FearlessFrog provides his opinions in a humorous, but insightful look at IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover.

http://www.simhq.com/_air13/air_501a.html

I did get a few grins from the article having watched the whole buying the Russian version of the sim discussions in the forums these past few months.


Wheels

I bought the game through steam and I wish I had not. Not only is the training Horrible and does not teach you how to start the engine this is by far the worst Sim ever. If you watch the models the Rudders and ailerons they skip to positions, there is no smooth movements. disappointed in the sim.

I like moonlit walks on long sandy beaches , stirring conversations about immelmann manuevers and cold beer by a heated fire on a hot bear skin...you did want to know more about us Frog ..Froggie?

I'm good, thanks

That was the most descriptive portrayal of CloD I have read to date.

same feeling here !

And even more, i had almost the same experiences as the writer since april
To start the game is always a travel from hell to heaven and back again.............

This commentary and the review that was just written complement each other well. Thanks!

Once I thought SimHQ was the best website regarding sims out there but right now it's probably the worst and most amateurish. It reminds me of the cheapest tabloid press available. Posting all these "opinions" is a strange way to fill up a main page. The times of me checking SimHQ daily or at least twice a week are now definately over.

To me there is a difference between a review and continuous bashing of a game. Review a game, be professional while at it and then be done. There is no need to beat the horse until it's dead.
Also the big question is what do you think to accomplish with that, being one of the bigger Sim related sites? Ubisoft totally canceling the game or rather all the development and expansions? Killing the Sim genre completely?


Everyone has opinions. But to be frank - the opinions I read here are very questionable and not helpful. There are enough reviews out there and ALL of them are literally tearing the game apart. I haven't seen a good one yet.
Ironically, if I look at how ugly Black Shark and A10 e.g. are at ground level and how "great" they run on my system compared to IL-2 it's almost funny reading these opinions.

So here's the thing: How about we just let people read the reviews for now, decide if they want to buy the game in a state like this or not. If you end up not liking it then just play something else and stop bashing it - you had the reviews, you took the risk - it's your own fault and no one elses. And if you like it, want to play it and improve it: stop bashing it or else it'll definately be the last IL-2 and probably only see one expansion.

I also wonder why there are at least no good opinions regarding the game. Mine would certainly be a good one but for some reason I doubt it'd ever get posted.

Your calling SimHQ the "worst and most amateurish" website regarding sims is unwarranted. On the contrary, there is good information here and often useful debate, and the staff are a fair and stand up group of folks who apparently know what they're talking about. I respect them for their work, and I believe you should too.

It is not SimHQ's fault that CloD turned out this way.



Uhmm... reason why may not be a mystery to many.



Go ahead and write one, and post it in the CloD forum. Some non-staff forum members already have (Heinkill comes to mind). I'm sure SimHQ won't censor your passionate depiction of CloD.

I don't think Fearless' review is "the most descriptive portrayal of CLoD I've read to date" as someone else commented. Not by a long shot. In fact, it is extraordinarily light in description. It is the best written review of CLoD that I've had the opportunity to read. Fearless' writing skills are exceptional. I'm envious. Unfortunately, I fail the third prong of his test. While I do have an interest in WWII aviation and a decent PC, I have zero patience for software that is released to the retail public in a disastrous, largely unplayable condition, as if it is the only game in town so eat your peas. The masochism exhibited by some on this board reminds me of self-flagellating priests doing penance for impure thoughts (i.e. liking CLoD and making excuses for it). Sometimes I think it's a world gone mad. In the end, I'm not sure what value Fearless' second opinion adds to the debate. I keep visualizing Fearless (and others) over many months, on their knees, shirts off, cat-o-nine-tails in hand, whipping their own backs, and it makes me sad.

Harsh, but I generally agree. Except for the part about visualizing the Clod community shirt-less on their knees....you can um, keep that one for yourself.

Frog, I understand your conundrum of having to weigh the good against the bad, but I submit that much of the bad will keep people from ever seeing the good. poor execution is the enemy of ambition. Personally, I'd rather play a sim with more realistic ambitions (such as Strike Fighters) that rises to it's own goals, than a sim like CloD which falls woefully short of them.

Also, while you mention that there are legions of community members willing to step in and work on CloD, willing and able are two different things. We need 1. a stable software platform, and 2. an open platform within which to develop. Right now CloD is neither of those things. I know a map maker SDK is due, but has there been word of an aircraft SDK? How about an open back door to the engine in the vein of FSUIPC for FSX?

I personally thought it was a pretty good review in terms of detail it covered and descriptions of the product.

Thanks for the feedback gents. This was really just a quick piece, written before we had the review and when we weren't so sure when it was incoming. TC did an excellent job on that, and this was more just some personal thoughts to complement a proper review.

I can quite understand why many wouldn't want to put in the time for CoD so far, it's a real odd one so far.

FF, Cliffs of Dover represents a great step forward in WWII sims and, despite its current less-than-stellarly-perfect status, still has a lot of folks playing the heck out of it. I'm with you in that I'm patiently waiting for the product to get some some additional polish before I put any serious time into it, but I know of a large number of folks who get a lot of enjoyment out of it as is.

Well if your a hardcore "sim" guy that thinks that every little detail down to the number of panel lines must be correct, and you think that unless you fly with "full super duper extra realism engine management" on then, its not a real "sim", amd anybody who don't play it like that is not a "REAL" pilot, then your probably not going to like CoD in its present state............

But if you are a "sim-lite" type of player (myself included)then its for you, some of the off the wall detail that you find at random is worth the price by itself, and if you can waited for a few "mods" and patches then its well be giving you hours upon hours of escapablity from your wife.

You must remember that the first IL-2 when released was pretty dang bad, as far as replayablity goes,not until Forgotten Battles/Pacific Fighters was released and some of the modders got a hold of it did it become the "Holy Gail: of WW II flight sims.

And this is all just My Own Opionin...............................

That's highly debatable. Granted, the game did not come with a career generator, but the static campaigns included were far better than what came with CoD.

Ahh, interesting read...both the add-on article, AND the feedback. Nice, IMHO.

Waiting on further updates am I. (before plunking down some cash).

Nice article, FF.

Wow, i thought my moonlit walks was a bad enough visual.Looks like i have been outbid on the dating stakes