pacific Fighters for the PTO. The vast majority of players like the game BECAUSE of the different airwar theaters and the amount of flyable planes. Just a few flyable, that may not be one of Oleg's better ideas. Maybe if he makes a few more planes player controlled, it might just intrest more.

Remember, he needs NEW customers (mainly younger, lets face it, we are a OLD bunch of guys here) to keep his company in the money. And the expectaions are high, if it doesn't meet them, well, it won't be the first who died because of that.

GF http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

ElAurens
03-06-2009, 10:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Da_Godfatha:
Do you really think that? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would not have posted it other wise.

SOW will make IL2/1946 seem like kiddie cars, all protestations from modders not withstanding.

Von_Rat
03-06-2009, 10:54 AM
i gotta agree.

furthermore after bob comes out this forum will be like a ghost town.

squareusr
03-06-2009, 12:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jannaspookie:
Besides, why does it matter what country the planes are from? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why? Dunno, maybe some people are still sticking to those outrageous claims that those turn-fights around Big Ben where the Spitfires got totally owned by Zeros never happened http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

major_setback
03-06-2009, 03:31 PM
Re: the arguments about the limited plane-set. Oleg has stated several times that third party developers (and users) will be able to add other aircraft.
You will get your P40, and Wildcat, and whatever else you you want.
And you will also be able to make smaller maps of The Med' etc. Who knows - these might even be a lot larger than the usual size maps we are used to now.

It's nice to hear from Oleg. At first I was very disappointed that the sim was only 60% complete, but on reflection it could have been a lot worse, and now we are more than half way there, so I am happy enough.
I am just about giving up on Il2 though My comp' is not up to playing it, and because of that I haven't even touched the mods. I can't see any reason to get a new comp' in the near future either, not just for the sake of Il2 (with a need for a further upgrade later when BoB comes out). I will have to see if i still have any interest in gaming when BoB finally arrives.

Hurry up BoB!!

HuninMunin
03-06-2009, 05:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Da_Godfatha:
Do you really think that? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would not have posted it other wise.

SOW will make IL2/1946 seem like kiddie cars, all protestations from modders not withstanding. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Quoted for absolute truth.

Frequent_Flyer
03-06-2009, 06:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Da_Godfatha:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
The idea that no one but Brits and Germans will fly SOW is nonsense.

Once folks try the new engine going back to IL2 will be like going back to Pong.

And the idea that the planes from the BoB period are slow and will not be popular is rubbish. By that logic everyone would be flying Lock On by now. And why are so many drooling at the prospect of Rise of Flight? Just so they can tear up the sky at 110mph?

These tired old arguments don't hold water. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you really think that? After the "AAHHHAA" effect is over, it will get old very quick. Unless shortly after the main release, he (Oleg M) releases a addon, most will use it very little. That old argument it is a Maddox game is getting OLD. Some of the players of IL-2 don't care about BoB. You have alot that bought this game (myself included) for the East Front. And then those who got Pacific Fighters for the PTO. The vast majority of players like the game BECAUSE of the different airwar theaters and the amount of flyable planes. Just a few flyable, that may not be one of Oleg's better ideas. Maybe if he makes a few more planes player controlled, it might just intrest more.

Remember, he needs NEW customers (mainly younger, lets face it, we are a OLD bunch of guys here) to keep his company in the money. And the expectaions are high, if it doesn't meet them, well, it won't be the first who died because of that.

GF http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You could'nt be more correct. The BOB planeset is stale. If you fly for the Germans, your choice is limited, lets see the 109 the .... snooze. Or the Spitfire and Hurricane. I' d rather go to an all nite dentist. You could have started with the the MTO and included the above mentioned. Plus the Italian, French, US . fighters and bombers. Shipping targets, ground attack targets etc. A whole lot more diversity .

Chivas
03-06-2009, 06:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by major_setback:
Re: the arguments about the limited plane-set. Oleg has stated several times that third party developers (and users) will be able to add other aircraft.
You will get your P40, and Wildcat, and whatever else you you want.
And you will also be able to make smaller maps of The Med' etc. Who knows - these might even be a lot larger than the usual size maps we are used to now.

