Except CLOD is still in the gestation stage and in this stage maturing is not possible

Every aspect of COD is more complex, Aircraft, Cockpits, DM, FM, Graphics, etc. It should take much longer to develop than the orignial sim, aircraft alone take 3 times longer to develop. The complexity of the sim will also exponentially generate far more bugs. The longer development time and much higher costs are the main reason developers like even Microsoft have left the building.

If the new game engine can get sorted and optimized, then the developer/third parties/community can start concentrating on new features, Maps, Aircraft, Campaigns, we are in for a very bright future. As computers become more powerfull we should see more complex features added, and I'm very interested to see how the Human Animation feature the developers have been working on plays out.

Bugs are expected.
Missing or broken features is one thing.
Missing or broken features after 8 months is another.
Missing or broken features that take 2 years and buying a sequel to fix is a rip off.(and even then nothing is certain)

I understand CLOD is complex and i understand things like DX11 and the dynamic weather coming later but Chivas what i cant understand is why the FM and the DM are still so far off after this long, surly these features should be a No1 priority for a flight sim, the can be no excuse for them to take this long, i mean what has the FM and DM guy been doing all this time?

PS. Banned too i see.

It's all relative Chivas. One could say that the original IL-2 was more complex than anything before it as well. With far less dev time.

Yes, part of the ban sweep from last night. BTW Furbs, loved the south park pic for David you made last night...classic. It looks like he didn't get a ban though, not sure how that is even possible. He deserved one way more than Chivas IMO.

Fair enough , just the general vibe of your original post was nothing like that

I go a bit with the dated side of things as i am a graphics whore but i did spend 6-7 years in il2 and for me the game just ran out of steam. Like many have said for years and years and Jedi eluded to above, it always had a certain sterility about it that it never overcame, especially if you were a ground pounder which i generally liked more than just out and out dogfighting. EAW was sterile in that regards too, even more so than il2 for ground pounding.

I hope we get to a stage in sims where there is a lot more ground action and not always lifeless towns farms and villages.Doesnt mean a lot in dogfights but when you are cutting across the country at zero feet it adds a ton.

Yep, just got over the ban here, and got banned at IC. Starting to feel like Tree.

None of us really know what happened during BOB development, but they certainly appeared to have more than their fair share of major setbacks, as there are always countless things that can go wrong. I didn't think it would be possible to add all the features they talked about with playable frame rates. In fairness to the developer they did say there were no promises. It is what it is, but it doesn't mean it will stay that way as long as the development keeps working.

The developer changed the basic foundation of their new game engine to a module based system, that in theory they could change whole modules without effecting other modules. In the original series aspects of the sim were hidden in the sim, hard to find, and change without effecting everything else.
As far as the DM and FM coders go, anything from employee problems, loss, etc etc could have happened. I can also see an FM and/or DM coder having problems connecting his module to the game engine when everything they connect to is still changing. This is a function of the game engine being unfinished and unoptimized. Again when the game engine is sorted everything should start falling place.

Patience is still the keyword. Much of what they have accomplished is very good and hopefully the features will be implemented to most peoples satisfaction in time. A time which should be much shorter than waiting for another developer to start building the kind of simulator where waiting for. As a matter of fact I don't think we will see another developer unless Gaijin does a better job than their last effort, or 777 studio decided to build a WW2 sim which wouldn't be started or completed for many years.

Edit...you could come to the conclusion that the developer is just not good enough, but I think there are a myriad of other explanations as well.

YOu got a ban here Chivas?? Wow that really surprises me, you generally present so calmly and respectfully

The mods can't be seen to take sides, so I have no problem with it. Like I've said before I would gladly take a life time ban if I could take a couple with me, although I would only impose a ban on them for the length of time it takes the development to get on more solid ground.

I'm no great poster anywhere but I've had it with the 1C forums. If I looked up a definition of fractured community I'm pretty sure it woul give a link to that site. Handing out bans for expressing a genuine opinion on a forum board is bonkers but its pretty much indicative of the desperation to try and keep this thing afloat that comes across in virtually every thread you read over there.

I can see the frustration in having the same old things being beaten to death again and again, I understand that for those who love this game come what may criticism hurts but the majority of CoD players are flying it on forums because it does have so many issues. 'We will fix it' has got thread bare. At some point in any situation there has to be a put up or shut up moment. This games time for that has come and gone.

This thread was another candle in fireworks factory but yes, I think IL2 is, and for that matter always was (and I've played it for over a decade thank you) a better game/sim than Cliffs of Dover (in my opinion).

Off-line the original IL-2 series is a better game now because its finished and works, COD on the other hand is unfinished and still a work in progress. That said COD's on-line experience especially with CEM enabled is far more immersive than the original IL-2 1946, mainly because online play has fewer game play issues.

The first key is the frame rate/stability issues which hopefully the graphic engine rewrite should substantially address. This fix will allow more people to load and start playing.

The second group of key issues are the game play features, Commands, AI, FM, DM. This fix will make people want to keep playing.

If and when these issues are addressed then you will see a great migration of people from IL-2 1946 to the new series. That said people will still fly IL-2 1946 while waiting for the new series to develop their favorite aircraft and theaters. The new game engine will also allow new features that are almost impossible to develop with the old game engine. This is the main reason they decided to build the new engine in the first place, and why ROF which was originally going to modify the old IL-2 engine for their sim but found it unsuitable for the features they wanted to have in ROF.

