Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
#4018569 - 10/06/14 01:20 AM Creative vision and target audience ***  
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,705
Pizzicato Offline
Asleep at the Wheel
Pizzicato  Offline
Asleep at the Wheel
Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,705
Vancouver, BC
I want to start by pointing out that the intent of this post is not to be inflammatory or disrespectful, but to try to articulate my current feelings about the direction of BoS and the (perceived) steps that have brought us to this point.

Just to provide a little context, I'm a Design Director at EA. I've been working as a designer in the games industry for over 16 years during which time I've worked on the Battlefield, Max Payne and Prototype franchises, so I like to think I have at least some reasonable understanding of game design, creative vision and product positioning.

With this in mind, I find the current state and direction of BoS extremely frustrating and schizophrenic.

The first issue that I perceive is the disconnect between the fidelity of aircraft modelling, the accuracy of the map and the structure and presentation of the SP campaign:


  • When it comes to the aircraft, there's a huge emphasis on authenticity - prop pitch, mixture control, radiators, trim and all of the rest are modeled with great levels of realism. This speaks to a desire the satisfy the hardcore flight sim fans.
  • When it comes to the map, there's been a huge emphasis on historical accuracy and recreating the battlefield as it was in late 1942. Once again, this speaks to the serious, historically invested player.
  • When it comes to the campaign, however, the experience deviates massively from any attempt to immerse the player in the reality of that time - settling, instead, for extremely simplistic action/RPG tropes.


The end result is that it feels as though the SP campaign was designed and implemented by some third party with no understanding of what the rest of the team was looking to accomplish. The best analogy I can come up with is that it's like one half of the team building Gran Turismo cars while the other half of the team builds Mario Kart tracks for them to race on. Both approaches are entirely valid, but they can't live together cohesively in the same space. Creative vision demands that you pick one or the other and drive (no pun intended) in a clear direction.

In this regard, it seems to me that 777 don't have a clear picture of what they want the game to be and which audience they want to serve. As a result, the game ends up falling horribly between stools.

This lack of coherent creative vision also manifests itself in the bizarre requirement that MP players play through the SP campaign in order to unlock MP features. From a design perspective, there is literally zero reason to go this route outside of an arbitrary and ill-conceived determination that "We built this content, so you're damn well going to play it".

I've seen this kind of thing before at several studios and it's just really poor game design. Being a good game designer is about making the choices that deliver the best possible experience to the player - not willfully forcing your own preferences onto them.

This leads me to my final point - respect for the customer.

I think it's a reasonable assumption that the people that were willing to shell out nearly $100 for early access were the serious flight sim fans - the ones that were courted and catered to from the outset by the high-fidelity controls and accurate environment. Over the past year, everything about the various releases and communication through developer updates has suggested a reasonably simulation-centric approach. All of a sudden - mere weeks before release - it feels as though there's been a sudden "Surprise! It's a game!" unveiling of the final experience.

This, understandably, seems to have caused a great outpouring of frustration from the audience that bought into the promise of the project right from the outset. Rightly or wrongly, it feels like a bait-and-switch at the expense of the core audience. I've heard the developers explain it away as "Well, the audience has changed and no one wants to role-play real war anymore", but if that's the case, why bother with realistic aircraft and theatres? Why not just go full Ace Combat?

From my perspective, the game has gone horribly off the rails in its closing months, and it's a product of a complete lack of coherent creative vision. I'll be fascinated to see if 777 decide to do any course correcting as a result of the current negative feedback, but I'm not holding my breath.

Frankly, it's a crying shame, though. There are the seeds of real greatness in BoS, but it's currently a massive, soulless disappointment. So close and yet so very, very far...


---------
Pizzicato
#4018572 - 10/06/14 01:32 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Pizzicato]  
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 21
RAF92_Moser Offline
Junior Member
RAF92_Moser  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 21
NW Indiana, USA
I am interested in this sim, but the negative reactions to some of the unveiled features is driving me away from investing any kind of money into this.

Why can't we just have a higher fidelity IL2:FB?

#4018580 - 10/06/14 01:38 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Pizzicato]  
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 638
ATAG_Bliss Offline
Member
ATAG_Bliss  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 638
@Pizzicato

I agree completely. What I look for in a flight sim is obviously not going to be the same as everyone else. On that line, the best way to appease the masses is to create a game that caters to and excites all the varying flight simmer's ideas on what they like.