It's nice to hear from Oleg. At first I was very disappointed that the sim was only 60% complete, but on reflection it could have been a lot worse, and now we are more than half way there, so I am happy enough.
I am just about giving up on Il2 though My comp' is not up to playing it, and because of that I haven't even touched the mods. I can't see any reason to get a new comp' in the near future either, not just for the sake of Il2 (with a need for a further upgrade later when BoB comes out). I will have to see if i still have any interest in gaming when BoB finally arrives.

Hurry up BoB!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think the 60% statement could be alittle misleading. In Luthiers translation he added that 60% of the Features were done. Implying to the glass is half full crowd that the game engine is complete and they are 60% done with the features. This could be make the total work time something like 80% complete, which would allow a possible 2009 release. Now I feel better. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Chivas
03-06-2009, 06:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Frequent_Flyer:
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You could'nt be more correct. The BOB planeset is stale. If you fly for the Germans, your choice is limited, lets see the 109 the .... snooze. Or the Spitfire and Hurricane. I' d rather go to an all nite dentist. You could have started with the the MTO and included the above mentioned. Plus the Italian, French, US . fighters and bombers. Shipping targets, ground attack targets etc. A whole lot more diversity.
[/QUOTE]
________________________________________________
There will be plenty of Shipping targets, and Ground attack targets on both sides of the Channel. One of the many reasons they chose to start with BOB is its relatively small theater. Building a new game engine and a smaller theater makes perfect sense. Starting with the MTO amd having to build the game engine aswell would have made a release date atleast a year longer. The following larger theaters will not take that long as the game engine will be complete and it only be a matter of building the map, area specific objects, and some aircraft that haven't already been built.

Frequent_Flyer
03-06-2009, 08:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chivas:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Frequent_Flyer:
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You could'nt be more correct. The BOB planeset is stale. If you fly for the Germans, your choice is limited, lets see the 109 the .... snooze. Or the Spitfire and Hurricane. I' d rather go to an all nite dentist. You could have started with the the MTO and included the above mentioned. Plus the Italian, French, US . fighters and bombers. Shipping targets, ground attack targets etc. A whole lot more diversity.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
________________________________________________
There will be plenty of Shipping targets, and Ground attack targets on both sides of the Channel. One of the many reasons they chose to start with BOB is its relatively small theater. Building a new game engine and a smaller theater makes perfect sense. Starting with the MTO amd having to build the game engine aswell would have made a release date atleast a year longer. The following larger theaters will not take that long as the game engine will be complete and it only be a matter of building the map, area specific objects, and some aircraft that haven't already been built.[/QUOTE]

Maybe So? There is no denying , the plane set and targets will be much better and more diverse in the MTO.

Chivas
03-06-2009, 08:56 PM
You could say any larger theater would be more diverse. The point is he needed to build a new game engine with a small globally recognized theater near the start of WW2 and BOB fit the bill perfectly. He then could build the larger theaters once the game engine was complete. It checked all the boxes, except for a few gamers that can only fly certain aircraft in certain theaters. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ElAurens
03-06-2009, 09:07 PM
Chivas, ever the voice of reason.

Frequent_Flyer
03-06-2009, 10:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chivas:
You could say any larger theater would be more diverse. The point is he needed to build a new game engine with a small globally recognized theater near the start of WW2 and BOB fit the bill perfectly. He then could build the larger theaters once the game engine was complete. It checked all the boxes, except for a few gamers that can only fly certain aircraft in certain theaters. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It appears you are excited about SOWBOB . Good for You !! I bore easily lopeing along in a Spit or 109. You can have it... Enjoy.

