I made an promise to a forum moderator, I won't rock the boat upon lifting my unfounded ban. So my comment here is on this "alpha" patch:

At least the patch was way more lenient than on WW2OL players back in early days. Their beta patch did wipe out unfortunate downloaders hard drives... :D

Cheers! :)

You are trying to make your point using outdated information similar to DX11 case. Devs made a different decision on May 05, 2012 as goes from the patch notes.

BTW information that luthier mentioned that DX11 will be their priority one year ago is also outdated.

When time passes different decisions are made and priorities change. It is logical, reasonable and in general clever to take time and changes into account, isn't it? Without logic being used it is not an argument but trolling.

Hey Tree, it's an alpha patch. Read BlackSix's post.

I guess they're testing Geometry Shaders, as that's the only real reason to go from dx9 to dx10.

Funnily enough - it's a big improvement performance wise for me too - also with a gtx260. No crashes either. (Maybe some of you folks who splashed out on gtx680s recently might be able to pick one up on EBay? :cool: ;) )

I tend to agree with Freycinet (and Ataros, etc) - people need to get their heads around the fact that they have (with another late decision apparently) decided to release an alpha mainly for purpose of getting an expanded user test base to massively increase feedback about bugs. They have concluded that they weren't making good enough progress with a small team of testers.

But, I think where they have screwed up this time is (yet again) in communication. (Ideally) there should have been advance warning of exactly what was going to be released. With everyone on tenterhooks eagerly expecting THE PATCH, to say right at the release that there was changed plans and what we in fact were getting was an alpha obviously didn't really cut through the excitement and eagerness to download and install (labelling the post title as 'beta' didn't help either). There really should have been advance notice and a WARNING not to install unless you were willing to take part in the testing process.

Don't want to be too critical - expect it was all a bit last minute, seat of the pants as usual, but ideally they should have planned/communicated it better.

For those having big problems with the patch the solution is obvious (and easy) - let Steam rewind the game back to its previous state. If you were enjoying it before keep playing the old until the new patch is done. If you weren't enjoying it, play ROF, DCS, or whatever you were into.

For the rest of us, let's do what we can to provide feedback as asked on the (many) issues still to be fixed. That way we all benefit.

So very true.

That's pretty much it. If anyone is comfortable with the above, apply the patch and test it out a bit.

If you don't like it and don't want to keep testing, just go back to the previous version (verify local game file integrity through Steam and it will roll back your version).

I suggest that everyone should enable crash logs, clear their documents\1c softclub\IL-2 CoD\cache folder, apply the patch and fly with it for a couple of times. Just a couple. If you crash, just send the crash logs to 1c and go back to the previous version. If you don't and you like the new patch, keep flying.

Fly, crash and send the logs, then go back to the previous version if you want to ;)



They said so, but many were constantly asking for some early scraps to cut their teeth into. They got it, half-baked or not, so they better start chewing or don't ever bring up the subject again.

You see, they can't expect to change their set of "requirements" depending on whatever suits their usual point scoring and "tit-for-tat" argumentation and expect that
a) nobody will call them out on their self-contradictions and
b) they will maintain any sort of credibility.

To afford them that luxury is to afford them the luxury of considering the rest of us idiots and frankly, i don't know how the rest of the community feels but i'm not going to do them such a favor.


Also...

[Moderating mode on]
This is a forum with people of different ages and background, not a small gathering between long-time mates at the pub. You keep doing this and ignoring any pointers to correct this behaviour, so i'll say it in a way you'll understand. Pleas sir, mind your ******* language :-P
[moderating mode off]

Nothing personal, i just don't want you wondering again if i personally dislike you, when in reality it's just your infraction points adding up to another ban :grin:

Tree my friend don't you feel like beating a dead donkey sometimes? It could be good as anti- stress but it looks seriously useless. Just my humble advice.

Cheers!

Important
 

I received this tip from different users at the forum, and this proved to work:

For those with problems starting the game after the patch, don't use Winzip. Try to uncompress the patch with 7Zip or WinRar.
Winzip apparently works, but the result is that the game crashes right after starting it.

Thanks Bounder! and David198502 for advising. Devs, I think that this is important to be noted on the first post.
Now for the testing!

I am very disappointed in this alpha patch. I thought it would be a proper alpha and I would get to do proper testing and send crashlogs and stuff. Apart from the graphic things I now miss like damage from MG hits, I have not any problems or crashes to report. My fps is about same, but stutters much less. I can't see any difference in FMs as I am not expert to spot them. Also I can't get wingman commands to work still, but that is probably me - how to tell if they are working or not? Someone has a good test case?

Anyway, call this an alpha patch? Shame on you! Is beta at least...

;(

Oh, my machine Acer i7 laptop gtx 560m 2G vram, 4g system ram

Huh? :confused:

this is well spotted