Quote:
Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES
That depends..
IMHO it would not be fair to compare BoB II's graphics to CoD graphics..
But I think it is 'ok' to compare BoB II's AI and campaign to CoDs! Note I said 'ok' not 'fair'.
Why?
Because something happened years ago.. online game play.. Since than there has been more and more 'resources' (time & money) devoted to online play than offline play. Some big game makers have enough 'resources' to do both.. But as we all know flight sims have limited 'resources' realitive to other games.. Thus they have to focus on the market demands.. And the sad truth of that is more people care about online gameplay against other human pilots than offline AI and campaigns
I miss the games like SWOTL and RB where the offline campaign pulled you in and made you feel apart of what was going on.. But to be honest, if I had to choose between the two I would pick online play over offline play wrt flight sims. Note I said if I had to choose, that is based on me knowing flight sims makers have limited 'resources'. It would be great to have both, but clearly that is not the case
Thus long story short.. It is not fair to compare BoB II's AI and Offline to CoD for the reasons I noted above.. Which is not to say that I think BoB II's AI is better, just pointing out that it is not fair IMHO to compare a flight sim who focus is on OFFLINE play such that they didn't even include ONLINE play to CoD who's focus, like so many modern sims, is on ONLINE play
Just my 2 cents
|
Firstly, has any definitive research been done on the proportions of online to offline players for an established, successful flight-sim like il-2? I suspect the numbers would be close, with possibly even a majority for offline. I would also say that the online crowd are more easily visible and high-profile, but whether that means they are more numerous I don't know. As Furbs says, for the sake of CoD I would hope that there are at least as many playing offline (or temporarily inactive but interested in future developments) as are currently online. Also, beware the self-fulfilling prophecy of settling for a poor offline experience with no campaign, losing all those interested in offline play, then concluding that the numbers are all online and that is all that matters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES
It is not fair to compare BoB II's AI and Offline to CoD for the reasons I noted above.. Which is not to say that I think BoB II's AI is better, just pointing out that it is not fair IMHO to compare a flight sim who focus is on OFFLINE play such that they didn't even include ONLINE play to CoD who's focus, like so many modern sims, is on ONLINE play
|
It's not about 'fairness' or even
comparing the two games for that matter. You get so defensive about CoD. This
isn't about saying game X is better than game Y. Here is the situation: CoD (fantastically wonderful as we all agree it is
) requires further development in several key areas. The question is what form should that development take? What sort of standard should we aim at? Someone suggests that a previous game did a good job in certain
limited aspects of its development and suggests that if CoD was developed along similar lines in those specific areas it might be really good.
It's just logic. Answer these questions:
1. Is COD currently perfect?
2. If not, which aspects would you like to see improved?
It seems in your world that anyone answering 'no' to the first question gets labelled as one of the 'glass half empty' crowd.