Chivas
03-06-2009, 10:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Frequent_Flyer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chivas:
You could say any larger theater would be more diverse. The point is he needed to build a new game engine with a small globally recognized theater near the start of WW2 and BOB fit the bill perfectly. He then could build the larger theaters once the game engine was complete. It checked all the boxes, except for a few gamers that can only fly certain aircraft in certain theaters. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It appears you are excited about SOWBOB . Good for You !! I bore easily lopeing along in a Spit or 109. You can have it... Enjoy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes..I'm very excited about SOWBOB, the next benchmark in WW2 combat flight sims and hopefully SOWMTO which is the next logical step. It would be nice if you could give it a chance if only to support and help finance the next addon which should be the Mediterraen Theater. They need all the support we can give them, if we want all the theaters, etc planned for SOW.

grifter2u
03-07-2009, 12:34 AM
whats with all the negative post in response to this interview ?

we have just been given the best solid insight yet as to what BoB will contain, and as far as i am concerned it a quantum leap to the next level of ww2 prop sim's. most of what we hoped for is already included it seems, and HEAPS more of what he wished seems to be confirmed (integration with future land/sea sim's for ex which would add ships and tanks etc..)

oleg also indicated recently in a different interview he was aiming for a 2009 release, so if all goes well the due date is not to far away.

the pic showing the new BoB trees with the house in the background look absolutely stunning to me !! add to that the grass tracks the vehicle made in the other pic, and it looks like there is many more new features oleg hasnt even mentioned yet !

current il2 mods are nice, it does breath some life into the old sim and revived some interest for the people who were drifting away, and keeps other busy and entertained while we are impatiently waiting for a long promised BoB, but for those commenting they'll stick to the old creaking warhorse of il2 with all its problems and limitations when BoB is released, you must be dreaming http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

wake up and smell the roses folks, we just had a glimpse of the future and it looks rather exciting http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

jannaspookie
03-07-2009, 12:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Copperhead311th:
No i agree they didn't have much of in impact...but from a personal stand point...and i've said thsi a million times it it was relased that it SOW will start with BoB....YAWN.
I agree done to death. I don't fly spits or 109's much now as it is. just doesn't intrest me. Sure i'll fall right in line and be beating down the door for my copy on relaese day.... if for nothing else to get away from all the damn hackers we have now. But thrilled about the theater & plane set...i am not.

IMO SoW couldn't get to the MTO, ETO, Korea, or the PTO fast enough. Again that just me. the theater and planset holds little intrest to me...i'll buy it just to support Oleg...but i'll probly not spend a lot of time flying till we break out of BoB. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I suppose BoB would be kinda boring if you're mostly into American stuff. At least North Africa will be Oleg's next theater. However, it looks like you'll be waiting for quite a while on the PTO. USAAF stuff is kind of "been there done that a thousand times" to me. I like flying for the Germans or Brits way more than my own country (US), but to each his own.

Aaron_GT
03-07-2009, 12:58 AM
From Oleg's point of view releasing a small theatre and plane sets reduces risk. It means he gets a stream of revenue at the earliest possible point. Building a bigger theatre and delaying release means a bigger investment and loss should the game not sell well enough.

csThor
03-07-2009, 01:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by grifter2u:
whats with all the negative post in response to this interview ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's the "spoilt brat syndrome" for you. Give them a little finger and they'll rant that they won't get the whole arm. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

ElAurens
03-07-2009, 09:14 AM
Precisely csThor.

"I can't havae my late war uber plane so I'm gonna whine like a schoolgirl all the way back to the War Chumps server about it."

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Speed is relative, especially in computer simulations. And if speed is so important, why aren't they flying Lock On instead?

I will never understand this mindset.

Von_Rat
03-07-2009, 12:19 PM
well im one who does prefer late war planes. especially fws ,p51s and p47s. i fly mostly warclouds because thats what they use.

but i gotta say that bob looks so good right now that i dont mind waiting for the late war planes.

there will be more than enough in bob to keep me interested till my favorite planes are added.

one thing im looking forward to thats specific to bob, is olegs handling of the spit 109 matchup.

i know its open to debate, but from most of the historical accounts i read these 2 planes should be so closely matched, that we will be having some epic dogfights online with them.

another thing bob specific is stratigic bombing. unless oleg started sow in 43, which is way to late to start a new series, bob offers the earliest stratigic bombing campaign.

i for one am looking forward to massed level bombers going after whole citys, and not trying to pick off tactical targets like we have them doing now.

all in all i think we'll see many of the nay sayers leaving il2 and joining us in bob.

