In some ways yes, maybe.

(This isn't totally facile and stirring, before some of you run with it as a red flag).

On the one hand it is an attempt to keep the 'detailed' ww2 air combat genre going. But because it was the only game trying to do so in this way, and because it had a famous older brother, then expectations were higher. And were raised by the devs/publishers (whatever is said).

But of course, it also half-realised, badly implemented, poorly sustained, and has a killed a lot of the momentum and goodwill created by the first one, to the point where you have to ask yourself if they would have been better off killing it off before release.

It wouldn't have attracted so much debate and polarising if it had been half-decent.

So 'yes' isn't as facetious as it sounds. Also, the investors and bean-counters might well have a different view of the company and its products, notwithstanding allt he personnel changes and apparent revolving-door staff policy, to say nothing of the sheer ineptitude in many areas - which are ongoing.

In fact, it's all done a great deal of harm in lots of ways, some of it probably quite long term. God only knows of what inesvters/publishers and devs sitting on the side-lines have thought. Has it attracted many of them to the idea of new Titles/publishing models...?

Ben