Friday 2010-10-22 Dev. update and Discussion

[NLS61]

I was drooling over the latest screenshots again and there is this “gun camera” switch.
Currently it’s in the off position, might it be possible to put it on?
Maybe?

Niels

[=BLW=Pablo]

Hello everyone!

I saw this site with the BOB SOW for sale, is something true, or is it a mistake?

http://www.play.com/Games/PC/4-/1021...n/Product.html

~S~

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox

Its why we plan third party useful tools for the the makers of add-ons. Currently it useful only for us. Becasue we have no time to finalise them for external use before the sim will be out of gate
I was learning experience of MS with third party and get some info what is possible to give and what is not.
There are a lot of contradictions with this... especially due to online gameplay.
Sometime incorrect politics with add-ons may totally destroy the gameplay online.
The goal is to satisfy both sides:
1. these who want totally fair gameplay online with no cheating
2. these that want other set of objects, aircraft, ships, etc...

Trust me for the combat, not for the civil aircraft sim, it is very complex task to develope the code and to satisfy then all groups of interest.

CFS would be more popular with the investment power of MS, but from the beginning they did a lot of mistakes in this area.

In the other hand we can't anymore make everything ourselves - to get 3D from third party, to rework it and then to progam it, like it was with Il-2 series...it was total oveloading of our team. That all should be done on the third party side with the limits that we defining. And limits will be. For some parts - strong, for some - nothing in limit.

There is impossible to compare the MS FS third party development type with the Combat sim additions of third party. The main difference - Combat term, that defining the rules for inclusion in the game some new content by third parties. Gameplay of MS FS and any of combat flight sim is very different and its a problem to go by MS FS experience as a copy.

Exactly...

[major_setback]

Originally Posted by OLEG

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox View Post
Its why we plan third party useful tools for the the makers of add-ons. Currently it useful only for us. Becasue we have no time to finalise them for external use before the sim will be out of gate
I was learning experience of MS with third party and get some info what is possible to give and what is not.
There are a lot of contradictions with this... especially due to online gameplay.
Sometime incorrect politics with add-ons may totally destroy the gameplay online.
The goal is to satisfy both sides:
1. these who want totally fair gameplay online with no cheating
2. these that want other set of objects, aircraft, ships, etc...

Trust me for the combat, not for the civil aircraft sim, it is very complex task to develope the code and to satisfy then all groups of interest.

CFS would be more popular with the investment power of MS, but from the beginning they did a lot of mistakes in this area.

In the other hand we can't anymore make everything ourselves - to get 3D from third party, to rework it and then to progam it, like it was with Il-2 series...it was total oveloading of our team. That all should be done on the third party side with the limits that we defining. And limits will be. For some parts - strong, for some - nothing in limit.

There is impossible to compare the MS FS third party development type with the Combat sim additions of third party. The main difference - Combat term, that defining the rules for inclusion in the game some new content by third parties. Gameplay of MS FS and any of combat flight sim is very different and its a problem to go by MS FS experience as a copy..

Originally Posted by Bearcat

Exactly...

I'm extremely optimistic about the situation.
I think that the difference between combat and non-combat aircraft modelling will be overcome without a problem. Shockwave (if they decide...) for instance, know that have to develop a damage model and working guns etc. or they won't be allowed to sell their add-ons. It's a big incentive!

Civilian (modern) aircraft makers on the other hand won't need to do so much in the way of damage modelling.

But the main reason why I think we will see third party companies making add-ons is because we will all want to fly lots of aircraft is SoW, and otherwise we will be stuck with a small plane-set for a long time...I think we will be craving for good add-ons. And willing to pay for them if made by third parties.

We want extra planes. If the weather/turbulence etc. is as accurate as we hope then anyone who flies in a plane sim will want the same.

[JG53Harti]

Originally Posted by major_setback

Well, look at all the add-ons for FSX that do actually feature complex start-up procedures. There is quite a big market for them.

I would like see you on a DF-Server 50 enemies over you airfield and you must press button 1, button 2, move lever X ten times.... you will be dead and have to start again
Press button 1 again, 2 again and dead again
You will be frustrated and you will never start the game again, because Oleg has not build in a quick start button


So in this way I prefer the one-button-startup

[ZaltysZ]

Originally Posted by JG53Harti

I would like see you on a DF-Server 50 enemies over you airfield and you must press button 1, button 2, move lever X ten times.... you will be dead and have to start again

Not all servers run missions where bases are only 10km apart and the only AA present is the one, which has been placed by mistake and mission creator has been too lazy to "fix" that.

[Azimech]

Agreed. Not every detail or system needs to be in the initial release, I loved it how IL2 growed with every patch. It gives the devs time and receive more detailed feedback from the community and a lot of questions that are asked now will be answered by the product itself when we play it.

[Oleg Maddox]

Originally Posted by ZaltysZ

Not all servers run missions where bases are only 10km apart and the only AA present is the one, which has been placed by mistake and mission creator has been too lazy to "fix" that.

98% would like quick action playing online. This isn't only in sim industry but also for any game. Doesn't matter is is shooter or even adventure game (different sort of action, but anyway they want it right after the start the game).

the other 2% asking some uniquie features that dislike most. Including starup procedure.

Will be fair till end: Startup procedure don't make money that we need for the continues of development. Instead it is eating money and resouces of development. There are many other things that are way more important for making successful on the market combat fligth sim.

I need to listen market, experinece for the last 20 years of my business and plan my team work that to do not overload them with the things that don't bring money in future comparing to the investments in such development. Just will repeat: complete check out and starup procedure - this is for third parties for some of aircraft... But I'm sure that for all content of the sim even third parties will be unable to make these things... or they will only do withourt adding of the new content...

Trust me. I know well what I talk.

And look please back to Il-2. Still no one sim has so many things modelled in one combat sim. One could maybe, repating the Il-2 itself with a bit better graphics engine... but it will be repeating, not the new things, like will bring the new series from us in future.

[Flanker35M]

S!

So the hopes of certain procedures are in the hands of 3rd party. Fully understandable and agreeable at this point of the SoW development and situation.

I just hope that we do NOT have this IL-2 style "no penalty at all" engine thing in higher realism settings. I could care less of the arcade settings, as long as realism can be adjusted then all is OK

The point I tried to make is that SoW will have a high fidelity modelling of damage, flight physics and systems. So will the SYSTEM modelling take in account the careless use of the engine for example? There was a reason why the engines needed to be warmed before take-off or keep the ground idle/taxi times short to avoid overheat.

So question is: If I start the engine with a button, do I have to wait for the oil and fuel pressure/temps to stabilize BEFORE I can slam the throttle to the firewall for take-off OR can I just press "start engine" and slam the throttle to the stopper WITHOUT ANY penalty as in IL-2?

[Oleg Maddox]

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

S!

So the hopes of certain procedures are in the hands of 3rd party. Fully understandable and agreeable at this point of the SoW development and situation.

I just hope that we do NOT have this IL-2 style "no penalty at all" engine thing in higher realism settings. I could care less of the arcade settings, as long as realism can be adjusted then all is OK

The point I tried to make is that SoW will have a high fidelity modelling of damage, flight physics and systems. So will the SYSTEM modelling take in account the careless use of the engine for example? There was a reason why the engines needed to be warmed before take-off or keep the ground idle/taxi times short to avoid overheat.

So question is: If I start the engine with a button, do I have to wait for the oil and fuel pressure/temps to stabilize BEFORE I can slam the throttle to the firewall for take-off OR can I just press "start engine" and slam the throttle to the stopper WITHOUT ANY penalty as in IL-2?

No penalty at all just with simple settings without CEM (Complex engine managment)