One of the best, if not the best examples of this is obviously going to be old IL2 (or Clod). You could play at any realism setting, any server setting, any graphics setting, any load out setting, and of course, you could choose to do this in MP, in a COOP environment, a QMB environment, and an SP environment. The options at which you had, as a flight simmer, were limitless only to your imagination. If you wanted to fly around open pit (wonder woman), sure. And if you wanted to fly around in some fairly hard core closed pit fun, go right ahead.

The big attraction to old IL2 is the fact that the choice was all yours. And on the flip side, the tools to create that choice were very easy to use, and offered an ability in using them unlike what had been released in flight sims before. You wanted to line up 1000 hangers in a row and fly right through them for the hell of it? Go right ahead. You want to create a map filled with immersion, action, flak, AI, etc.,etc.,etc., the game simply didn't care and begged you to create what you want.

Furthermore, if you want to build a campaign, if you want to use a certain skin, if you want a certain squad marking, or hell, just about anything, go right ahead. And then once your campaign is all finished and put together you even have a place and the tools to inject it right into the game like it came that way. This is all stuff that BoS simply does not have and can't do.

The blunt reality of it is, if you make a good game (in this case a flight sim), people will flock to it. Blaming your customer base or your lack of customer base on the genre is 1/2 the problem I see with the current developers, especially 777. Other flight sims have long proved that if it's good not only in authenticity and quality, but also in features and ability, people WILL flock to it like a fat kid to cake. It will happen and has happened in the past.

The old "you build it and people will come" thing has never been truer. But unless you build it, and I mean build it like I said above, with the foundation to grow, and with the foundation to flourish, the community will grow and grow and grow until everyone and their ass is foaming at the mouth for the next theater and set of planes. But if you have a mission builder with 20 objects in it, a SP campaign that is lucky to have 5 planes in a mission, and a MP server that's limited to 50-60 players, I'm sorry, but you have missed the boat completely on getting that market share that IL2 once used to have.

My .02c


Last edited by ATAG_Bliss; 10/06/14 01:39 AM.
#4018603 - 10/06/14 03:39 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Pizzicato]  
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 862
mugwump Offline
Member
mugwump  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 862
Vancouver, Canuckistan
Man, when even EA people start calling you out on poor design choices and ignoring your customers, you've got to know you're in trouble.


S = k ln W
#4018609 - 10/06/14 04:00 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: mugwump]  
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 560
lokitexas Offline
Member
lokitexas  Offline
Member

Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 560
San Antonio, TX.
Originally Posted By: mugwump
Man, when even EA people start calling you out on poor design choices and ignoring your customers, you've got to know you're in trouble.


Ok that was funny.


Good post, I saw you post it at the official forums....I am betting locked by tomorrow, with a just of fantaics giving you #%&*$# about it first. smile

#4018610 - 10/06/14 04:10 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: mugwump]  
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,705
Pizzicato Offline
Asleep at the Wheel
Pizzicato  Offline
Asleep at the Wheel
Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,705
Vancouver, BC
Originally Posted By: mugwump
Man, when even EA people start calling you out on poor design choices and ignoring your customers, you've got to know you're in trouble.


Lol! biggrin

It's weird. I've worked for Activision, Rockstar, EA and some place you've never even heard of, but EA is by FAR the best o them (and not nearly as disrespectful of its customers as might outwardly seem to be the case on occasion).

The major issue with working for EA, however, is having to publicly admit that you work for EA. It's almost impossible to say "I work for EA" without adding at least 10 minutes of caveats to the end of the statement. biggrin


---------
Pizzicato
#4018615 - 10/06/14 05:16 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Pizzicato]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,562
Airdrop01 Offline
Chief Pheasant Controller
Airdrop01  Offline
Chief Pheasant Controller
Hotshot

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,562
Kansas, USA
Originally Posted By: Pizzicato
I want to start by pointing out that the intent of this post is not to be inflammatory or disrespectful, but to try to articulate my current feelings about the direction of BoS and the (perceived) steps that have brought us to this point.

Just to provide a little context, I'm a Design Director at EA. I've been working as a designer in the games industry for over 16 years during which time I've worked on the Battlefield, Max Payne and Prototype franchises, so I like to think I have at least some reasonable understanding of game design, creative vision and product positioning.

With this in mind, I find the current state and direction of BoS extremely frustrating and schizophrenic.

