Do you really expect people to follow you heaping praise on a game based on the "potential for self-expansion" alone? That gotta be a new one, someone running around marketing the game on "what it might be able to be doing".



He paid his 40 bucks, he can voice his opinion all day long and you don't have to like it, but can't shut him down. Nice try.

FlyRetired,

You really are the most obnoxious fanboi-a$$ I have ever seen.

There, been meaning to say that for a while...feeling much better.

The blinders you put on, when it comes to ROF, then your verbal attempts to quash any dissenting opinion, is pathetic.

Get a life eh?

Love it!

Whatever keeps you coming back for more, and you will.

Its OK FlyRetired,you've been 'outed'!

I try not to let people like you ruin what may turn out to be a great sim and a good forum so I will be back (unless I get banned) but not to see your incredibly inane self.

Now to find the "Ignore" feature...

I have read this entire thread and have not noticed one person saying "I could do better than Neoqb". All I have read are peoples opinions that SP is in need of a lot of work and it looks like it will take a long time to see it improved to a workable state. Given the current state of RoF it will take a lot of work to get it to an acceptable state for both MP and SP. Thankfully Neoqb are not shirking that task and improvements have already been made.

Saying something sucks is not the same as saying I could do better. Red Baron is a very old sim and the career mode in it is light years ahead of RoF in immersion. This is the point many are making, a 10+ year old sim got it much better with much less PC power than Neoqb.



Wrong, it's because they have been flying sims for a long time they can see that the RoF campaign is very poor in comparison to those in much older sims. What you are reading is not "I can do it better" posts, they are "it has been done much better before", or "this needs a lot of work" posts.



This is exactly what most people are doing. Granted there are some who are far too aggressive in their approach but the underlying tone is that RoF is a technically excellent sim but it needs a lot of work in SP and MP.



It is for this reason you will see so many visitors on this forum. It has been years since a hardcore WWI combat flight sim has been released, so it will inevitably garner a lot of interest from the hardcore flightsim community. There will be a lot of very vocal people who will post some very negative comments about RoF. This happens in all areas of software development, Neqob (and the sycophants who patrol this forum) will have to get used to it.

You got it!

It's been said many times, but products do sell themselves, and ROF will succeed or fail on its merits. The more familiar people get with the ROF expansion scheme, the more they'll embrace it. ROF is the hottest sim going now. Some gamers might not buy it now because it doesn't have a feature or plane they want, but will later. A self-expanding sim that can build on itself, add new features and content, is all about aiming to please. It just takes time to do new things really well, but ROF can do both.

As I listed at the beginning of my thread here, there's reviews out on the sim that give a pretty good picture of ROF. Sure they're outdated because of the free planes Neoqb added, and the new buyable flyables now available, but the reviews do convey the sim's merits.

It's great to see opinions change too, and see diehards do 180's right here on this forum and buy the sim afterall.

I really, really like this line:

"The ROF designers have invested much time in preparing their own ability to add features (code) to this sim."

If that is a fact and their abilities have been so well prepared, why are they taking so long to repair this sim?

Perhaps, after investing "much time in preparing their own ability to add features (code) to this sim.", they should have applied those abilities just a tad more before they released this sim, eh?

Here's another review, and again it's already been superceded by recent updates, but worth a look.

http://www.gameplanet.co.nz/pc/games/159340.Rise-of-Flight/reviews/133545.Rise-of-Flight/

Btw, I'll add this to the first page also, and can update as additional or new reviews come in.

You needing to call others an A S S comes across as totally childish. Hope that is not your birth date in your login name, that would be really sad.

Just put the know it all fanbois on ignore ...Unless these knowitalls actually work for neoqb the
opinions expressed by said knowitalls is just that ....

Ever since I started posting on this forum it was very easy to spot the fanboys. They would shout down dissenters and even derail threads that asked legitimate questions. Granted some people who have been negative of RoF have on occasion gone way overboard but some of the comments the fanboys have made have been bordering on delusional.

