Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 16 of 17 1 2 14 15 16 17
#2710622 - 04/19/09 06:14 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: csThor]  
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,633
Dart Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Dart  Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Lifer

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,633
Alabaster, AL USA
LOL, who doesn't prefer an option to play while not connected to a server?

I also think the majority of the sim market will buy it, even with the connectivity requirement.

If Neoqb doesn't screw it up, that is.

Okay, so let's just suppose that they pull it off - stable servers that don't go down, and a quick, seamless connection that is invisible to actual gameplay.

And we'll also suppose that the customer has a decent Internet connection.

At that point what's the big deal, other than a philosphical argument? Respectfully, Thor, I would think the decision to allow RoF to connect would be an easy one.

And what will it have to do with whether or not the sim is fun flying?


The opinions of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

More dumb stuff at http://www.darts-page.com

From Laser:
"The forum is the place where combat (real time) flight simulator fans come to play turn based strategy combat."
Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#2710635 - 04/19/09 06:47 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: Dart]  
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,502
Wklink Offline
Permanent Latrine Orderly
Wklink  Offline
Permanent Latrine Orderly
Hotshot

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,502
Olympia, Washington
I agree with Dart on this. I DON'T particularly like the idea of having to connect every single time to play offline. I think Neoqb is making a mistake with this in its current incarnation.

I would prefer that if they did want to go with this that they would go with something similar to what StormEagle Studios did with Jutland. Jutland also checks with the server every time you fire the game up but if you don't connect you can still play the game, for a week. If you don't reconnect and verify after a week then you can only play in demo mode until the game connects and reverifies your game. That way the occasional server crash wouldn't result in a total lockout of the game.

I wasn't particularly thrilled with SES's system either (and pretty much said so in my review of Jutland) but compared to NeoQbs it is much less restrictive.

I think that Neoqb will have to ensure that their servers are completely up at all times. If they go down for any lenght of time it will literally kill any chances of them selling another simulation. This is the Russian Roulette (no pun intended) that they are playing with the game. If people can't play ROF because the game can't connect with a downed server people won't take a chance with any upcoming games from that company.

I hope Neoqb is watching these boards. If they are maybe they should get ahold of SES and ask about their security system. They may be able to license it for their own use. It might help a lot in relieving concerns about the game. It won't make everyone happy but people will be more comfortable with it.


The artist formerly known as SimHq Tom Cofield
#2710658 - 04/19/09 07:41 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: Wklink]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,618
Ming_EAF19 Offline
Babelfish Immune
Ming_EAF19  Offline
Babelfish Immune
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,618
London
In the interests of balance I like the idea of being connected umbilically to neoqb all the time it's like having Nursey back

Ming


'You are either a hater or you are not' Roman Halter
#2710680 - 04/19/09 08:55 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: Wklink]  
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,380
FlyRetired Offline
Senior Member
FlyRetired  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,380
Originally Posted By: SimHQ Tom Cofield
I think that Neoqb will have to ensure that their servers are completely up at all times. If they go down for any lenght of time it will literally kill any chances of them selling another simulation. This is the Russian Roulette (no pun intended) that they are playing with the game. If people can't play ROF because the game can't connect with a downed server people won't take a chance with any upcoming games from that company.

I agree Tom.

It's their decision to require the online connection, so their server service better be well-staffed, and work efficiently to prevent downtime events from their side of the lines!

#2710734 - 04/19/09 11:29 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: Ming_EAF19]  
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 202
WilliVonBill Offline
Member
WilliVonBill  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 202
North Carolina
Originally Posted By: Ming_EAF19
In the interests of balance I like the idea of being connected umbilically to neoqb all the time it's like having Nursey back

Ming


Careful Ming... I hear the connection will be via two separate tubes. An 'incoming' and an 'outgoing'. You might take a care not to mix the two! thumbsup


~RB3D~First Eagles~OFF BH&H~RoF~
Its A Good Time To Be A WWI Sim Junkie!
#2710869 - 04/20/09 06:48 AM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: WilliVonBill]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
csThor Offline
Senior Member
csThor  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
Germany
Dart - with all due respect, but are you really not seeing why people like me are ticked off by this "feature"? It is a matter of principle, a question of what kind of policy BS I tolerate or not. For example I already gnashed my teeth when Windows XP forced me through the online activation process (and I still don't like to be treated as potential pirate) and I also went to great lengths to keep it from "phoning home" (as far as I could manage that). With this in mind do you really think I will just shrug when a mere PC game wants to do the same and wave through whatever it sends? Nah, buddy. Not with ole csThor.