The first issue that I perceive is the disconnect between the fidelity of aircraft modelling, the accuracy of the map and the structure and presentation of the SP campaign:


  • When it comes to the aircraft, there's a huge emphasis on authenticity - prop pitch, mixture control, radiators, trim and all of the rest are modeled with great levels of realism. This speaks to a desire the satisfy the hardcore flight sim fans.
  • When it comes to the map, there's been a huge emphasis on historical accuracy and recreating the battlefield as it was in late 1942. Once again, this speaks to the serious, historically invested player.
  • When it comes to the campaign, however, the experience deviates massively from any attempt to immerse the player in the reality of that time - settling, instead, for extremely simplistic action/RPG tropes.


The end result is that it feels as though the SP campaign was designed and implemented by some third party with no understanding of what the rest of the team was looking to accomplish. The best analogy I can come up with is that it's like one half of the team building Gran Turismo cars while the other half of the team builds Mario Kart tracks for them to race on. Both approaches are entirely valid, but they can't live together cohesively in the same space. Creative vision demands that you pick one or the other and drive (no pun intended) in a clear direction.

In this regard, it seems to me that 777 don't have a clear picture of what they want the game to be and which audience they want to serve. As a result, the game ends up falling horribly between stools.

This lack of coherent creative vision also manifests itself in the bizarre requirement that MP players play through the SP campaign in order to unlock MP features. From a design perspective, there is literally zero reason to go this route outside of an arbitrary and ill-conceived determination that "We built this content, so you're damn well going to play it".

I've seen this kind of thing before at several studios and it's just really poor game design. Being a good game designer is about making the choices that deliver the best possible experience to the player - not willfully forcing your own preferences onto them.

This leads me to my final point - respect for the customer.

I think it's a reasonable assumption that the people that were willing to shell out nearly $100 for early access were the serious flight sim fans - the ones that were courted and catered to from the outset by the high-fidelity controls and accurate environment. Over the past year, everything about the various releases and communication through developer updates has suggested a reasonably simulation-centric approach. All of a sudden - mere weeks before release - it feels as though there's been a sudden "Surprise! It's a game!" unveiling of the final experience.

This, understandably, seems to have caused a great outpouring of frustration from the audience that bought into the promise of the project right from the outset. Rightly or wrongly, it feels like a bait-and-switch at the expense of the core audience. I've heard the developers explain it away as "Well, the audience has changed and no one wants to role-play real war anymore", but if that's the case, why bother with realistic aircraft and theatres? Why not just go full Ace Combat?

From my perspective, the game has gone horribly off the rails in its closing months, and it's a product of a complete lack of coherent creative vision. I'll be fascinated to see if 777 decide to do any course correcting as a result of the current negative feedback, but I'm not holding my breath.

Frankly, it's a crying shame, though. There are the seeds of real greatness in BoS, but it's currently a massive, soulless disappointment. So close and yet so very, very far...



Exceptional post. (From my view as one of the guys baited and switched out of his $100).


"For I know the plans that I have for you," declares the Lord, "plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope." Jeremiah 29:11

Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. Matthew 5:11

Indeed we call blessed those who have persevered. You have heard of the perseverance of Job, and you have seen the purpose of the Lord, because “the Lord is compassionate and merciful. James 5:11
#4018616 - 10/06/14 05:20 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Pizzicato]  
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 862
mugwump Offline
Member
mugwump  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 862
Vancouver, Canuckistan
Originally Posted By: Pizzicato
Originally Posted By: mugwump
Man, when even EA people start calling you out on poor design choices and ignoring your customers, you've got to know you're in trouble.


Lol! biggrin

It's weird. I've worked for Activision, Rockstar, EA and some place you've never even heard of, but EA is by FAR the best o them (and not nearly as disrespectful of its customers as might outwardly seem to be the case on occasion).

The major issue with working for EA, however, is having to publicly admit that you work for EA. It's almost impossible to say "I work for EA" without adding at least 10 minutes of caveats to the end of the statement. biggrin


Just busting your chops! I've got a buddy who's been working as a producer out there in darkest Burnaby since back when you guys were in the building next to what's now that monstrosity of a casino.

I actually think your post was very well written and on-target without being disrespectful or inflammatory.



Last edited by mugwump; 10/06/14 05:21 AM.