Frankly, telling people to "do better themselves if they don't like it" is obnoxious and childish in the extreme. Far more obnoxious than calling someone who is being an a$$ an a$$. I respectfully suggest that people like you and FlyRetired take a step back and think before posting in that typical knee jerk defensive fanboy fashion every time someone makes a warranted negative comment on your beloved RoF.

If you don't like the fanboy moniker you have built for yourselves then I suggest you start posting some objective unbiased comments for a change. If everything RoF was as great as you and FlyRetired make it out then why are they still patching/adding to it. It has got a lot wrong and is missing so much that anyone with even a smidgen of sense can see it will take a long time to come good. The core is excellent but in all honestly in its current very limited content form it will not take long before it becomes stale and boring. The fanboys constant denial of this fact is laughable and delusional.

I too get very tired of hearing people saying without any data to back it up how the ROF design is so expandable and ROF expansion scheme is super good and special.

Those are sell/marketing statements that will need to be "proved" duing the next year or more. When someone sounds like a broken record without adding any real depth or facts, one just needs to stop reading their post. It is a better method and you will not default to name calling which is a poor style, IMHO.

A dynamic campaign is the hardest application to implement in a historicly accurate flight sim IMHO (based on my flight sim development experience. I have coded BOBII applications since 2003 mostly the AI) if it is historicly accurate with accurate squad markings, A/C, and airfield locations over time. They will also need to design a method to move the front over time and reposition all the airfields and A/C types. It will be a real challenge to develop and if they are just getting started the schedule will be significant (12 months may even be too short of a schedule if it is historicly accurate).

Great new review Fly - thanks for adding that one too.

You guys know what i like best about this subforum the last few weeks? The fact that i don't have to embark solo on arguments with some very rigid-thinking people anymore, trying to prove that some of RoF's design points are going to be badly received by the majority of community and endanger its potential market penetration. I don't even have to post here anymore as far as this matter is concerned, because others have taken care of it, others that can't be driven away by cries of "buy the game first before you comment", because they have already bought it.

I can just sit back and read the posts of dozens of actual buyers of this product telling things the way they are, giving those of us who wait on the sidelines a source of valuable and largely unbiased information, maybe even embarking on verbal scraps with members of what, in a tongue-in-cheek fashion, i like to call the "ostrich brigade" and shooting them down in the process.

If this was Shakespeare, someone would be shouting things like "Set forth my braves and reap justice"
Excuse me, but seeing you all gang up on members of the old "gangbang-the-naysayer" club actually made me laugh in real life, oh how the times change
Oh, nice reviews by the way

"You needing to call others an A S S comes across as totally childish. Hope that is not your birth date in your login name, that would be really sad."


Freycinet,

When you and that other ROF sycophant have done 1/10th as much for the WW1 flight sim genre as PatrickWilson has your insights and comments will be better appreciated.

Learn to see before you speak...

I have noticed what has been happening over the past few weeks on this forum. More and more people have played RoF and seen that it has a great core but very little content. They have started to notice that the MP is poorly implemented. They have noticed the very poor career mode with so many bugs and historical errors. They have played through the very limited number of single missions and they hold no interest any more because they know what is going to happen where and when. They ask "how long before MP & SP is improved?" and the only answer they are hearing is "wait and see". Even worse is reserved for those who have the audacity to wait and see how RoF develops prior to purchase, they are simply told to "shut up if they haven't bought the sim".

If Neoqb want to get people on board with this sim they need to start communicating. They need to allay peoples fears and confirm if the SP career mode will be improved to a level similar to RB2 or at least in that direction. They need to let people know that a DF mode is planned for MP. We are not asking for definite dates or time lines, we are simply asking what are the plans for SP & MP?

Gentlemen,
The thread topic is "Recent ROF Reviews", not "Stick It to Your Fellow SimHQers". Stay on topic please and stop the personal attacks.

You're welcome Brian!

I'll keep the list updated periodically.

Might even put the link to the upcoming ROF review by the SimHQ staffers when it's out here too.

Maybe SimHQ has decided to wait until there is something to review.