Da_Godfatha
03-08-2009, 10:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by csThor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by grifter2u:
whats with all the negative post in response to this interview ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's the "spoilt brat syndrome" for you. Give them a little finger and they'll rant that they won't get the whole arm. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you ever heard the old saying "The customer is King"??

THAT is the whole problem with the IL-2 series. Oleg acts like he wrote it for himself and a few buttkissers here. That is maybe why after 2 weeks full price, it falls to the bargin bin quick. IL-2 46 started at about 39 Euro and then 1 month, yes, 1 MONTH later was sell for under 15 Euros.

I know we are a small fan community (all PC games are that is), and if this game turns out to be a bust, that just maybe the last nail in the Flight Sim coffin. What is coming out now is just ported console games with the 3rd person view. It is taking WAY too much time for ANY of the new generation games to come out. By the time they hit the market, most intrest has been lost (or in our case, we died of old age http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif).

Yea, yea, I know it takes time to make a new graphic engine, that OLD excuse have been run into the ground, but do we really need waving grass? Most of our comps would die if that was turned on anyway.

No, IMHO BoB has been done to death, late war planes have been done to death. The idea of a flight sim that covers the WHOLE airwar is really not bad. To really take-off (and make money) he needs to release very quick the addons OR tools to MOD (Oh NO, HE SAID THE "M" WORD!) the game.

BTW, I thought most of you old timers here finally got off your high-horses, these comments about "spoiled-brats" are NO longer called for. Geez, alot of young players are turned off of the game BEFORE they play it by just visiting these and the bananna forums.

Psssssst, we do NEED younger players! Take a fecking chill-pill.


GF http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

Von_Rat
03-08-2009, 11:47 AM
prices fall quick for all niche games.

oleg might upset you but he's doing somthing right.

Chivas
03-08-2009, 11:51 AM
Well he just proved your point ElAurens. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Frequent_Flyer
03-08-2009, 03:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
Precisely csThor.

"I can't havae my late war uber plane so I'm gonna whine like a schoolgirl all the way back to the War Chumps server about it."

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Speed is relative, especially in computer simulations. And if speed is so important, why aren't they flying Lock On instead?

I will never understand this mindset. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Let me simplfy for you and CS. The vast majority of folks have lives outside of " gaming". I have have two in college and a career that keeps me travelling more than I would like. I am sure, I'm not alone in saying my free time is very limited. I would prefer to fly aircraft that were designed after WW II started. Not a couple of underpowered gliders, with a teaspoons of fuel and a couple round of amunition.

Why would someones opinion you do not share bother you and CS ?

Oleg is not putting the level of detail into SOWBOB for the PC community. Follow the money, my friend, TV documentaries and " console " games .....

Chivas
03-08-2009, 04:14 PM
Everyone here knows that the developers are also building this game engine for the movie, documentry, etc industries as the flight sim community if far to small and fickle to make any money at it.

Frequent_Flyer
03-08-2009, 04:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chivas:
Everyone here knows that the developers are also building this game engine for the movie, documentry, etc industries as the flight sim community if far to small and fickle to make any money at it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not trying to be advesarily. However, I will have to respectfully disagree. To paraphrase what I understand most poster are saying is " Oleg had to start with few planes and a small geographic " theater" to get the new engine " out " quickly.

Look what Team Pacific is doing, has done, and the 352nd fellows have accomplished.

How mant times in the past 20 years has BOB been done ?

Start in the MTO, release, and work forward and backward simultaneously. You will capture a much greater audiance.

WTE_Galway
03-08-2009, 04:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Frequent_Flyer:
Start in the MTO, release, and work forward and backward simultaneously. You will capture a much greater audiance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Except in practice addons for sims never go backwards, addons always progress forward in time from the historical period of first release.

There is no logical reason for that, it just seems to work that way.

Chivas
03-08-2009, 05:33 PM
With all due respect to the mods. Building maps consisting of jungle islands, a few objects, and ocean compared to what had to be done for BOB, get serious. They don't have to build a game engine, multiply aircraft, FM's, DM,s, AI, Weather, thousands of objects, etc..etc...etc. The same goes for the 352nd map that I can't wait to fly. Even the modders will tell you it can't compare to the work be done by the BOB developers.