S = k ln W
#4018617 - 10/06/14 05:33 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Pizzicato]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,955
Sokol1 Offline
Senior Member
Sokol1  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,955
Internet
Quote:
I am betting locked by tomorrow,


You lost, pay 100$. smile

#4018626 - 10/06/14 06:57 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Sokol1]  
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,743
HeinKill Offline
Senior Member
HeinKill  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,743
Cloud based
Originally Posted By: Sokol1
Quote:
I am betting locked by tomorrow,


You lost, pay 100$. smile



Locked before the day was even out. At least the thread wasn't deleted this time.

SimHQ and other independent forums are the only place to actually debate 1C/777 sims.

H


[Linked Image]
#4018631 - 10/06/14 07:55 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: HeinKill]  
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 599
Ghost_swe Offline
Member
Ghost_swe  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 599
sweden
Originally Posted By: HeinKill
Originally Posted By: Sokol1
Quote:
I am betting locked by tomorrow,


You lost, pay 100$. smile



Locked before the day was even out. At least the thread wasn't deleted this time.

SimHQ and other independent forums are the only place to actually debate 1C/777 sims.

H



Surprisingly, it was locked due to people getting offensive to the OP, a step in the right direction at least.


Anyways, back on topic.

What i find amazing is that the devs managed to piss of both SP and MP players with one and the same decision, i mean, that's an accomplishment in it self, give credit where credit is due i say.

#4018634 - 10/06/14 08:09 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Pizzicato]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,213
Trooper117 Offline
Hotshot
Trooper117  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,213
UK
A well structured post by the OP with some good points.
I'm very worried that BoS my have taken a step in the wrong direction, but reserving judgement until the final product comes to light.
I still have the old IL2 1946 on my pc, along with CLoD, and DCS has some great and high fidelity WWII aircraft to fly.
I'm currently messing about with the BoS campaign, working my way through the grind. It isn't difficult and it's easy to get the unlocks. But I really do hope things are rectified, so that the bickering calms down a bit smile

#4018650 - 10/06/14 09:41 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Pizzicato]  
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,743
HeinKill Offline
Senior Member
HeinKill  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,743
Cloud based
Interesting that War Thunder fans think the same way as you Pizzi.

This from War Thunder Game Hub:

BoS isn't War Thunder, and it isn't IL2: so what the heck is it?

Where I come from we have a saying "There are only two types of people, the Irish, and those who wish they were." You could say the same of flight games: there is War Thunder, and those games who wish they were.

BoS is one of those wannabees, but in trying to land halfway between flight simulation and true flight game, they have landed in no mans land.


As you say, this is what happens when leadership lacks clear vision, coupled with a leadership culture that from the outside, appears to aggressively discourage dissent.

As I wrote a while back, as a marketing communications leader if I had approached the launch of this sim as a marketing strategy, it would have been like this:

- (Blue water strategy: Hard core sim) Produce the best in class hard core flight sim and capture the entire hard core WWII flight sim market in an environment where there is no real competitor for WWII sims (CoD failed, DCS WWII stalled at least a couple of years until the new map/theatre/objects), a smaller but high value segment willing to pay 100 USD per unit for the game and then 50 USD per unit for add ons. This would mean doing what BoS has done, with well executed SP and MP modes, and without all the WT style GUI, unlocks, XP grinding. Lifecycle management would be straightforward and involve releasing meaningful add-ons: new aircraft, new maps/theatres, mission editor, scripted squadron/pilot level campaigns.

- (Me too, but better: Flight game with true scalability) Produce an arcade based flight game with ALL the most popular WT elements, but with the bonus of player being able to flick a switch and really fly 'full real' unlike in WT. The aim being to switch some of the thousands of WT players who are tired of WT and want a new challenge. For this you can't be half hearted, they have to feel right at home in the environment, and safe in the knowledge they can go hard core when they are ready and take the leap from game to sim. Bigger audience at a lower value per customer, and need to bring out constant improvements and updates to the game. So this would mean doing more than just adding a colourful GUI, it would mean sacrificing Single Player (almost entirely - a single player QMB would have been enough), with a much bigger focus on the multiplayer game and the 'game economy' like the repairs, crew training etc in WT, eg something ground breaking like a commander level game economy (as in all the big F2P games), where you need to secure 'resources' like enough pilots, aircraft, factories, spare parts, medicines, ground crew etc to continue your part of the war.

A halfway compromise between the two would not have been allowed on my whiteboard, if it was my money being invested.