I was interested in RoF (even though my passion lies with WW2 aviation history). My gaming PC is up for a major upgrade anyway (for SoW) so I thought about upgrading earlier - until I read about that "online for offline" nonsense. After that no feature, regardless how nice it may sound/look/work, could bring me back as customer. They could - as was suggested here - combine user stats into a massive campaign running on their servers and I'd still stay away. Is this positive for neoqb? No, certainly not. Not when my opinion doesn't stand alone and I know many folks share my reservations.


Intel i7 960 @ 3.2 GHz - ASUS Rampage III Gene Republic of Gamers - 6GB RAM OCZ CL7 XTC Platinum PC3-12800 - ZOTAC GeForce GTX 480 - 64GB Crucial RealSSD C300 SATA II - 1TB Western Digital WD1002FAEX SATA II - Creative Soundblaster Xi-Fi Titanium - Windows 7 Professional 64bit
#2710886 - 04/20/09 08:34 AM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: csThor]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,618
Ming_EAF19 Offline
Babelfish Immune
Ming_EAF19  Offline
Babelfish Immune
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,618
London
I very much hope these connections are full-duplex umbilici

Full duplex. Sounds almost Dickensian Smile2

Ming


'You are either a hater or you are not' Roman Halter
#2710890 - 04/20/09 08:50 AM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: Ming_EAF19]  
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,633
Dart Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Dart  Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Lifer

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,633
Alabaster, AL USA
Quote:
It is a matter of principle


Thor, there is no middle ground with you, then. That's neither good nor bad, it just is. One thing I learned long ago is one can never reason another out of their belief system.

I take DRM sim by sim - a more pragmatic approach, some might say. Others will disagree.

Now, then, since it's established that with a connectivity requirement you won't be buying the sim, can the rest of us that might not like it but are willing to accept it talk about the actual features of the simulation?


The opinions of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

More dumb stuff at http://www.darts-page.com

From Laser:
"The forum is the place where combat (real time) flight simulator fans come to play turn based strategy combat."
#2710894 - 04/20/09 09:06 AM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: Dart]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
csThor Offline
Senior Member
csThor  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
Germany
I have no issues with anyone who wants to and will buy this game. The only reason why I posted was my impression of being belittled and patronized for my POV. This I object to. I have made my decision (just as you said) and I am quite aware that nothing I say will sway neoqb's decision. However making fun of me and other "people with reservations" and belittling us for our principles is not the SimHQ way, either. smile


Intel i7 960 @ 3.2 GHz - ASUS Rampage III Gene Republic of Gamers - 6GB RAM OCZ CL7 XTC Platinum PC3-12800 - ZOTAC GeForce GTX 480 - 64GB Crucial RealSSD C300 SATA II - 1TB Western Digital WD1002FAEX SATA II - Creative Soundblaster Xi-Fi Titanium - Windows 7 Professional 64bit
#2710925 - 04/20/09 11:31 AM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: csThor]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,618
Ming_EAF19 Offline
Babelfish Immune
Ming_EAF19  Offline
Babelfish Immune
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,618
London
"people with reservations"

Big Chief No Names No Pack Drill, he say today good day to lose bank balance to Nigerian ambassador

Ming


'You are either a hater or you are not' Roman Halter
#2711026 - 04/20/09 03:00 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: Ming_EAF19]  
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,502
Wklink Offline
Permanent Latrine Orderly
Wklink  Offline
Permanent Latrine Orderly
Hotshot

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,502
Olympia, Washington
cs Thor, the problem isn't people who have reservations in general. Most of us have reservations in general about this system that NeoQb has put into place.

What is bothersome are the individuals that are what I call 'one trick ponies'. YOu know the types. These are guys that will enter a thread called, 'New ROF pics' and will immediately start hammering on the devs for the softward check system or whatever. When told that they should knock it off they then scream about how important it is that everyone know what kind of meenies this company or that company is because they mandate some kind of software system and so on and so on.

