Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games.

View Poll Results: Battle of France as add on?
Yes, will buy this. 55 58.51%
OK, if for free. 21 22.34%
No, looking forward to Eastern front. 18 19.15%
Voters: 94. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10  
Old 08-29-2012, 07:11 PM
klem's Avatar
klem klem is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,653
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandstone View Post
I think the reputation of CloD is now so poisonous that it would be better for 1C to put as much distance between BoM and CloD as possible. A simple statement that CloD is finished would probably be for the best, accompanied by a radically different branding for BoM. The current state of play is not doing 1C's reputation any good at all and a clean break would at least give them a chance to put it behind them as a noble failure and move on to something more worthwhile. A clean break might also give them the chance to make any necessary personnel changes.
There are two issues. Or parts if you want to follow the structure of the CoD installation parts folders.

One is the core content which should benefit CoD even if we have to wait for BoM and merge it because it should have the same core structure. This is where 1C seem to be spending almost all of their efforts.

The other is the much less complex issue of CoD content, or bob as it is in the file structure. These things are not difficult to fix, primarily FMs and DMs i.e. the objects unique to bob/CoD.
Look at the bob folder .SFS files.
3do - not sure what this is. 3d models with DM modules?
buildings - who really cares at this stage?
ground - ditto
humans - ditto
maps - they've already told us the map won't be changed and its acceptable
plane - MOST important. The FMs are way off and DMs are not all ok (flaming flying 109s)
speech - who cares
and so on.
I don't know what the other files are for but you can see where I'm going. We have an environment which could probably be left alone and a core game that will be fixed. However, we have CoD/bob aircraft that badly need fixing.

If 1C don't deliver on the CoD/bob content (i.e. aircraft that fly as they should) they will have failed miserably for the sake of a minimal amount of work. It will remain laughable as a representation of the BoB and for what? Remember, almost all of the fixes needed are core fixes not CoD/bob fixes.

CoD, or SOW-BoB was to have been the jewel in Oleg Maddox's new flight combat simulation. That's why it was never allowed in IL-2 '46. It was the iconic air battle, the almost set piece of the Douhet theories and with only one other Victory-by-Air battle like it, Malta. The pacific battles needed air power but were not of the same nature.

If such simple fixes are ignored and the iconic air battle of the war is left in the mud the reputation of CoD and 1C will be more than poisonous.

IMHO of course.
__________________
klem
56 Squadron RAF "Firebirds"
http://firebirds.2ndtaf.org.uk/



ASUS Sabertooth X58 /i7 950 @ 4GHz / 6Gb DDR3 1600 CAS8 / EVGA GTX570 GPU 1.28Gb superclocked / Crucial 128Gb SSD SATA III 6Gb/s, 355Mb-215Mb Read-Write / 850W PSU
Windows 7 64 bit Home Premium / Samsung 22" 226BW @ 1680 x 1050 / TrackIR4 with TrackIR5 software / Saitek X52 Pro & Rudders
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.