H


[Linked Image]
#4018653 - 10/06/14 09:54 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Pizzicato]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 8,771
Para_Bellum Offline
Oberkriegkaboomführer
Para_Bellum  Offline
Oberkriegkaboomführer
Hotshot

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 8,771
Germany
A well put OP.

The problem with BoS is that it tries to attract new customers with the concept of unlocks made popular in FPS like Call of Duty and Battlefield and MMOs like World of Tanks/Warplanes or War Thunder. IMO this simply won't work. To the contrary, it alienates the core audience who either seem to outright hate such a feature (especially in the case of offline play unlocking stuff for online play) or who merely accept it without much enthusiasm.

You need to cater to your core audience first and foremost.

Anyone remember MS Flight? They too thought they could grab a share from the mass market with a more game-like concept. And yes, it totally failed.

When I play a campaign mission and land my shot-up aircraft at my base and, after taxiing to my parking space and shutting off my engine, am greeted with a bland GUI that tells me I have just earned 253 EXP and reached pilot lvl 4 I am not just torn from the immersion of flying and fighting on the Eastern Front, immersion just did an ice bucket challenge on me. Then kicked me in the nuts.


"...late afternoon the Air Tasking Order came in [and] we found the A-10 part and we said, "We are going where!? We are doing what!?"

Capt. Todd Sheehy, Hog pilot, on receiving orders during Operation Desert Storm

#4018657 - 10/06/14 10:05 AM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Pizzicato]  
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 418
AnKor Offline
Member
AnKor  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 418
Russia
In my opinion Rise of Flight suffered from the lack of clear vision about what the game's genre and focus was supposed to be. It was understandable though, the game was made from scratch by a new and (probably) inexperienced team and rushed to the market when the crisis of 2008 hit. Ok, over the years they supposedly learned a thing or two... just to repeat the similar mistakes with IL2.

Maybe it is not the management problem though, in fact 777 management seems to be doing a good job at delivering a product (regardless of what this product is), I think the problem is that they are now stuck with their engine which is good at FM/DM, but is a mess when it comes to gameplay features.

#4018759 - 10/06/14 03:58 PM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Pizzicato]  
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 49,716
Jedi Master Offline
Entil'zha
Jedi Master  Offline
Entil'zha
Sierra Hotel

Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 49,716
Space Coast, USA
I don't understand why people insist there are only two types of flight games, hardcore sims and arcade games. There are almost infinite gradations. The original Il-2 was not modeled to the same level as CloD, but it's ahead of BoP. Flaming Cliffs is not modeled to the same level as DCS A-10C, but it's ahead of Strike Fighters which is ahead of HAWX/Ace Combat. But I guess by the same token there are only two types of people on these forums then, right? Those who understand what is going on and total idiots? rolleyes Don't understand how you get around insisting the world is black and white. Or is it just really poor use of hyperbole?

As for "lack of vision", you're using the wrong word. It's "lack of money." EA, Activision, Rockstar...all of them could afford to budget what they needed where they needed. 777 and 1C can't. Now maybe they spent more on the terrain and planes than they planned, and now with what is left (less than originally budgeted) this campaign is all they can do for now.

In the streaming video they implied if not outright stated that they didn't have the resources to make it as historical as some might want, and limiting user choices in some areas might be an outgrowth of that.

They didn't set out to build GT cars and Mario Kart tracks, but after they built the GT cars they found they only had the money and time to make MK tracks and not the GT tracks they planned on.
You want to blame 1C for not giving them the time and money they needed to do it, that's fine. Maybe if enough people buy it they'll be able to revise the campaigns later to be more historical and have more user options.

One thing I can say for certain though--flood the forums with enough negative statements to scare away the undecided/waiting for release customers and your prophecy will be self-fulfilling. But if saying "I told you so" is more important than getting it the way you want it, go ahead.
Complaints will NOT convince 1C to spend even more money on this and delay the release to comply, but it very well could prevent enough people buying it to convince them not to continue past this release.

Complaints don't pay the bills, and your rebellion against any attempts at structure 777 is putting into it in favor of a complete formless sandbox seems to imply these people are smart enough to make a hardcore flight sim but too stupid to realize how you wanted the campaign to work? Or is it possible that they ARE aware and they are just limited to doing this as their best effort given the time and money available?



