True you have done this, but your solution is---> feed the machine and it will get better, when past experience with both 1C and 777 have shown that this is not true. The proof that your method of feed the machine doesn't work is in the words from the mouths of the DEV team itself. If you would like me to I will find the quote, but it was something to this effect. BOM will follow the same design production of BOS. Translation, we are going to change the plane set and have a few new maps and slap all of this into the BOS framework. That is enough for anyone with a little common sense to understand that if they are happy with the current BOS then they will be happy with BOM, but if they were not happy with BOS and expected changes to be made for its improvement them BOM will follow the same order and you will not be happy with it. It just amazes me that a company in this day and age would produce a new product, a square tire, and have customers say, "but it doesn't role?" and the company says, " we know", now we are going to produce another one in a different color, you should buy it, it will be great. I just don't understand that ideology at all, but hey if it works for 1C/777, more power to you I guess. My only question is, How does this ideology and the product derived from it not hurt the genre?

S!Blade<><

@Blade_Meister absolutely agree, this is what I have been saying for some time at the official forum: even at the time of "unlockgate" it was clear what the developers were saying but much of the fan base was in denial.

Basic psychology really: reward behavior X and you will get more X. The Bearcat position is that we should reward behavior X and then they will stop doing it. (Is there a pulls out hair emoticon?)

@SharpeXB - have you ever heard of sampling? Do you even know the meaning of "correlation"? Just because only a very small percentage of people post in forums does not mean that counting them is somehow devoid of information. If the ratio of enthusiastic posters to silent but active players is reasonably constant then the number of enthusiastic posters can indeed serve as a proxy for broader activity.

@Rama - the split between CFS and civilian sims is interesting and I believe that the issue is that most adults think that playing PC/console games is juvenile and demeaning. (I think so too, but I do it anyway ;)) while the yoof market needs instant gratification.

There is really nothing to talk about at the official forum. The developers have their "take it or leave it" attitude making constructive suggestions pointless, there is no buzz of campaign or model making discussion because mods are verboten.

Weird how this keeps coming up.
Ever considered that there's no smoke without fire?

Even if it's wrong, the fact that it's a common misconception must tell you that there's something wrong with the message that's given out over there.

The question of why BoS forum is so quiet (or this forum on SimHQ for that matter) is a vexed one, multiple reasons no doubt.

I certainly did a lot of posting when the game came out, but I stopped playing the game once I had run through the campaign twice with two different aircraft, one German, one Soviet. Wrote a few AARs. Had a play around with the 3rd party simple mission builder, had a look at the (for me) too complex full mission builder. Tried but wasn't grabbed by the multiplayer. In the end I decided, there is a good sim there, but they left the game out.

Got bored, went on to other things and thus don't post on BoS much any more.

So I don't blame the BoS forum moderation for my not posting there any more. It's their game, their forum, they can do what they like over there. I still don't believe what they do has much influence on the success or failure of the game - that's down to the game.

To me, it's boring.

Everybody's opinion about anything is generally made of 90% common misconceptions, that were initiated for various (generally personal) reasons and perpetuated only by lazyness.
Peoples stay lazy to challenge missconceptions as long they have no personnal interest to do it (it doesn't matter).
Most people on this forum have no personnal interest to challenge the missconception that on the official BoS forum every critics are deleted and the critic's author banned... that's why it is not challenged.
... and that's the only reason.

HK pretty much sums it up... for me as an SP guy it is absolutely and mind numbing boring.
I played the SP campaign with the 'unlocks' and the 'grind' when the campaign was first released. Why? because I thought I should give it its due and see if I liked the system... I friggin hated it, but I still completed it.

The awful tinpot made up medals etc are another put off, along with the lack of any kind of immersion in the campaign missions.

I haven't flown it since, (several months) it's 'gathering dust' in my hard drive.

I 'will' fly it again when a green map arrives, if only to see if I can gather some enthusiasm... BoM? Don't intend to buy it unless there is some kind of change made to the game that makes it viable for single players... that or they have some kind of internal revolution over there
Or, of course it becomes so cheap in a sale... (English you see, can't resist a bargain)

And this is your oppinion which is fine. Key words "To me"
You aren't the average player. In terms of the time you spend on these games and therefore the depth of content you expect you're in the top tier of less than 1% of the players of these games.

Some real statistics
Total Median playtime for several of these games per player in hours
From steamspy.com

BoS 5:19

CoD 3:06

War Thunder 5:45

IL-2 1946 1:45

So the typical player actually finds this game more appealing than CoD or IL-2 1946 and about the same as War Thunder. 5 hours is the average for all games.

You aren't the typical player and neither am I. I would agree with much of the comments about the campaign and SP game. But we aren't the majority.
So blanket statement about the game like this are just personal opinions from a very small and vocal set of the players and don't have much to do with the acceptance of the game as a whole.

