Oh, and now you are making an edit to your post just to throw an insult at me. You are really the wrong man for your job, seeing how easily you are getting desperate. But don't worry, I won't report you. I actually like it when people get down to it. If it was up to me, you could throw around insults all day long. Only helps to support my point. Thanks for playing.

You don't know what cognitive dissonance is. But that is typical for people who are throwing around big words that are above their pay-grade. Cognitive dissonance, in this case here, would be pretending to be a member of the customer flightsim community while in fact being a shill for a software studio. That automatically leads to cognitive dissonance if you are not careful. In fact, it seems like you are having a meltdown right now. Maybe you should take a break, "buddy".

My job as a computer support specialist..?


Report away, I'm new here and I'd be happy to discuss this interaction with an administrator.

Holy #%&*$# dude... You're crazy.

I went ahead and filed the report for you.

Oh, just now saw this gem now. So, what reputation has it? Not being a mere marketing forum like all the other controlled developer forums are? Yeah, tough $hit, isn't it.
In fact, SimHQ was close to becoming that at one point, until ED was becoming so megalomanic that they actually banned the main moderator here of this forum lol. That kinda changed the tact. And it was for the better, really.

Yeah dude. I think you should take a break. You are really getting involved, talking about your family and stuff, while I was only discussing flightsim matters.

I don't appreciate being accused of something I'm not so I thought I'd provide a little clarification for you.

You don't know me and your accusations are not only false, they're completely immature and inappropriate.

You don't need to say another word. I'll wait to hear from an admin.

Thanks for the warm welcome to SimHQ.

Yeah. Now, after you trying to curb stomp criticism by members by dropping arrogant one-liners ala
, you are now crying out for "the admin" to save you, like a little child. And try to bring the whole reputation of the forum in with "Thanks for the warm welcome to SimHQ". You truly are working in marketing. Normal people do not act like that. Here is my advise for you: If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Or, don't dish out what you can't take yourself.

Again, you don't know me.

I don't even click on your links. Stop posting pictures of yourself on the net for no good reason, if that is what you're doing. That is retarded. God damnit, people these days.

OoooooKay...

Debate, even lively debate, about IL-2 Box's content, development, marketing and sales, is welcome here. Characterize the game all you like. However, do NOT characterize other members here. Address the content of the posts, not the authors.

There are people who like things about the game / company as they are, and they are welcome to express what they like about them here.

There are people who dislike things about the game / company as they are, and they are welcome to express what they dislike about them here.

Some people even fall into both categories.

There are helpful links included below in my signature.

Carry on.

Been a while since I viewed this thread. Unfortunately, i’ve seen this pattern all too often. My observation is that on many forums someone makes an observation directly or implicitly critical of a product. The observation(s) may or may not be valid. Then another forum member objects to the given “complaint”. What I look to see is initiation of a personal attack. That to me is the “tell”. Eventually the recipient of the attack succumbs to an urge to react in kind and the thread gets closed. I have seen past instances where threads got closed but posts launching personal insults were allowed to remain. I suspect that members consider their posts carefully when they believe that initiation of a personal attack will be looked for. It may be that some individuals are on lookout for other posters who might seem easy to get a rise out of. Perhaps they find that to be entertaining. I think that if such attacks are launched in defense of a product they have potential to damage image of the product. It is especially counterproductive if some special knowledge of the product can be implied from the post. If a criticism is valid it is best to just accept it and move on. If the criticism is inappropriate there will be multiple owners of the product who will present logical rebuttal. If personal attack is the only way to defend against a complaint I consider it a mark against the attack initiator and any collaborators. I don’t see anyone benefiting from viewing posts that launch personal insults.

A video game cost $40-$60 in 1990. Just adjusting for inflation, that is $75-$115 in 2017 dollars. Add in the fact that it is more expensive, in terms of man/hours, to code a modern video game, and prices in excess of $100 become much more justifiable.



The rest of your conspiracy theories aside, selling for what the market will support is not "malicious," that is what game companies are supposed to do. That is how they make a profit to pay investors and employees, so they are able to continue making games.

Lifeblood for simulations is evidence of improving fidelity over time. “Games” differ from sims in that buyers mostly seem to accept mediocre AI as long as eye candy continues to improve, My guess is that, somewhere along the way, some sim houses decided that quicker and larger profits would be had if development funds were spent on eye candy rather than on sim fidelity. Similarly, some developers may have decided that online combat could substitute for lack of offline AI progress. What may have been forgotten is that online combat is possibly always going to be subject to connection speed and that new players must be able to take as a matter of faith that their game experience has not been compromised by hackers. I suspect that many simmers would pay far more than typical mass market game prices if the products on offer demonstrated improving fidelity over time.

A lot of wacky misinformed statements here. If you want to know the truth I'll answer here while I'm awake for the next hour.

Jason

If you're still awake... when does the P-39 appear?

Well, Jason, I feel as though I might have started this whole mess when I suggested that the Battle of Midway might not be a deep enough campaign to keep us playing for a long time. I suggested, maybe, the Solomons. Yikes!
Anyway, any validity in my statement, do you think? Or do you have plans for Midway that will keep us involved for a while? It's just that, at the price of games today, I look for lots of bang for my buck. Others, too, I'm sure.

Piper,

The P-39 will be released in our final update of the year in December. Along with the A-20 and Yak-7. The P-39 was built by our Lead Modeler who unfortunately has had some health problems that has slowed his work on it. Poor guy has been through the ringer lately. I don't have a big enough team to pick up the slack.

Pooch,

The air war in the Pacific was different. What can I say? Do users really want a Solomons Career over Carrier warfare? That's literally the choice I have to make with my resources. Ideally I'd have both, but I need a much larger budget. However, I have taken such push back into consideration and I'm re-evaluating what we can do in this regard.

About pricing - our Standard Edition product is always $49.99 and we often do sales on all or most of our content. We try to balance our needs and the community's wallet as best we can. And we make just enough to keep going. This is not a hugely profitable business.

For those that are complaining and continuing to making snide remarks about the product and our team, you must remember that I was not in charge of the Sturmovik product until 13 months ago. For 3 years I sat in a corner watching bad decisions and trying to help the team survive, but failing to influence the product to change or the public to give it a chance. I started a new business and was actively seeking a path out of something that wasn't working for me. That is until things changed and I could gain control of development again as I had with ROF. That wasn't a picnic either, but ROF turned into a stellar product over time. In that time, I have completely re-arranged our priorities, technology, feature-set, plane-sets and am about to embark on a new adventure greatly expanding our ability to make content. I've pushed the team to their limits and made our budget stretch as far as I can without breaking. I've made the product and the team do a complete 180-degree flip. But unfortunately making such changes takes time to catch on and I still have two arms tied behind my back when it comes to making new stuff you guys want.

This job has cost me a marriage, affected my health and ruined many a perfectly fine day. If anyone can do it better, please start a software company and show us how it’s done.

Jason

I for one appreciate your efforts... please keep up the good work

Jason, I'm not a customer of the product, but judging by the volume and characteristics of the traffic in this sub-forum following your assumption of leadership... I'd say that you accomplished a lot of positive change there. In a field of endeavor where it is virtually impossible to please everyone, that is no small feat. I hope you get/keep the health issue(s) under control.