The Jedi Master


The anteater is wearing the bagel because he's a reindeer princess. -- my 4 yr old daughter
#4018762 - 10/06/14 04:01 PM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Pizzicato]  
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 8,700
Peally Offline
Hotshot
Peally  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 8,700
Wisconsin, USA
Bought IL-2, enjoyed, life was good.

You guys might learn a thing or two just sitting back and relaxing wink


Scully: Victim died of multiple stab wounds.
Mulder: *throws her a file* Ever heard of the knife alien?
#4018784 - 10/06/14 04:39 PM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Jedi Master]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,179
bisher Offline
I'll be your Huckleberry
bisher  Offline
I'll be your Huckleberry
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,179
Manitoba, Canada
Originally Posted By: Jedi Master
One thing I can say for certain though--flood the forums with enough negative statements to scare away the undecided/waiting for release customers and your prophecy will be self-fulfilling. But if saying "I told you so" is more important than getting it the way you want it, go ahead.


I have not see any 'I told you so' posts, but I could have missed them, I've read most posts here. It seems most posts/threads including this one have been respectful and provide insight into this game.

BUT it is all matter of perspective I suppose




#4018789 - 10/06/14 04:50 PM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Pizzicato]  
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1
StkNRdr Offline
Junior Member
StkNRdr  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1
Jedi, you are right, it is a matter of resources. They put most into the FM/DM, map, graphics quality, etc. Based on limited resources it was the right decision. They made it clear the SP may not be everything that everyone wanted, especially at release. Even the devs hoped that third parties would step into that space to fill in with mission generators and dynamic campaigns, etc. From all my readings on the forums the general customer consensus has been, OK, let's wait and see.

But the current state of affairs is different. People didn't just decide one day to start massive complaining. In fact, up until this last update, all has been moving along with very little negatives. It was 1CGS's decision on unlocks (although announced months ago), and specifically their application to multiplayer which caused the ruckus. Now they must decide, is it worth it and do they wish to stick to their guns?

There is a very simple solution to this whole issue, remove the stupid unlocks (at least off mp). The sooner they do this and communicate it, the quicker the complaints stop, i.e., damage control. The longer it continues, the more sales will suffer. Pretty simple business decision if you ask me.

Last edited by StkNRdr; 10/06/14 04:53 PM.
#4018808 - 10/06/14 05:22 PM Re: Creative vision and target audience [Re: Jedi Master]  
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 257
Itkovian Offline
Member
Itkovian  Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 257
Originally Posted By: Jedi Master

One thing I can say for certain though--flood the forums with enough negative statements to scare away the undecided/waiting for release customers and your prophecy will be self-fulfilling. But if saying "I told you so" is more important than getting it the way you want it, go ahead.
Complaints will NOT convince 1C to spend even more money on this and delay the release to comply, but it very well could prevent enough people buying it to convince them not to continue past this release.

Complaints don't pay the bills, and your rebellion against any attempts at structure 777 is putting into it in favor of a complete formless sandbox seems to imply these people are smart enough to make a hardcore flight sim but too stupid to realize how you wanted the campaign to work? Or is it possible that they ARE aware and they are just limited to doing this as their best effort given the time and money available?


This. Very well said.

This isn't an "us vs them" scenario. 777 doesn't set out to alienate its fan base, and lashing out venomously as some posters are doing will accomplish NOTHING good for the genre. Causing BoS to fail isn't going to teach other sim makers a lesson, and guarantee that future sims have no unlocks and fully RP single player campaigns.

There's so very few simulator developers out there these days, that all it's going to accomplish is cost us yet another simulator developer, and the genre will be driven further into obscurity.

So instead of reaching for the torches and pitchforks, let's try to actually collaborate with the devs instead, to work with them and see what solutions are possible.

What I see when I play BoS is a stable, high quality WW2 flight simulation with a rudimentary dynamic campaign. The former is excellent, while the latter is something that can certainly be modded and improved in time... indeed, the Devs pretty much said that's what was going to have to happen (and we KNOW it can happen, like Pat's campaign generator for RoF). Heck, for all we know the devs may be planning to facilitate that development (such as by providing us with APIs for mission generation, and the likes).

Either way, I'm certainly having a much more pleasant experience with BoS, pre-launch, than most sims on release (I don't even want to think about CloD right now). This is a good thing, and it'll only get better.

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  CyBerkut 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
10 years after 3/8/2014
by NoFlyBoy. 03/17/24 10:25 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0