ElAurens
03-08-2009, 07:20 PM
What Chivas said.

Hobbiests building maps is in no way comparable to building an entire game, from scratch.

Bearcat99
03-08-2009, 08:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
The idea that no one but Brits and Germans will fly SOW is nonsense.

Once folks try the new engine going back to IL2 will be like going back to Pong.

And the idea that the planes from the BoB period are slow and will not be popular is rubbish. By that logic everyone would be flying Lock On by now. And why are so many drooling at the prospect of Rise of Flight? Just so they can tear up the sky at 110mph?

These tired old arguments don't hold water. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I totally disagree... I think given the fact that we are still getting new people in this sim running P-4s.... and my Fx-60, $G DDR 400, 9800GTX GPU PC still stutters on it.. IL2 will be around for a while...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Q: When playing Il-2 offline, many commented on inadequate AI behavior. Completing offline campaigns offered little excitement for that very reason. Will the quality of AI change with BoB?

A: Oh really? Have you seen better AI in any other sim? Generally, it was offline gameplay that drove most of our sales, and not the online modes. Of course, it’s more exciting to fly against a live opponent. AI will be smarter in BoB. We’ll even consider whether the pilot is tired or hurt, whether he’s a good shot or a master of aerobatics, and whether he’s a trooper or a coward. Other things, too… I’ve said too much already
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Q: Oleg, we have some intel that the next add-on after BoB will be the Mediterranean. Can you let us know how soon that’ll be released? And another even more important question: how soon after BoB can we expect the Eastern Front again, and what are you planning for it?

A: Your intel is nothing but a rumor. Even I myself don’t know whether it’ll be Africa or something else. Everything depends on the success of BoB on the market. Of course, no one has done a comprehensive MTO sim, save for a few unfinished or unsuccessful attempts. Eastern Front or the Pacific will perhaps be the most difficult to develop out of all options. So you should probably not expect to fly Soviet planes immediately after BoB. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">«Our main goal is to outdo ourselves.»
--Oleg Maddox
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Q: Oleg, considering that your progress with Battle of Britain is over 60%, as you’ve said, we’re getting the impression that working on BoB is taking too long, for example compared to Il-2. Is that correct?

A: I wouldn’t say that. Il-2 Sturmovik was in development for 4 years before its 2001 release. First we built the engine, then everything else. Then we continued making various improvements and built a new 3D engine (the Perfect mode that shipped with Forgotten Battles was in fact a whole new 3D engine). All this work took another 4 years before Il-2 1946. That’s a total of 8 years, 4 of them spent on updates and expansions.

We initially wanted to make Battle of Britain on the Il-2 engine. However that would be the last thing we could do with it. And then what? The engine was beginning to show its age by that time, despite many revolutionary features which Il-2 brought to the genre in 2001, and which many developers have tried to replicate since. By 2005 we’ve finally realized that we had to build a new engine. First only one person worked on it, then two, all while continuing to work on Il-2 as well. We’ve really switched over to BoB only after all work on Il-2 was completed, i.e. in 2007. So BoB’s only been in development for 2 years now. It isn’t all that much compared to all the goals we’re trying to achieve. The tasks at hand are enormous. We want to outdo ourselves, and of course all those who claim that they’re better than Il-2 (which they finally get to claim years after we’ve stopped all work on the product). So far we haven’t even spent the time on BoB that we spent making the original Il-2.

Speaking of other developers, we’ve given one team the entire Il-2 source code a long time ago, and they were supposed to release their sim even before 1946 in order to turn a profit. However they decided instead to make their own engine, etc. It still drags on, so how long has that been in development now? I hope this example makes it clear to everyone that anything not based on an existing engine takes a lot of time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Q: You’ve stated many times in previous interviews that BoB will be drastically different from the Il-2 series. What do you mean by that?

A: Not a very easy question to answer, but I’ll try to respond the best I can without divulging some secret information.

1. The engine and the system we’re developing is built from the ground up to allow future expansions. Each new product can be stand-alone, or it can plug in with the others starting with BoB, following the success of Pacific Fighters which proved that this model can be viable.