We've seen this plainly with SF in the past. I know, say Starforce three times and the beast will rise again but it is a perfect example of how any thread was ruined by self appointed messengers who felt that any thread had to have at least ten references to the evil, horrendous Starforce (that's two) so consumers would be able to make an 'intelligent' decision. Of course that decision had to be one that the messenger felt was appropriate.

It is fine you have pricipals but when people start interjecting their personal agendas into every thread then it goes beyond having your principal to trying to impose your beliefs on others. If no one can discuss one aspect of a game without another person shoving another aspect in their face then there will be no discussion at all.

I still think that the best way to discuss things like DRM (which the sign in every time to play the game really is) is to have a forum about it. We put a big sign at the top of the forum to direct people with curiousities about that forum. All we ask is that the people there be members of SimHQ and sign in. However there are bunches of folks that consider this small request to be some kind of great burden on humanity and another big fight starts after that.

Sorry but after day after day of reading this stuff, followed by constant arguments that we are somehow suppressing the information because we want people to be actual members of SimHQ to read the DRM arguments and we get a little bit tainted and irritated, and we start to become sarcastic.

I wish people would become this exercised and involved with their own countries problems instead of jumping on the white horse over a 45 dollar video game. Maybe some of the world's problems wouldn't be so bad.


The artist formerly known as SimHq Tom Cofield
#2711071 - 04/20/09 04:12 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: Wklink]  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,774
Cas141 Offline
Senior Member
Cas141  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,774
Northern hemisphere
Originally Posted By: SimHQ Tom Cofield
cs Thor, the problem isn't people who have reservations in general. Most of us have reservations in general about this system that NeoQb has put into place.

What is bothersome are the individuals that are what I call 'one trick ponies'. YOu know the types. These are guys that will enter a thread called, 'New ROF pics' and will immediately start hammering on the devs for the softward check system or whatever. When told that they should knock it off they then scream about how important it is that everyone know what kind of meenies this company or that company is because they mandate some kind of software system and so on and so on.

We've seen this plainly with SF in the past. I know, say Starforce three times and the beast will rise again but it is a perfect example of how any thread was ruined by self appointed messengers who felt that any thread had to have at least ten references to the evil, horrendous Starforce (that's two) so consumers would be able to make an 'intelligent' decision. Of course that decision had to be one that the messenger felt was appropriate.

It is fine you have pricipals but when people start interjecting their personal agendas into every thread then it goes beyond having your principal to trying to impose your beliefs on others. If no one can discuss one aspect of a game without another person shoving another aspect in their face then there will be no discussion at all.

I still think that the best way to discuss things like DRM (which the sign in every time to play the game really is) is to have a forum about it. We put a big sign at the top of the forum to direct people with curiousities about that forum. All we ask is that the people there be members of SimHQ and sign in. However there are bunches of folks that consider this small request to be some kind of great burden on humanity and another big fight starts after that.

Sorry but after day after day of reading this stuff, followed by constant arguments that we are somehow suppressing the information because we want people to be actual members of SimHQ to read the DRM arguments and we get a little bit tainted and irritated, and we start to become sarcastic.

I wish people would become this exercised and involved with their own countries problems instead of jumping on the white horse over a 45 dollar video game. Maybe some of the world's problems wouldn't be so bad.


Tom, I agree with what you say above if this was happening on every thread. But, look again at the title of this thread - " Rise of flight Offline play "
And so, putting points of view that the devs have made a mistake in making a requirement
for Offline play [b][/b] is totally relevant , and there should have been no attempt or suggestion to push it off into the DRM thread- a thread which is not viewable to the casual visitor, as the other threads are.
And is it not surprising therefore, why some should ask why is this subject being pushed out of "public " view? at the apparent instigation of the folks who are criticizing those who are saying that the requirement to be online at all times isn't a good idea, etc.?

Surely ( you don't mind me calling you surely, do you? -lol ), it's a matter of transparency, is it not? That anyone can casually visit this website and read threads which opine that the devs are doing something negative with the sim , as well as all the other threads which praise this sim to the heights?

IMHO, I want to buy this sim ' cos it looks good,etc - and the only reason why Neoqb won't get my money is that I have to be online to play it. Nothing to do with DRM.

