Quote:
Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw*
The stupidest thing about the decision to spend all their efforts on an Eastern expansion, is that the company could have fixed their current game, and developed a Western based expansion using most of the current planeset for less effort and money.
The current planeset plus one or two new planes could have been used for a Malta 1940-early 41 Campaign, a Greek 1941 Campaign and a BoB Nightbombing Campaign with the main requirement being maps and a few cockpits. A Malta map would be very simple and easy, being mostly water, a 1940 Greek Map would give the opportunity to use the mountainous terrain feature capabilities of the game. A BoB nightbombing campaign doesn't even require a map.
The only cockpits needed for the three campaigns would be for the following:
CR42
BR20
Defiant
Beaufighter
Gladiator
Wellington
The only new planes which might be required would be the Swordfish, Potez 633 or PZL-24.
The above could be accomplished with far less time and money investment than a whole new Eastern Front game.
The decisions which have been taken by the 1C Maddox Team in the development and design of this new series have been shortsighted and without logic. They have alienated their former strong customer base with these decisions. It is time they took a second look at what their rationale has been, and set a new course.
|
Ah, but you forget that 1C's home market is saying the same about the ETO and MTO ... their prefered theater is the Eastern Front. And aparently - even though this is speculation on my part - the deal between the russian state and 1C to produce computer games about russian history (= $$$) did have a role in that decision as well.
I fully agree that it was premature to switch development resources to new additions, especially since a multitude of things would really fill out the BoB theater (more artillery, ships of any kind etc) and that it would have made more sense to do that because these additions would lay the groundwork for most later thematic additions.