I doubt it would be the end of CoD, maybe. It depends on how the developer "uses" the complaints. They can either disregard the community or take the complaints and use them for the greater good.

Example: http://blog.bioware.com/2012/03/21/4108/

To date I think the guys have been doing the best with what they've got. It's a small team developing an extremely complex piece of software, compare that to the FPS genre where you have a huge dev team working on mainly eye-candy.

Could you be more specific? AFAIK those people that weren`t satisfied demanded their refund @Ubi and got it. So if you have something else in mind please share.

I doubt that UBI were in the position to force anything. The main IC publisher would decide and provide a copy for UBI to distribute to the west. Although UBI could demand that the IC publisher/developer provide an epilepsy filter before they would distribute the sim in the West.

SO.... UBI named the sim Cliffs of Dover, much to the upset of Maddox Games and the sim (western version) was force released by UBI. The original title for the sim was; "Storm of War: the Battle of Brittain".

You (et al) keep on complaining about lack of communication... fair enough - why should they, when greeted with hostility.

You (at al) keep on banging on about business and "management issue"... well good again. Who creates the sim and who publishes the sim?

and further good for you (et al) for just limiting the whining to this board... though, is it getting you (et al) anywhere?

But you can`t provide anything factual, can you? I thought this was pretty clear, but I may be mistaking. The epilepsy thing seems to be clear. Do we at least know that the release was forced? If it wasn`t then I can`t say I`d be debating the cause at all. Maybe we`re again short of information on this one.

I think about a possible penalty clause inserted into the contract. Of course I can only speculate about it: I know it since in my job penalty clauses are usually inserted for an accurate delivery date, minimal performance required and of course the obligatoriness of accurate support too.

I'm scared about it.

Well... very soon i'll not be "divided" anymore, i'll go back to fly choppers:

http://www.arma3.com/full/wp-content...ot_1105_14.jpg

I believe the "graphics engine" of ArmA 3 will have at least FXAA at the release and a little less stuttering...

Bye!

Was Ubi the publisher in Russia too, or is it 1C? I remember that it was released at start, and not in the Western market (as for the US market...)
And where did you read about that forced release?

Do you read hostility in my words? :-|

The publisher needs to be aware of the state of the product, because of a matter of his professional image. Ubisoft did a hole in the water with SH5 too, and infact look at their image: it's an hated publisher and many customers avoid their games (not only since the release of CloD and SH5).
I found it strange that people kept asking at them about the game and they didn't know anything...

About the whining and complaining: I'm totally for it, both as customer and developer. Constructive whining is needed to improve the product (no one is perfect). I remember some days after the release there were guys loving the sound of the engines (the old IL2's one)... why should they improve the sound engine then? Why should they avoid the "engine radar" if nobody is complaining about it (and I did a lot: it was one of my battle horses :-) )

We don't know if they are reading the message board... if they read then they could at least acknowledge the requests/complains. If not then keep whining to so that the problem stays alive and it's not forgotten. Whining does not kill anyone and there is always the "ignore" function that so few are actually using.

Of course sometimes I end with feeding the trolls like today... but I've had some fun: if they are not banned than lets exploit them. :D

This is one thing I don't understand: attack the offensive posters, report them, its' ok... but let the people complain if they want, just ignore them. :-)

IMO whining about the whiners is really damaging the forum... Live and let live.

I have no numbers, but I'm fairly sure and makes sense that COD's main financer is the IC Company, so its highly doubtfull UBISOFT which is only the western publisher would be in any position to force the early release. While the IC Company certainly would be in the postion to end financial support for IC Maddox Games COD development which is under the umbrella of the IC Company.

If they can actually be seen as simulators then RO:Ostfront and RO2 have divided their community, most than the IL2's one, since in RO there are far less options and different styles of playing/simulating.

There was a war into the tripwire forum...