This thread showed that there are many of the same opinion, and many who are not.
But, those, like me, who want Neoqb to change their mind, may think that Neoqb may have second thoughts if they saw how many were of the same opinion.

If I were Neoqb, I'd be thinking again, if the posts were somewhere near 50-50 on this?
I think it only fair to them that these differing opinions should be there for them to see.

cheers


Mankind's problem is not failing to know the difference between right and wrong; - It is failing to know the difference between different and wrong
#2711084 - 04/20/09 04:29 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: Dart]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,024
RSColonel_131st Offline
Lifer
RSColonel_131st  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,024
Vienna, 2nd rock left.
Originally Posted By: Dart
At that point what's the big deal, other than a philosphical argument? Respectfully, Thor, I would think the decision to allow RoF to connect would be an easy one.


It's philosophical as long as NeoQB stays in business - when they go out of it early and leave you with a non-working coaster, you might not find it so philosophical after all.

Like I wrote in that other recent argument with you, at least in the EU if you buy a product you have a right for it to keep working. Sims like this have an implicit chance to failure built in, constantly being tied to an external entity.

And for those guys with unstable net connections (most of them single play users who migh well have the hardware and desire to run/buy this sim) it's not at all philosophical.

#2711109 - 04/20/09 05:11 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: RSColonel_131st]  
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,633
Dart Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Dart  Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Lifer

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,633
Alabaster, AL USA
You're correct on both counts - buying RoF is a wager that they'll stay up and running, and those without a stable Internet connection simply don't meet the requirements as they stand to play the simulation. RoF isn't the first computer game to list broadband connectivity as a basic requirement for play.

In the former, the traffic may be so low (due to small packet size) that it will remain affordable. Similarly, they've managed to somehow maintain enough capital to put the sim through the development process without a publisher. Somebody somewhere has deep pockets to foot the bill for over a year's worth of overhead in putting a sim together.

In the latter, I can't really be forced to care, beyond the standard empathy for my fellow man. Many simulations are out of the reach of people I know, let alone the rest of the world. Heck, lots of folks I regularly flew with in RB3D couldn't buy IL-2 because of the hardware requirements - and it didn't stop me for a second in upgrading and purchasing the simulation.

A few of them are still playing on boxes that suit RB3D and little else past that. It's not a fact that comes with a pretentious snicker or a look down one's nose, it's just the way it is.

[edit]

However, your earlier comments had nothing to do with whether or not one meets the connectivity requirements - you wrote that as a matter of principle you would not buy the simulation. That's a "won't do" not a "can't do" based on a decision tied to a belief system. One can persuade or change another's opinion, but not a belief system.

[/edit]

It's a computer game - so let's put it in the right category of stuff within the hierarchy of human needs in the proper spot. Not one single person needs to play a computer game or simulation on a desktop.

The few people on this planet that really do need computer simulations "play" them on multi-million dollar platforms which are serviced by teams of technical folks and are part of professional training program.

My sister's PC is an old Pentium III with a 14" monitor and some really creaky dialup. She can't play RoF for a host of reasons - but that doesn't mean I think she deserves any sort of pity. I don't think she's "left behind" or "left out" in the slightest, as she's made the decision not to upgrade.

Similarly, the logical point of "but if it wasn't for the connectivity requirement, many would be able to play" is simply the same computer hardware requirement with a different component. What of the guy with the great firehose of bandwith and beefy hardware who's running Win98SE? He could play but for the operating system.

Now I'll agree that the constant connectivity looks to any objective person like an unnecessary requirement that limits some that should otherwise be able to play, and also agree that it really should be rethought. I haven't seen anyone on the forums saying it's a great idea - it's pretty much 100% for at least the option to play without being connected to neoqb's servers - the difference is that there is a large chunk of folks that want to know what the benefit to us is (goodness knows we all got an earful of how it's bad for us) going to be for that requirement.

We're still pretty early in the game - RoF is in early beta testing - and the devs have got to be re-looking everything - including the server situation and how to best optimize both sales and useability.

Last edited by Dart; 04/20/09 05:20 PM.