2. We’re developing a system that is more than just a flight sim, but can be a sub sim, PT boat sim, tank sim, helicopter sim, etc. By the way, we just might have a flyable autogyro in BoB.

3. We’re also writing a completely new, drastically improved online code with multiple modes and features. It can even support a server-based MMO with a monthly fee. This of course won’t happen with BoB itself, but is possible on its engine, possibly made by other teams that further develop into this direction.

4. Quality level for ground and air objects is ages beyond what was one with Il-2. I don’t think that such a huge leap will be possible after BoB; the only changes that can happen is increase in polycount or texture size, or more detailed interior details. Even Il-2 was often used as a reference by other developers, and BoB will even have uses for movies.

5. We’re working on an add-on and expansion module that will not affect the online playing field. After BoB is released we plan to publish a set of tools that will allow end-users to:
* Create new planes;
* Create new vehicles, tanks, ships, etc;
* Create new static objects, such as building, bridges, equipment, etc;
* Create new maps, with limits on total size. We’ll leave large maps for ourselves, for our own new sims.

Of course, to do any of that end users will need to have experience with other 3rd party software, such as 3D modeling suites. There are a lot of people that have the required skills around the world, of course, including right here in this country.

Even just the few details I’ve listed above should give you an idea of all the possibilities we have with BoB. One of the consequences is that a whole industry can pop up around BoB similar to that around Microsoft Flight Simulator, creating add-ons for it, also considering the online fairness with BoB. We can also expect a large number of new aircraft to become available soon after BoB’s release, including Soviet planes. One Russian plane will even ship with BoB, the Su-26. We’ve built it following many requests from pilots around the world. Many in the West are also asking for the Yak-52. You can see how different BoB will be from Il-2 in this respect. In Il-2 we had to develop or insert all new objects ourselves, specifically for the purposes of maintaining cheater-free online gameplay. Remember that we’ve released a huge number of these add-ons for free.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Q: Will there be free expansions for BoB, like there were for Il-2? Or will all expansions be commercial, considering the current state of the economy?

A: We will definitely continue releasing free expansions. However we won’t be able to do as much as before. We’ll adopt more of other people’s work and include them in the standard cheater-free online list. But it’s a bit too early to talk about this. However, we do have one plane already in the works for just such a free expansion.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Q: And now Oleg, please go into more details on your thoughts of the future of Storm of War compared to Il-2, given the potential you’ve built into the engine from the start.

A: Considering what I’ve said already, and given an initial commercial success of BoB, here’s what I see:

1. Some number of developers internationally that worked with MSFS, and probably a large part of them too, will convert to our side. This is especially to be expected considering the recent closing of Aces studio. So these add-on developers might just start making add-ons for Storm of War. I think this might even include jets, including modern ones. At the very least I would expect someone to do Vietnam, not to mention WWI. This should happen too. Generally WWI aircraft are easier to model and program, since they don’t have such complex aerodynamics, no retractable landing gear, propeller pitch, and other advanced devices. There’s also no radio, which means there’s no need to develop and record radio chatter.

2. Korea, in conjunction with RRG. Its development is now in background mode. Their team is now working with us finishing up planes for BoB, and also modeling ships.

3. Africa, Malta, USSR. These are most appealing choices for us. Even though we know for sure that the Pacific is the most interesting subject matter for the international market, besides Battle of Britain that is. Generally the Eastern Front is a bit easier for us to do since we have loads more data on it, and there’s less variety of vehicles and aircraft to model than all the other fronts.

4. Continuing combat around the English Channel, which will largely be made via expansions since we’ll already have the main map.

5. Cooperation with other teams to create other games (perhaps by selling the engine). For example, an MMO with controllable soldiers and submarines etc. Or even a space sim around planet surfaces with somewhat realistic physics

6. Console variants with simplified features. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Good stuff....

Skoshi Tiger
03-08-2009, 09:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
Precisely csThor.

"I can't havae my late war uber plane so I'm gonna whine like a schoolgirl all the way back to the War Chumps server about it."

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Speed is relative, especially in computer simulations. And if speed is so important, why aren't they flying Lock On instead?