Of course it's personal opinions... we are all different. It's not a crime.

For those bored and have not played for a while I really think you should try out at least these two Authors work

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/13912-veteranenmissions/

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/16008-platzschutzstaffel-pitomnik-mission-pack/

to continually lament the lack of SP content and not at least try all four of these mission packs to get an idea of what CAN be achieved at present seems rather self defeating

Yes they are not campaigns in the original sense, but take for example Flatspinmans Afrika campaign, still regarded as a highlight of IL-2...a series of linear missions cut together with four 'cutscene' movies.

Would some be happy with that type of campaign? because it is almost totally doable in BoS, the creators just need some support to continue.

The time spent bemoaning the lack of content would be better spent supporting those that are making it...download them and get some value from your 'wasted' purchase, hell you might even enjoy them and see the greater potential the FME has compared to the old simpler FMB

Cheers Dakpilot

I have to second this suggestion from Dakpilot...These missions have helped to bring out the best in BOS. Complete with added radio communication for immersion...great triggers....and especially in Veterans missions...a lot of ground activity down there. Juris missions have a great sense of historical immersion as well. Just two fine examples of what can be done with the FMB. If you have a midrange system..I'd suggest Juris missions first...Veterans can be taxing somewhat on all but upper end systems.

If we get a more sophisticated parser...from Lupson or someone else.....with more breakdown..we can get a sense of overall mission results. Just some non-engine related things that can really change this game for the better.

Critics are Harming the genre.
I don't agree with that.
What's harming the genre are the folk who accept what is on offer and plead the unhappy to accept it too.
We should pay our money and hope a third party arrives to rescue the game and do the devs job for them. We're paying a large sum of money for a shell of a game. The moderators and supporters are telling us to wait... it will get better 'other games were crap when they were first released this one is no different'
That's all well and good if you're dealing with a developer who listens to its customers. In the case of bos we are not. We're dealing with devs who have shown little more than contempt for their customers. There will be no change, we've been told that. bom will follow the same template as bos. Mods and supporters are waiting for the talented community to get together to produce what the devs won't, immersive content. We're to pay $90 to finish a product for them? I'm sorry but THAT line of thinking is harming the genre.
Sharpe and bearcat you are harming the genre more than those who are complaining about this game.
During EA the bos forums were abuzz with activity. Many posters here were very active on the bos forums. There was a genuine enthusiasm about the game. There was very little discontent until the 'release'. The decisions the devs have made and the supporters defensive stance has pretty much killed any enthusiasm. The forums are subdued. A Post asking who is still actively playing? A roll call of the faithfully gets 2 pages. If that isn't a red light for the devs this game is doomed.

Please stay away from the labels that have derogatory connotations. People can disagree with the actions/postings of others without unnecessarily infantalizing them and thereby inviting the same in return.

I have to laugh about all this stuff about the lack of activity on the forum. Come on...of course the lack of activity reflects a decline in the amount of excitement and concern for the game. I mean....you don't need statistical data...One need only compare from a couple of months ago up until today. Heck...Jason announced the winners of the screenshot contest last night and I checked a few times and no one had even commented on it...for over 3 hours. That is just pathetic.

Is there anyone who thinks the campaign mode is a good feature for this game? It's the Achilles Heel of the entire game. So, forget about it.....Single missions....intricate capabilities in FMB to deliver great missions...Here is the games strength, and no, you are not going to have the amount of AI and aircraft in there.

It's simple really....if anyone is looking for a great CFS with a good campaign mode....then I'd tell them to forget about this game. It's really that simple. But if you want to have some fun making missions, or playing some great missions...or making movies, with some super graphical immersion....then I'd say go for it. I also think the MP will pan out if given some time and I base a lot of that on AbortedMan and several others out there who are well versed in this area.

CFS'ers are a fickle bunch though.....when that green terrain get's released....or some third party comes out with some other great utility.....you will see the forum activity pick back up.

No that is not my solution.. that is not my call to make.. what you or anyone else who does not see BoS as I do does with their money is none of my business. I like BoS and look forward to BoM so I have no problem buying in.. Yes it could be better in some respects .. in many respects, but it does do enough things well for me to support it with my money. I would be a fool if I expected you to feed a machine that you did not like.. I just don't want to see the machine wrecked. Everything out there that involves flying and fighting in virtual space is good for the genre because the pickings are so slim.. I bought WoP.. I bought into the P-40 expansion because they kept saying they were going to produce a ME and expanded maps.. What they wound up with was WT... I messed with it for a while and it was not for me.. Lesson learned. I did not toss any more money at it and I walked away. But I do not go on and on about how much WT sucked for me.. or how I was baited and switched with WoP.. I am not saying I expect you to walk away but I don't know.. maybe it is me.. maybe I just look at things differently.. but if I don't like something I let it go and move on.. especially if I have something that I do like..

