Friday 2010-07-23 Dev. update and Discussions

[The Kraken]

Originally Posted by zapatista

your off on your own tangent there, i never mentioned falcon and it has nothing to do with what we were discussing

for microsoft it is easy, and good business practice at he moment, to put some non priority projects back on the shelf and cut the money it spends on them during "the economic crisis". its also very easy for them to revive it later should they choose to. ms flightsim still has a lot of legs in it, since only the latest hardware can at long last run fs-x fluidly with decent scenery on a high resolution, so it is not as if an imminent upgrade was/is needed.

The main issue with Microsoft from how I see it, is twofold: first they have all but abandoned the PC games market, despite occasional claims of the contrary. Second is the classic ROI problem: even if their flight sim line is profitable, it binds too much capital for a substantial time. And of course it's a niche market that is only getting smaller, so there's not much growth potential. Stockholders don't like that. I don't see that changing in the near future either so I guess they are out of that market for good.

Which does of course open opportunities for other develoeprs. I appreciate that Oleg is going against these trends, even though I assume SOW won't be "perfect" on release. Feel free to prove me wrong though

Originally Posted by SlipBall

You surprise me Tree, your not helping much I thought you were in a bigger hurry than me, that is, to get this sim to market...I say, tweak it after release!!!!!!!

Aw mate I would love to see this sim out asap, but in truth it really doesn't matter how long it takes if its not going to be dissappointing in any way. The frustrations have always been for me when Oleg would would hint at a release date that was a year away and then when we got there we would find out its going to be another year etc, etc.

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

Aw mate I would love to see this sim out asap, but in truth it really doesn't matter how long it takes if its not going to be dissappointing in any way. The frustrations have always been for me when Oleg would would hint at a release date that was a year away and then when we got there we would find out its going to be another year etc, etc.

Yes, I hear you...was, and continues to be very frustrating. I fear that I'm loosing my youthful reflexes, and will be an easy kill for philip.ed.

[Redwan]

In the in game render the fire effect should look more like this photoshoped screen. And if it's so, the photorealism could be quite good !

[Viikate]

Originally Posted by Aed

So.. why U still not finished 4.10.. if U have paradize conditions? +)))

Sa
Working for free on your own free time after real job.

[Richie]

This is the video that got my hopes up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMFFQ...eature=related

[Jaws2002]

Im really bumped about the troubles with releasing the templates for the skins.

Would it be possible to make some sort of "skin viewer" (a simple 3d viewer aplication where we can see the texture on the 3d model)?
It may be too time consuming tho. It has to come with the 3d models of the planes and possibly lighting engine.

Anyway you guys know better what you can do and what you can't.

[Necrobaron]

Have we forgotten last week's update? I thought the flames looked pretty darn good there. I assumed what was shown in this week's update was either from an earlier build or taken on a lower graphical setting.

[Tone71]

I am not new to the IL-2 series and I am not new to these forums but (as you can see from my total posts) I am new to voicing my opinions; I am now beginning to wish that I had never started reading these responses to the weekly updates.

The gfx of BoB:SoW will not please everyone 100%. The gameplay of BoB:SoW will not please everyone 100%. BoB:SoW as a 'game' will not please everyone 100%. We must all learn to accept comprimise and the final word rests with Oleg.

On the subject of the gfx effects; do we want them to look realistic, or should they look spectacular ('Hollywood', if you will)? The flight model, true to life, or playable?

I know many of you want a 'simulator' with life-like effects and FM but others want a playable 'game', that's fun and yet looks good. Can we not all agree that these are mutually exclusive and compomises must be made?

Imagine a realistic Formula 1 racing sim, the most true to life available. This would be neither fun nor playable, for all but maybe a small percentage of gamers that actually race Carts or Formula 3.

C'mon guys, let's not argue amongst ourselves but keep it to constructive criticism and enjoy the updates. Can we call a truce and just enjoy the forthcoming sequel to a game that we currently all enjoy, be it modded or otherwise.

[daHeld]

Originally Posted by GOA_Potenz

isn't mysterius at all
just it seem that many diferent
progamers work on that code
and you diferent functions from
diferent people

Of course it does look like that. That's because it's the way things are done in a development team. Every coder has his own style, and that's exactly why the code is COMMENTED. Those comments are there so that one coder can carry on from where the last one left off.

@AED

Pleas mind your manners. People wouldn't get angry with you, if you were posting in a more "grown up" way.