If they are using the same engine as in CoD, then NO!

There must be something fundamental wrong with that engine, because even after 18 months of patching (and 7 years of development), it is still not pushing the graphics through in a satisfying manner. And we are still missing a working comm. system and any SP campaigns that makes sense.

We have never heard the true story of how this CoD-project could take so long and achieve so little,- was there too much vodka and too little project-management & quality control going on?

I find it close to criminal behavior, to charge full price at release for a game so broken and lacking in promised features, as CoD was. I still think the company deserved to go bust for that decision.
Thank God I never bought it at release, but picked it up for 10$ later. And with Desastersoft's campaign add-on, I now have a working game (with stutters) for around 30$.

Looking at the Gaijin crew, they have no problems with creating wonderful maps and planes that runs stutter-free at 60+ fps. So if Luthier and Co. are not totally retards (and I don't think so), they are flogging a dead horse right now.

With something wrong with both the engine and the team-management, the BoM-project will prob. run over budget and over time. This will result in a game that is bound to be incomplete and full of bugs, if it ever gets finished.

But this time customers will be a little more cautious, so BoM could very well be the last game from Luthier and Co.

Anyway, I would not hold my breath...

I've been enjoying the game more now, I hope they get it squared away and stay in business.

Seriously? How long has CloD been in development and how much longer would those marvellous programmers have needed without the detrimental influence of the bad bad suits?

I am perfectly aware that their european publisher Ubisoft (no clue who marketed it in russia) has a well deserved reputation of throwing unfinished simulations (Silent Hunter III, IV and V) on the market and never fixing their mess, but has there been any relevant improvement in the state of CloD since release? If no, you really think the coders are not part of the problem? If yes, how much longer at the current speed of improvement till the game will meet expectations?

On topic: heck, no.

I agree.

It is a myth that a publisher will ever force a Development-team to release a game prematurely for economic reasons alone. I have never seen it confirmed anywhere in the industry.

At some point Oleg, or another team-leader, has told the publisher that the game is ready for release.

Why he did that, when the game was so clearly not, is anybody's guess. Was it desperation, ignorance, malice or simply "I don't give a #%&*$#, I'm leaving anyway"?

We will prob. never know...

Hmm. Reading carefully between the lines, there seems to be just the slightest hint of pessimism.
Waiting for a demo sounds a damned good idea.
Hope they manage to get it right.

I've just about finished up with this game and would have got there that much sooner if it hadn't been for Heinkills excellent mission packs. It would have to be a complete turnaround to make me think any future game based on the CoD engine could be anything other than more of the same.

I think the ambitions were too high, the resources needed to bring it though development too little and the post release management shambolic. That is not the solid foundations a good sim needs to be built on

Don't think so, too. I'm not just talking about the engine itself (which is a big ? anyway) but more so about the gameplay part. CloD doesn't have any - the campaigns were a sorry joke, the missions that came with the game are ludicrous at best and the small issue with scripting and me not getting along at all keeps me from making my own. Not to mention the lack of working artillery (to make the battlefield lively), the in parts unfinished map (missing bridges anyone?) etc etc.

Now, they have BlackSix and from what I've read he's been a pretty good mission builder in Russia who has released a number of highly successful campaigns, some of which were adopted by 1C as payware. But I don't think he has actually much of a say and I am not sure his input is valued as much as necessary to make the gameplay acceptable (or good). But as it is Maddox Games has never been good at providing decent missions and campaigns, they were always "engineer developers" and totally lacked the eye for what any kind of PC simulation is: a game.

Im waiting for "The last patch for COD is released with the install of BOM"

Guaranteed.

If they did do that, and it actually fixed everything properly I would actually pay for it. To a certain extent Luthier hinted that some things such as the altitude limitations would not be fixed until BOM, so I've kind of being expecting this for a while.

Yes I believe it is possible the coders could fix the problem, as they have accomplished alot that people don't seem to notice, as they only focus on the things that aren't working. Ubisoft has very little influence with COD. IC publishing in Russia is the major investor now. You actually believe IC publishing would still be putting out thousands of dollars a day keeping the development afloat if they didn't see signs of progress. The developers are working out of the IC publishing development studios so they I have first hand information on what exactly is going on, and they know very few people outside of Russia will buy BOM until they know that the game engine has been sorted. That said I believe the developments days are numbered unless they start making significant improvement soon. This latest patch was built to address the CTD, and DX9 issues, which it may or may not have done as COD has always run very well on my system. Atleast until this latest patch where Ive experienced my first Launcher exe problem, which I think is a minor issue as it happens when I exit the sim.