As far as your final question.. at this juncture I don't see any of the current products that are available to us now as hurting the genre any more than it has already been hurt. Right now this genre is supported by 6 products IL2,BoS,CoD,DCS,RoF and WT .. Out of those 6 products only 4 are developer supported and only one is a dedicated WWII sim.. Basically that is three developers making sims ED, Gaijin, and 1CGS. Four if you count 777 as a separate entity as far as RoF goes.. (not sure if that is how it is in practice though). I hope that BoS does get some needed changes and regardless to what the devs said I think we will see some changes.. They said that unlocks would not be removed too.. but at this juncture it may be best to speak with your wallet if you have something to say or are not happy but don't shoot the horse because the wagon is broken. At the end of the day because I like much in BoS and think it is worthy of support does notmean that you are wrong to feel that way.. and vice versa.. but I do not want this sim to fail and I hope the devs take some steps to engage the disengaged ....

Anyway.. that is my take... I am not trying to convince anyone to like BoS .. either you like it or you don't.. but I'd like to see it not fail and improve..




Yes it is weird because it does not happen.. That does not happen.. as I have said on multiple occasions.. Threads rarely get deleted/hidden... They may get locked.. and if you go there you will see the locked threads right there with responses from admins or moderators but no one was banned in any of those locks.. There are posts expressing dissatisfaction or issues there on the front page.


All well and good... but you do not spend hours a day talking about how boring it is.. You make whatever input you make (which is usually spot on the money... like this post) .. and then you get on with enjoying what you do like instead of trashing what does not float your boat very well..

Easy answer--5x more people likely to buy the next product. Even better would be 50,000 playing 100 hrs, that's 50x more people. Putting 100hrs into a game is a good deal, even if you paid $100 for it, because $1/hr is cheaper than a lot of activities. If people put in 100 hrs, they're likely interested in the next product. If it's 10 hrs...they're likely not.
Far worse would be 100 players putting in 50,000 hrs (granted that's a lot of years!) because you can't float on those numbers of sales.




The Jedi Master

I agree that those missions are great, they show what talented people can do with the Mission Editor and the game.
Personally this is the kind of gameplay I prefer for these sims.

But do you all think this is the type of campaign that should be included with the game as the "Official" Campaign?
Really it's not.

First of all for the reason that the missions are too long and a flight sim doesn't have a way to save checkpoints in the way other games do. So the typical player that can't devote an hour to one of these will just be unable to complete them. Furthermore if in a Campaign it's required to suceed at one in order to move onto the next one that forces the player to repeat these hour long missions over and over. To the average player that's incredibly tedious.

Secondly. You have to fly a particular plane. There are 10 planes in BoS so the developer would have to come up with a campaign for each one or have you rotate in a game like fashion through the roster. Also one of these requires a bonus plane many players might not own. The "pick a regiment" system many of us want is maybe not exciting to the average player who just wants to fly a different plane every time for variety.

The missions are designed around "Expert" gameplay. They're not skies full of super arcade action. A realistic WWII mission means flying for 40 minutes to find your target, dropping the one or two unguided bombs you carry on your plane, probably you miss. Then flying 40 minutes back home. Me personally I call that "immersion" but the typical player finds that boring.

Look at all the above reasons and you can see why the Official Campaign is the way it is. It's made to appeal to the common player not enthusiasts like us who represent only about 1-2% of the market. If they designed the game only to appeal to 2% of the players it would sink. I finished the Official Campaign (and all the Unlocks) in 55 hours. Only perhaps 2% of the players in BoS have that much time in the game. And that's not because it's boring, that statistic is typical for all games.
When the Devs give us reasons why they haven't put the time into making campaigns like this, it's because of facts like the ones above.

Once again, for my personal taste I hope and expect to see much more content like this and I'm sure we will get it. But it's for us, the small group of enthusiasts to create and enjoy.

As always you forget your own words, or simply change the interpretation on the fly to fit your needs. You have always said, it will get better so let's support it. In my house supporting a product, more specifically a company means throwing money to them.

Really? Throwing money at them.. ? That is quite an interpretation.. one that I do not and never have shared.

Sharpe,

Are these game play numbers you're tossing around an average number of hours per day, per week, per month, per year, or life of the sim?

Then we agree on something...the worst thing that could happen to the combat flight sim genre is more resources for Albert Zhiltsov (Loft). The sooner he goes broke and is out of this business, the better.

This is an interesting statement. And for me BOS is not even in the CFS genre but trying to redefine the genre to fit