The standard defense that COD was released unfinished and bug riddled isn't exactly a ringing endorsement for any game. The fact that key issues have not been resolved 8 months after release is bad, PERIOD. The launcher crash that the online flyers suffer from should be addresed. This is the part when you say "It's not worth the time because they are re-writing most of the code". Not worth it to them maybe, but I bet it would be worth it to the people who paid for this garbage. The next patch could be a year away, would it kill them to set aside a guy for a couple of weeks to fix the damn CTD issues?

I bet if they asked the online flyers and people with the offline CTD's "If we fix the launcher crash and CTD's, it will take a year and 3 weeks instead of just a year" everyone would choose to play without ctd's for a year and have the patch be a little late. But they don't care enough about their customers for that, they would rather allocate assets to working on the sequel because that's where the money might be.

Communication: They don't have to promise anything, just an update of sorts. They could say "The patch is going to take between 5 to 9 months" and that would be fine. They might catch a little flak at first but the forums would settle down eventually, and folks would realize that ther's no need to go check the banana forums every freakin day.

COD, and the way the customers have been deceived/treated, has been the biggest "bag over the head, punch in the face" us simmers have got ever IMO.

Yes yes Force we have heard this view at least a dozen times, I agree but it's a tad irritating,as I suppose it is for you to hear 'patience is the key here' lol.

I too always felt IL-2 to be really sterile and COD just looked like more of the same. But I remember even the old DOS Su-27 sim was pretty much the same. Excellent technical fidelity and anal-retentive attention to detail but they seemed to forget to build an immersive environment.

There's no POV that hasn't been expressed and discussed ad nauseum here since the Russian early release first got out.

I will just say this: I played a lot more Il-2 in the first 6 months I had it than I have of CloD. In fact I have like 2 hrs in CloD. Granted 10 years on my life, job, and even I have changed quite a bit, so if the situation was reversed (Clod came out then, Il-2 now) I might not have responded the same way.

CloD was flawed and unfinished. Il-2 was flawed (less so, but still had many) but was at least finished. I felt like the design had omitted certain things I thought a flight sim needed (as I mentioned before), but it was done. CloD was in development for HALF of Il-2's life now and is still in worse state than Il-2 was after a mere 2 years' worth of work.

I'd say if you had a team start in Jan 2009 on a BoB sim from scratch it could've been done better and come out the same time as CloD with far fewer issues. What happened all those years before that? No one's talking, but it must have been a total mess.



The Jedi Master

Really?

OK, a few things: The code is buggy, both Campaigns are dysfunctional, incomplete, and the RAF Campaign storyline is downright silly, CTD's occur with annoying frequency, the menu GUI is goofy and not straightforward, flight models are wrong, damage models are wrong, Spitfires & Hurricane external sounds (save startup & idle) sound like road snowplows, not Merlins, mirrors on Spits & Hurries don't work and steal 10-15 fps, Spit mixture lever animation is reversed, railway station clocks don't match Big Ben, Spit & Hurri open canopies enable whine of DB601 superchargers to be heard over 500 meters away, no dynamic weather....in fact....no weather at all other than "sunny", clouds steal fps terribly, Spitfire IIa causes erectile dysfunction in Blue pilots, no bail out 3rd person animations, mixture control doesn't work correctly in all Marks Spits and Hurries, SLI/XFire not optimized, compass in Spits and Hurries suck, directional gyro goes stupid within minutes of adjusting, landscape colours still wrong, no St. Paul's or Canterbury Cathedrals, Big Ben time never matches clock in Spits or Hurries, Oleg is gone, Luthier is always MIA, Spitfire & Hurricane tachometers incorrect electric model, not period-correct mechanical version, no cockpit shake, no British warships modelled, , incorrect pubs in Dover, etc.

Otherwise there's not a lot to beef about. According to Steam I have 647 hours on CoD (very little on Spitfire IIa's - be glad) and enjoying it very much!

Yes and back on topic, I gave IL2411 a go last night and I'm dissappointed to say, it was just too sterile for me, though the 110 cockpit is quite pretty. I look around the cockpits, which I have become quite familiar with, and see missing parts, and the pieces that are there I can only look at.

Flying the 109 in 411 it was not difficult to achieve speeds of 400 -500 kms/h unlike the 109 in CLOD which is difficul to achieve these speeds. I would have no idea which is more accurate, but the CLOD 109 is a pain in the ass to fly. I'm not sure if this is a good or bad thing.

Of course sitting in the aircraft is not necessarily IL2s strong point and I hope to get engrossed in missions and such.

LOL Snapper great post!!

Jesus f-ing christ Snapper you forgot FSAA!!!! get with the f-ing program!!

I would assume the CTD issue is being worked on and its probably part of the graphic rewrite and fps issue that they almost released before Christmas. My system does not have CTD issues, so the rewrite may help reduce load on weaker or unoptimized systems, reducing CTD's.

Chivas, you really honestly believe that stuff about a last second bug? its the same stuff as the AI guy needs the community to help or Sli interfering with the new clouds or community manager on the way or heres a picture of the FM guy looking at the spit manual...its all smoke and mirrors.

Reading your post, would suggest that you think the developers were stupid, incompetent, crooks. Do you also actually believe the developers aren't working on the CTD's issue and launcher issues, etc etc. I could be wrong, but I believe this is one of the reasons for the graghic/sound rewrite that was going to be released before Christmas until there was a problem. (Major Bug?)