Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - Pacific Fighters Bombed

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- IL-2 Sturmovik (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=98)

- - Pacific Fighters Bombed - inadequate maps (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=2851)

Quote:

Originally Posted by csThor (Post 38756)

I don't think this is the way to operate for a business enterprise as Maddox Games. All they'd get is a zillion posts of people wanting different stuff - the really important stuff would get buried under loads of "Oleg, I want ..." and "Oleg, gimme now ..." posts (even with the strictest moderation rules you could think of). They should certainly use this board here, posting a simple "We need help with this and this field. Who's up for cooperation?" and getting these people to act as kind-of external contributors.

The basic reason why I am so against this "involve everyone and his dog and do it publicly" is the experience Il-2 gave me. All of Oleg's posts simply upped the (already ridiculous) expectancy level by another notch. He's playing it much closer to his chest with SoW so I figure the procedure I outlined would work much better. And it doesn't require to check the boards every day.

I think the most important thing is for Oleg to get the information. THe man isn't stupid. He can glean the treasure from the tripe, that's one of the ways our intelligence serves us. LOL

Tater::

Quote:

That's why I prefer simply not arbitrarily hobbling the map tools to Xhundred by Yhundred km in size.

Then people who know and care can simply create the maps. Oleg, et al can concentrate on what they do best, planes, FMs, etc.

Agreed. Aircraft is what cfs developers do best.

The terrain seems like secondary importance to the developers (not just Oleg, all developers), but not the customers who use the product.

I think every sim that allowed 3rd Party maps had modders make far better terrains than the developers. Aircraft might be a different story. Developers and their artists make great cockpits for example, and they are probably the hardest thing to do of all.

Yeah, look at slovakia. The guys made places they HIKE TO. They want it to fool themselves.

I'f I were to redo hawaii, aside from all the obvious Pearl Harbor changes (a simple google image search would have provided the devs aerial photos taken just days before the attack instead of the POS PH we got), I'd want hanalei bay (where we rent a house on the beach) to be as close as I could get. Just for joyride flights, lol.

If I were to do the bombadier school (using B-25s as in RL) that they did here in Albuquerque, you can bet the canyons up from my home would be at the bleeding edge of what the engine allowed.

tater
tater

Wow, such dedication here. Hell, I'm just glad I can hop into a plane and have such a top-rate experience. I'm not worried about the historical accuracy as much as the immersive effect of the sim on my senses. Not that I don't care: just given the choice, I see the glass as half full when it comes to the accuracy of the maps and missions: it's definately better than no maps or missions.

I'd hope that 3rd parties could/would make map expansion packs to cover areas of interest in greater detail. But then again, exactly how many people really care? Enough to cover the expense of the development? Care to spend $50+ per map expansion? Maybe that is why we don't see this kind of stuff filling the shelves. BTW IMHO, the AAA and M4T sites rock: any IL-2 fan should be grateful!!!!