The opinions of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

More dumb stuff at http://www.darts-page.com

From Laser:
"The forum is the place where combat (real time) flight simulator fans come to play turn based strategy combat."
#2711121 - 04/20/09 05:27 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: Dart]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
csThor Offline
Senior Member
csThor  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
Germany
Originally Posted By: Dart
You're correct on both counts - buying RoF is a wager that they'll stay up and running, and those without a stable Internet connection simply don't meet the requirements as they stand to play the simulation. RoF isn't the first computer game to list broadband connectivity as a basic requirement for play.


But (even though I know this is again philosophical):

Can any sim maker really afford to play russian roulette with its franchise by incorporating a requirement which is bound to raise a flak barrage that makes Flakbrigade Gro-Berlin in its prime look like a bunch of toddlers throwing rotten apples? Aren't we constantly told that the sim market is a small niche and that sims can't be "blockbusters" due to the rather low number of potential customers? Haven't great developers such as Microprose and Sierra gone the way of the Dodo because there weren't enough people like you and me who were prepared to pay good money for a good sim?
I mean it's one thing for a developer to be inconstant danger of having to close up shop because the product s*cked, but isn't it a lot more pointless to be in the same danger with a product that promises much just because you angered a good dose of your market even before release? That just doesn't make sense to me ... the obvious discrepancy between the alleged state of the sim market and what neoqb does with RoF.

*csThor bows, apologizes for the philosophical cr@p and retreats into his bunker* WinkNGrin


Intel i7 960 @ 3.2 GHz - ASUS Rampage III Gene Republic of Gamers - 6GB RAM OCZ CL7 XTC Platinum PC3-12800 - ZOTAC GeForce GTX 480 - 64GB Crucial RealSSD C300 SATA II - 1TB Western Digital WD1002FAEX SATA II - Creative Soundblaster Xi-Fi Titanium - Windows 7 Professional 64bit
#2711133 - 04/20/09 05:51 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: csThor]  
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,633
Dart Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Dart  Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Lifer

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,633
Alabaster, AL USA
Quote:
Can any sim maker really afford to play russian roulette with its franchise by incorporating a requirement which is bound to raise a flak barrage


I guess we'll find out!

hahaha

My gut feeling is that they're going to relax the constant connectivity six months or so after release.

Quote:
[lost sales] because you angered a good dose of your market even before release?


I'm one of those torch-and-pitchfork anti-Starforce guys, and to say my blood boiled at Eagle Dynamic's announcement concerning Black Shark is an understatement.

However, I bought the sim. Why? Because after far too much research, I came to the conclusion that Protection Technologies wasn't going to fry my system or damage any of my components.

That and the sim is just that darned good.

Notice the order there - Black Shark isn't good enough to risk my system over. But, once I learned there was no chance of damage to my system, it became worth it.

Am I happy over it? Nope. On principle, I guess I shouldn't have bought it, and sent a signal to Eagle Dynamics about just how deep my grudge against Protection Technologies, Inc., runs. But man, it's a great sim, and I'm glad I took a more balanced approach.

For every ten that say they won't buy RoF due to connectivity requirements, I'd bet five DMarks (I still have them) that seven quietly download it within three months of release.


The opinions of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

More dumb stuff at http://www.darts-page.com

From Laser:
"The forum is the place where combat (real time) flight simulator fans come to play turn based strategy combat."
#2711138 - 04/20/09 06:01 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: Dart]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
csThor Offline
Senior Member
csThor  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
Germany
Can only put 2,50 against that (gawd, have really more than 6 years gone by since our good old DM was buried? sigh ) ... hahaha

Anyway. The issue here is that neoqb tries to sell the connectivity requirement as "feature" and a "benefit". Quite frankly I don't see it so far (not for me, not for anyone but neoqb). Speaking hypothetically:

Had they gone a step further and done what was already suggested (running the offline campaign on their server and connect each and every player's achievements as far that is possible) the darn thing would have made sense. I still would object to it, but I would have seen why they included it. I mean a persistant campaign for offliners running 24/7 on a server, which also makes note of your own achievements and modifies variables to incorporate your deeds (say a player with "ace" achievments flying for a french squad in the Arras sector would translate into an AI ace in the same french squad in the Arras sector of another player's campaign) ... yada yada yada ... That would be a good sales argument for a lot of folks, wouldn't it? Right now the whole affair seems to pointless, so unnecessary ...