I will never understand this mindset. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I can't agree with you more. The Spitfire Mk-1 and BF-109E were like rocket ships in their day.

I think Oleg should have made an initial campaign where we had to fly Hawker Harts and Gladiators, just so we could realise how fantastic the early Spitfires and 109s are!

When you think about it, they made most of the other pre-war fighters obsolite and relegated to second line duties after the battle. ( I'l still fly the Hurricane for a while though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif )

WTE_Galway
03-08-2009, 09:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Skoshi Tiger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
Precisely csThor.

"I can't havae my late war uber plane so I'm gonna whine like a schoolgirl all the way back to the War Chumps server about it."

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Speed is relative, especially in computer simulations. And if speed is so important, why aren't they flying Lock On instead?

I will never understand this mindset. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I can't agree with you more. The Spitfire Mk-1 and BF-109E were like rocket ships in their day.

I think Oleg should have made an initial campaign where we had to fly Hawker Harts and Gladiators, just so we could realise how fantastic the early Spitfires and 109s are!

When you think about it, they made most of the other pre-war fighters obsolite and relegated to second line duties after the battle. ( I'l still fly the Hurricane for a while though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I would be very surprised if very many people on this forum could climb into a real Mk 1 Spit or an Emil and not kill themselves within 10 minutes. Whether you like it or not handling a 1000hp plus in a tail dragger is not exactly kids stuff.

csThor
03-09-2009, 12:56 AM
@ Da_Godfatha

Ever considered for a nanosecond that writing a whole new engine isn't done on a boring sunday afternoon in between a sixpack and the pizza in the evening? You may be bored bythe prospect of a new BoB sim (it's not my favourite timeframe and location, either, just to make that clear), but from a development standpoint it makes so much more sense than trying to cover a four or five year period with trainloads of objects. Limiting the scope lets them do stuff right without having to worry too much about time constraints. Or how was that with Pacific Fighters?

Bearcat99
03-09-2009, 06:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by csThor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by grifter2u:
whats with all the negative post in response to this interview ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's the "spoilt brat syndrome" for you. Give them a little finger and they'll rant that they won't get the whole arm. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In the meantime you get the "Where's Oleg http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif " "No updates http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif ""In the dark http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif ""Whine cheese blah blah moan groan http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif " nonsense... Then we get something... and it's "That sucks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif " "Gonna blow after 10 minutes http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif ""Who wants BoB http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif " "and my old favorite... "FB is dead http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif " and it's cousin.. "FB will die http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif "

With SoW 1C will revolutionize the combat flight sim again.. and because the first revolution is still going strong.. (We have gotten.. how many new folks in this forum alone over the past 12 months? ) it will be all good.. Thoise same guys who had the top of the line rigs 7 years ago or have rigs with the stones to run SoW well... will either drop FB altogether or do both.. at least for a while.. Those who have older rigs that might not be able to handle SoW except on the lowest settings , which will probably still look almost if not just as good as FB on excellent, will do so... as I stated earlier in this thread I will fly both but I will continue to fly FB for some time...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
The idea that no one but Brits and Germans will fly SOW is nonsense.
Once folks try the new engine going back to IL2 will be like going back to Pong.
And the idea that the planes from the BoB period are slow and will not be popular is rubbish. By that logic everyone would be flying Lock On by now. And why are so many drooling at the prospect of Rise of Flight? Just so they can tear up the sky at 110mph?
These tired old arguments don't hold water. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No they dont.. I agree with everyting that you said exceot the highlighted part...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WTE_Galway:
Come on ... only Russians and Germans flew IL2. We all remember what a huge flop it was until the P51 turned up !!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmmm well I guess all those Americans who were on these boards flying in IL2 don't count..... This sim was more a flop.. if you can call it that, because it was unknown... and many Americans had never heard of a Shturmovik.. but word began to spread before FB was released... and bear in mind that the P-51 didnt arrive until FB had been released for almost a year... FB originally was IL2 with P-40s, Hurris & Thunderbolts... initially if I remember correctly. The first P-51 was released in a patch.

knightflyte
03-09-2009, 11:33 AM
Best thing to happen to IL2 was CFS3. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif TBH, I'd have probably eventually bought IL2 anyway as I bacame more involved with simming and the community. CFS3 just pushed it along much sooner.

