This is the point I don't agree with you. If I'd review a game I'd focus on the product, not developer's past.

Of course you would focus 99.9% of the review on the product, but the buyer would also like to know how the developer supports its products.

Once more the stock conflation of new COD team management with old (BoB: SOW).

When a decent company changes management it doesn't always mean the product will become garbage. Also many of the original IL-2 team still work for Maddox Games.

For awhile I was concerned that the COD development would fail due to the release of an unfinished sim, and the poor sales that might garner. BUT the initial sales of the original IL-2 were probably weaker because many people never heard of IL-2 Sturmovic. Although quite a few of us followed the development from the Bluebyte days. It will probably take a year of patches before COD really catches on while it took a few years for people to migrate from EAW, CFS2, etc to the original IL-2 series.

The New Management had to have his a$$ pulled out of the mess he made of that was to be Pacific Fighters by the Old Management.

I think Luthier is doing his best, though so far his best is not quite enough.

I remember being totally pissed that the developers had to drop BOB to help Luthier with Pacific Fighters. Luthiers was originally just modeling an aircraft carrier but that idea expanded into Pacific Fighters where he would need alot of help. It also spawned the idea of making more addons to the IL-2 series instead of working fully on their new game engine. They probably realized early in the development of BOB that computers then weren't capable of handling the complex features they intended for BOB, and there was still considerable monies to be made from addons to the old series.

These are such complex projects (I wouldn't be surprised if CofD has more lines of code than any previous game, certainly it must be in the top three sims in terms of complexity - and these are generally a dozen times more difficult to program than a first person shooter) - so it is really hard to point the blame anywhere. It is just a difficult task that takes time...

It's straight forward common sense - without vendors paying for advertising the operating costs for SimHQ are paid by who? running a popular site isn't free. Biting a hand that feeds you or may potentially feed you sometime in future is not exactly wise business sense.

If a publisher such as UBI becomes hostile towards SimHQ they could lose a potential source of income.

More sensible than your conspiracy theory theory?

It' double edged.

How a developer (and publisher) has treated their consumers in the past needs to be kept in mind. ESPECIALLY if they've screwed their customers in the past.

This genre in particular has suffered under terrible - sometimes fraudulent - behaviour by some publishers/developers.

I can't remember the last time i purchased a sim that was not unfinished. This trend continues. Knowing that in some way those people will be held accountable in future might be that little bit of extra incentive to be more professional with their development.

You are claiming that SimHQ will make a negative review a positive one for the reason of being able to attract companies like Ubisoft advertising dollars?

Ok, I disagree with that because:

- I don't think the people that run SimHQ are journalistically corrupt, in that they would deliberately mislead people for commercial gain.

- SimHQ has published negative reviews before, so why is this case different? Why would they be worried about a publisher now?

- Ubisoft don't advertise here, so are you assuming that Sim peripheral companies (or perhaps other sim companies that do adverts here) would therefore withdraw revenue unless the review is positive?

- The site owner replied in this thread to say this wasn't the case. I'm not sure what more he could do.

Personally I think it's pretty insulting you post that opinion here, but you're free to speak your mind I guess.

I dont think for a second SIM HQ or the people doing the review would fluff it up.
Though it does seem the review is taking a long time, and with a patch round the corner...well i guess we will see when its done.

So Bard now accuses SimHQ of lying about their review process shortly after accusing Heinkill of lying as well?! That is pretty far out. Why would you even want to be part of a web site run by what you perceive as liars?

Ah, the classic "I don't think for a second... Though it does seem..."

- but then SimHQ is supposedly also in the pocket of yours truly, who runs the site as a secret cabal and can ban people on a whim... - The clowning around continues...

Freycinet...the point has already been made, and by a Mod. You dont need to jump in on the back of it just to stir things up further

Bard can explain his own thoughts without you paraphrasing.

Frecyinet, for once, why dont you just stay out of things?

Ben

An amusing saying just popped into my head.



This is getting silly now. The hold up is what?

I am just waiting for a brutally honest review that holds nothing back and proves SimHQ's unbiased credibility. We all know the state that the sim is currently in. There'll be no pulling the wool over anybody's eyes.

Glo

Ah, the classic: "you don't agree with my line of thinking, therefore I will continue to flame you."

What a nice character you are, Frey.

What is this nonsense, five pages of nagging SimH for a review? - It is not as if it is a pay web site and you're all owed something in exchange for a big monthly subscription! - This is a free site run by enthusiasts, how hard is that to understand?

All this bullying of SimHQ and their unpaid volunteers should really stop. If you guys want an unbiased review so much, maybe you shouldn't go on constantly pressuring them to do this and do that and woe unto the poor soul who doesn't write it exactly as you want him to... Just bugger off and leave them alone to what they're doing.

Enquiring as to what the delay may be is hardly bullying. Don't be so dramatic.

15 pages, 5000+ views, the wait goes on. The game was released weeks ago in US, months ago in Eur (in much the same state) and people are a little suspicious. Why wouldn't they be? Writing a review is an understandably complicated, time consuming process but in the meantime fans have written their in-depth reviews, game sites have put theirs up. Why is this one taking so long?

Last I heard (over a week ago) was that TC had completed his part of the review and Guod was waiting on Dart to complete his before formatting it for release. I think this will be a good test for SimHQ. Bias and a glossing over of problems will be easily detectable. It needs to be a true, warts and all, OOTB account of what it is and not what it may become with fantasy updates.

I am also very keen to see what Dart writes, considering he openly ridicules WoP and those that enjoy it.

Glo