Intel i7 960 @ 3.2 GHz - ASUS Rampage III Gene Republic of Gamers - 6GB RAM OCZ CL7 XTC Platinum PC3-12800 - ZOTAC GeForce GTX 480 - 64GB Crucial RealSSD C300 SATA II - 1TB Western Digital WD1002FAEX SATA II - Creative Soundblaster Xi-Fi Titanium - Windows 7 Professional 64bit
#2711210 - 04/20/09 08:10 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: csThor]  
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 618
Gr.Viper Offline
Member
Gr.Viper  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 618
Russia
Quote:
For every ten that say they won't buy RoF due to connectivity requirements, I'd bet five DMarks (I still have them) that seven quietly download it within three months of release.

Four of those who download won't buy it, though.

#2711298 - 04/20/09 11:48 PM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: Gr.Viper]  
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,633
Dart Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Dart  Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Lifer

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,633
Alabaster, AL USA
Well, they'll have to - as one has to log in to play.

Thor!

We're full circle! Hurray!

That is a fantastic idea - one flys the missions single player and sees them as part of a persistent world; one in fact is flying as part of a squadron with other players, but not in a multi-player environment.

Heck, I hadn't thought of that. Put two slices in your Weisen Bier tonight.

Of course we'd need a "would you like to apply your mission results?" option. Otherwise they'll run out of SPADs with me behind the stick.

What I'd like to see is skins and missions with a rating at the end of them - so I can tag by author or by rating.

Let's say I download and fly a user made mission, and it's pretty good. I give it an eight of ten after flying it, and remark on the forums that others should give it a try. In short order it gets twenty votes and enters the rankings server, where I can then set my filter for "rated, 7 or better" and see what's out there. Or filter by author. Or by mission type.

The advantage is that it becomes something of a competition, with folks plugging away at the FMB in the hopes of getting tagged as a premier mission builder. Of course I'd give the next plane release to one of the ranked mission builders as a reward (either by ranking, download amount, or randomly), and maybe a discount to the others. Or maybe a wing guidon that can be seen in the simulation that only they have.

Early on I don't think we'll see anything like that, but in the future it would really keep people motivated to keep playing.


The opinions of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

More dumb stuff at http://www.darts-page.com

From Laser:
"The forum is the place where combat (real time) flight simulator fans come to play turn based strategy combat."
#2711315 - 04/21/09 12:23 AM Re: Rise of Flight Offline Play [Re: Dart]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,632
Baco Offline
Member
Baco  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,632
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Originally Posted By: Dart
Well, they'll have to - as one has to log in to play.



Well really?
Dont think so mate.

I dont know but Ive been told that people play Empires at War 3 that requires a conection to Steam, with out permission...

Of course I cofed Up 45 bucks for it, and If I want to play with My kid I have to cogh up 45 more...
Since I can aford it I will, but it leaves a very sour taste in my mouth since My kid will play with me for 3 or 4 days and I will have spent that money in vain... Oh well...

But then aggain I have 2 extra copies of Arma lying arrond somewhwwere And I bougth Gold for QG.. but yeah I admit it I am a PC game junky biggrin biggrin biggrin Yes I buy everything with wings (even rotary ones) on it, jeje.

Still, My point is: there is no efective protection nor requirement aggainst piracy, so to annoy your legal customers is not a wise policy... But then aggain they will realice this too late, blame it on the small market and move on to write something for EA...


Fighter pilots make movies, Attack Pilots make history.
Page 16 of 17 1 2 14 15 16 17

Moderated by  Avimimus, RacerGT, Wklink 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

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


Recent Topics
YouTube is weird.
by Dart. 06/16/21 09:00 PM
Steam Charts
by PanzerMeyer. 06/16/21 02:05 PM
U.S. Flag Day
by rwatson. 06/14/21 01:06 PM
Song lyrics you were sure of … but they were wrong.
by oldgrognard. 06/13/21 08:01 PM
Yakov's Still Got It!
by vonBaur. 06/12/21 08:25 PM
Resident Evil Village?
by DBond. 06/10/21 05:07 PM
Drama Queens
by carrick58. 06/08/21 12:35 AM
So hell has frozen over!
by PanzerMeyer. 06/06/21 10:18 PM
Operation Opera
by RossUK. 06/06/21 02:11 PM
6/6/44
by Sunchaser. 06/06/21 11:57 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0