*Checks birth certificate. Yup. U.S. citizen. Playing IL2 since 2002. Me luvs me Sturmies.

Chivas
03-09-2009, 12:18 PM
I disagree Bear. I think the feel of flight thru moving air currents and the visuals of even a turned down SOW will make IL-2 feel like flying a brick over a moon landscape. An obvious exaggeration, but it may be that good.

willyvic
03-09-2009, 12:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by knightflyte:
Best thing to happen to IL2 was CFS3. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif ... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol, so true...

WV

lbuchele
03-09-2009, 05:25 PM
So, if I´m understanding well, people here are saying that american folks only like flight sims that have american fighters?
Is that true, guys?
My country only fight with P-47D in the ground attack role in Italy, in the WW2 but I have fight on everything on Il2,bombers included.
It´s only me, or american people here doesn´t have the interest for everything that fly and fight, classical airplanes, country of origin put aside?
I don´t know, never saw behaviour like this in the american guys here.
In "other" foruns I have seen american "pilots" (he,he) crazy to fight on Nieuports,SPADS,DrI or Albatroz.
I think us real enthusiast flight simmers like to flight even on simulated paper planes...

ElAurens
03-09-2009, 05:35 PM
I'm a US citizen, and I will fly anything in the sim, without qualm.

Actually I spend a lot of time in Japanese aircraft, how's that for serendipity?

My absolute favorites are the Curtiss Hawks, of course, but I will fly anything, and I always join the side with the fewest players, regardless of what that side is.

staticline1
03-09-2009, 05:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lbuchele:
So, if I´m understanding well, people here are saying that american folks only like flight sims that have american fighters?
Is that true, guys? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not at all. Even though my favorite WWII fighter is the P-40 I fly the 109 and 190 probably more than any other fighter. I can't wait for the new sim, glad OM went with the Battle of Britian first. Its always fun to fly the late war a/c but the early was always seems to be overshadowed by events that took place later.

R_Target
03-09-2009, 06:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lbuchele:
So, if I´m understanding well, people here are saying that american folks only like flight sims that have american fighters?
Is that true, guys?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There might be a couple like that, but there are also people here who claim they never have flown and refuse to fly Allied planes. It has more to do with the type of person rather than where they're from. The rest is just the chronic distortion and exaggeration that typifies this place.

Von_Rat
03-09-2009, 07:00 PM
on warclouds alot of the regular blue flyers are americans.

as a american i fly planes more by type rather than nationality.

i like bnz planes. so i prefer planes like fws and most american planes to 09s or russian planes.

irl 09s were bnz planes but in this sim late war ones are useless in this role.

knightflyte
03-09-2009, 07:02 PM
For me the continued attraction for IL2/FB will be the planeset.

I like my FWs. I've been getting into some Japanese fighters lately. Early war Russian craft are always fun.

If IL2 didn't have as much going for it I'd probably drop it right away when BoB is released, but it still has a lot I've not done.

squareusr
03-10-2009, 01:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WTE_Galway:
Except in practice addons for sims never go backwards, addons always progress forward in time from the historical period of first release.

There is no logical reason for that, it just seems to work that way. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure there is: if you move forward, you add planes x planes in each iteration and get a total set of x state of the art types + y slightly outdated types to play with. If you go backwards, you only have those few most recently added planes in the scenario you are aiming for.

The fact that people are more likely to pay for upgrades than for downgrades is another important point, but you were asking for the logical ones http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BigC208
03-12-2009, 04:20 PM
Been at it since the demo P39. 4 Computers, 8 graphic cards later I'm still hooked. CanonUK's Beta Channel map's what I use most. Going back to regular il2 maps without the trees and better ground textures is unthinkable. So I think once BoB SoW is on my hard drive it will be bye bye to Il2 of old. Might play some of the modded theatres that are not in SoW yet but once those are included it will be over. About a year back I went back to the original ofline missions and got bored quickly with the plain looking scenery. Point of all this...progress spoils most people.