I disagree Bliss, i think CLOD is harming flight siming more than anyone on these forums. anybody who brought CLOD believing the recommended spec to play CLOD would agree.

Honestly Bliss, how long should it take to get those 5 things fixed? how long should somebody wait before they are allowed to complain? 6 months, a year?, 2 years? are we allowed to moan at all?

if we have to wait until BOM is released to fix CLOD that could be 18 months.

Yeah that abnormal reasoning.

Luthier: We have the full support from 1C and plan on making updates, sequels, expansions, improvements to the new IL2 series for years to come. Sorry we couldn't get a patch out to you by the new year. We were hoping to make it by the holidays.

It seems as if you don't understand what those words mean. So in the 1st part it means they plan on continuing to develop the sim for years to come. The second part means the big re-write fix is being worked on as we speak.

So all the people should be upset with that? Huh? Or anyone that believes that can't reason? Are you mentally ok? Or just not able to read?

Furbs, do you understand what a minimum spec is?

The minimum spec basically means that it's the lowest spec you can possibly even think about playing with. In other words it should load the game, and you might even get to sit there in a plane. But if you think you could do anything other than airstart over water, I don't think you understand what a minimum spec is. Anything lower than that shouldn't even start the game.

I'm sorry, but this is my last post here for a while. Some of you people really are nuts.

I really find it difficult to disagree with this statement. What the hell?

Bliss, try answering my previous points a few posts before this. Let's hear it.

Also try understanding that Luthier's recent pronouncements are from the same person that previously pronounced all sorts of things, in all sorts of time-scales, for a game that was supposed to have all sorts of features at release. But strangely, didn't. And mostly still doesn't. It's not a question of what is being said - doh, we know what is being said, it is whether it can be trusted, and whether there is real substance/detail.

To a great many it looks as if they are moving on to a new game sharp-ish, and you will need to buy it in order to backwards-patch the old one if you want those issing features that were supposed to be there first time around. Cause for celebration, or alarm?

Capiche?

Try them apples.

Ben

Bisher said:



I'm sure you can if you put your mind to it

Oh... I get it (playful punch on the arm...)

Ben

No Ben

Eh? You dont like the wind-up in return?

Ben

They may not be nuts but they certainly have no common sense. They can't seem to grasp the concept that that just because the game was released unfinished, it doesn't necessarily mean it can't be finished. Even when you spell it out for them with examples like the ROF, and the long history of Maddox Games doing just that, they still don't get it, and immediately dismiss it. Of course there is still a good chance the sim will fail, everyone understands that. As long as the developer is still working on it and the publisher supporting it, there still a chance. But the whining does keep the forums active and helps kill time while we wait.

Hi Chivas. Mate, you seem very keen to point to Maddox Games' track record as proof they will eventually sort this mess out.
I think it's worth remembering that Maddox Games is essentially no more, and Oleg has left to do heaven-knows what.
The new crew under Luthier are very much an unknown quantity, and if recent deeds are any guide to go by, we are in much murkier waters.
In fact I can't name one thing they have done that they have promised to do since the release of the game - never mind before the release.
Better AI? The 109s I've flown against behave like Tie Fighters. Crossfire? Nup, still ain't working. The list goes on.
And now they're asking their customers for ideas as to what needs fixing? have they even tried playing their own game?
One poster suggested before the whole thing smells of stalling tactics, and I am inclined to agree.
While I admire your optimisim, I fear it is sorely misplaced.
And as for the idea that we should suck it up because this is all we have in the way of WW2 sims. I can't help but wonder that if the Il2 series did die, it might leave a gaping hole in the market for another - perhaps more competent - developer to fill.

All the best for 2012.

I can't help but wonder if the shift from BoB to BoM is being dictated in part by their not having permission to produce ANY US manufactured aircraft, AI or flyable.
If they concentrate on the very early stages of the Nazi vs Soviet war, before lend lease, they can try to get away with not having any P39s, P40s, A20s etc.
Just a suspicion I have. I have yet to see any plans for a single US aircraft, except for speculation by players.

There should be little disagreement that there are a lot of folks disappointed with Cliffs of Dover. Even Luthier mentions it lightly. What should be remembered, though, is that developers are human and make the best decisions they can with the constraints they have. 1C/Maddox Games has limited resources (personnel, budget, schedule) and is no doubt getting all sorts of pressures and guidance from sources we can't even fathom.

While I'm pleased to see healthy discussion on the issues that fellow flight-simmers are seeing out there, let's remember to keep the focus on the arguments and not stray into the personal attacks or name-calling. That way leads to thread locking and deletion and it would be a shame to lose the discussion so far.

Personally, while I feel a bit burned by ClOD, I do recognize the ambitious scope of the project added a lot of risk (more than the developer themselves may have realized) and have a healthy respect for all the patches/updates/support that was given to the original IL2 series. I find it hard to believe that that nuturing culture just up and vanished when Oleg left the team - it's possible, but not likely. Of course, all the bashing the developers have been receiving from the community isn't much motivation to do better.

At the end of the day, I'm looking forward to seeing what BoM or any future Maddox Games/1C title will add to the flight simulation community, but I won't be pre-purchasing it.

never mind, not worth it

thanks

This exactly mirrors my sentiments.

My criteria is Cliffs of Dover being transferred to the same engine Battle of Moscow will use and combined into the same build / codebase / whatever - ensuring that it recieves continued support and development. Its the only way I can see them being able to fix the game properly, especially since many of the fixes rely on the work being done on the new engine itself. I'm hoping its the route they will take but they haven't confirmed anything other than another patch in the works.

