Quote:
Originally Posted by SlipBall
That's all good, but if people become to comfortable in their various IL-2 sand box's siming advancements could suffer.
We just had a golden opportunity for a flyable B-17, but sadly participation numbers were low.
|
The advancements will depend on developer/engine capabilities and funding, along with strong mod communities. Sims will become stagnant when development stops, or the community stops supporting the developments, but I don't see that happening any time soon even in this tiny genre, with two development teams, and a strong Mod community. The original IL-2 was a long term success because the development team, and mod community continually added more interesting stuff.
The B17 failed because of the small genre, and the hangover of Luthiers/Olegs long drawnout development of their new highly complex game engine. Today's combat flight sims are so complex, that they take so much more time, and money to develop, while the genre wants it sold cheap, and released yesterday. The complexity of the game play also has a detrimental effect on the number of gamers that want to dedicate the time to learn. Its no wonder that only combat flight sim enthusiast are making these games, while the genre will shat on them at any sign of a setback.
The COD development would have tested anyone patience, but thats what were going to need, unless there is some coding breakthrough that will allow complex game engines, and content to be developed quickly and efficiently. BOS should be OK in this regard as its only developing content for an established game engine. Time will tell how the ROF game engine can be tweaked, and handle WW2 complexities, but so far so good, as they slowly add content. The same holds true with DCS WW2 being developed on an established game engine. Their long term success will depend on how these games handle the amount of aircraft/objects required, offline gameplay, online multi-player gameplay, continued developer support/additional content, and mod community support.