If that is the path they take then I will purchase Battle of Moscow as I know it will help fund future improvements for Cliffs of Dover as well. If not then I'm just not interested in buying a game set in a theatre I'm just not as passionate about, while the theatre I really am interested in just gets left with the poor attempt it got.

There has been so many posts (including my own) from people unhappy with CoD stating that without a fixed version of that game they wouldn't buy a sequel. From that some are just venting, others are just trolling but behind the murk there are previously loyal fans who simply feel dis-enchanted to the point of 'I don't want to do this again'.

From the last post I have taken the view that the developers of this game are well meaning, after all there is a large shelf of sims that weren't what they were hyped up to be, got some minor tweaks post-release and then were left for dead. CoD was a master class in how not to do it but it is clear that MG intend to carry on and without a properly functioning game engine they can't. If they didn't use the already released game as a testbed for their fixes even I will dispair in them

I suppose it is fair to compare one abysmal release (RoF) with another (CloD). at least you get a point of reference on how bad a game is.

Ofc it wouldn't be fair to compare CloD's release to other successful sims such as the DCS series and BMS that were released the same year. I guess I was a bit spoiled then by those two releases that gave me fully working games that only needed bug fixes and not a total re-haul of the coding or maybe that's what customers should be expecting when buying a product.

I guess I'll be recommending CloD to other players how RoF veterans did to me - wait a few years until the game gets worked out and by then if you're still interested - and it works - then go for it. Right now save your cash...

...unless you find it in the bargain bin for $10 or something. Then it's totally worth it.

Again guys I have stayed out of the mudslinging on here but have watched. But I have to agree with the above poster and with respect to my fellow flyers I agree that it was buggy on release and needed major work. I can live with and respect that however I will not buy another game from Luthier until I am sure that it works.

I am not mad that it was released unfinished, however that being said I am furious that a year later with exception to the sound that I find amazing that nothing else is seeming to work. The fact that crossfire and the SLI situation still hasn't been fixed bothers me. And it bothers me that there has been no mention why this is still broken.

I supported Maddox Games and I have been around since FB. However this is not Maddox Games this is being run by Luither and I am not sure where the future will take us.

Just my two cents. I look forward to being called nuts as well.

Um...according to my calendar it is still well short of a year since CloD's release, even the early overseas one. Those of us who got it on Steam in the US without resorting to odd hoop-jumping have had it only 6 months or so.



Anyway, quite simply people are expecting too much. It took them 5 YEARS to release an unfinished mess that was barely ahead of Il-2 in many areas...a release that bizarrely appears LESS advanced than sneak preview films on the Il-2 46 DVD?? To expect those same people to fix it in just a few months to where it should've been is ingenuous at best.

There are quite simply two choices: accept it's going to be a long haul and let them keep working on patching the game along with concurrent BoM work and hope that they will integrate the 2 titles; or say %@%# it and bail. There is no point in hanging around and complaining if you've lost faith and don't believe they'll make good. Do you honestly feel some need to crusade and "spread the truth" about its shortcomings? Have you nothing better to do?
If on the flipside you've decided you're in for the marathon and will wait and see what happens before making a final judgement, neither praise nor insults will get anything done faster.



The Jedi Master

Oh, one last thing. To everyone who's said:
"I will not buy a sequel until the first is patched." (thereby implying that once the game is patched you will happily buy the sequel/expansion)

Have you actually thought through what your statement means to Luthier's team?

Case 1: for whatever reasons, the fixes aren't patched into CloD alone but incorporated only into BoM, whether as integration with CloD or as a standalone product ala DCS series. That means you won't buy BoM, so why should they care what you say?

Case 2: the patches ARE made for CloD to bring it up to date without having to buy BoM. You say "Oh, great" and then proceed to buy BoM, spending almost no time actually flying CloD before buying BoM. In other words, you've demanded Luthier's team do a lot of work and then on seeing they did it for free, you ignore it and buy the other stuff they did. So they did a ton of work for literally nothing as you don't use it, like sending a steak back to the kitchen for being undercooked, but when it does come out correct you decline to eat it and get pizza instead!

Where's the logic in that?

I'll bet anything that's what Luthier and Ubi are seeing too. If BoM can integrate with CloD like PF and 46 did with Il-2:FB (a question I'm sure that's purely on a technical level), then my guess is that we might see a free patch for CloD that will bring it up to BoM's level as the work will already be done, you'll just not get the BoM content with it unless you buy BoM. If patching is NOT feasible, like Il-2 couldn't be patched to FB but was a total separate install, I'm guessing there will be NO patch to bring CloD to BoM levels (although many other things may indeed get patched farther along before then) because the finances of it make no sense.


Now if you say "I will not CONSIDER buying BoM until CloD is fixed, and still may not buy BoM even if it is", your statement makes more sense, but actually provides even LESS incentive for them to fix CloD! If they've already lost future business from you, giving you more for free is pointless.





That's why I said I would buy BoM happily if it fixes CloDs problems and integrates with it because, frankly, I have no problem with "paying for a patch" IF it gives new content at the same time. To stand and say "no, the patch must be free" and then go ahead and buy BoM anyway as soon as your condition is satisfied is just illogical.




The Jedi Master

ahem,

Luthier told us, that big parts of the GFX engine are being rewritten. Do you really think, they try to fix something in an engine which is about to be scrapped at least in parts? Now THAT would be waste of resources. Same goes for the missing FSAA. And maybe the GFX engine is rewritten BECAUSE of these problems.