Zuti MDS Still Not Ready For Prime Time.

[ZaltysZ]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

I'll never get this point, sorry. Even you try to ask for the customers/community if they can live with these glitches? I can.

Because things are not done in this way. There is quality control and it won't be passed on things, which are expected to cause glitches if they are to be implemented half baked. They will either be done right or won't be done at all.

[ElAurens]

Quality control is everything to a successful project, no matter what it is.

That is a pretty simple concept, that few, not all mind you, but few none the less, modders cannot grasp.

Quality third party work is a wonderful thing. But it is indeed rare.

I hope that the major bugs that I still find in the MDS, now that I'm using it more and more, can be worked out. Properly implemented it can be a wonderful addition to the sim. But if it means banging my head against the wall every time I try to make a new mission, well, then it's better to skip it.

Now that I've stepped up my mission building I find that saving my work in the FMB is FUBAR if I have more than three airbases on the map. Any base added after the original three will not have their info saved. This happens in 1.12 and 1.13.

I hate bugs.

[|ZUTI|]

Pointless. Just pointless. I can finally see what some users here are all about.

[LoBiSoMeM]

Originally Posted by |ZUTI|

Pointless. Just pointless.

+1 regards my easy request - and always ignored as point of discussion - of bigger than 90º FOV implemented in IL-2 core for widescreen users... Maybe a gigantic bug will jump out of my screen and kill me if this change was made, I don't know.

I give up! Gimme cool skis!

[Fafnir_6]

Originally Posted by |ZUTI|

Pointless. Just pointless. I can finally see what some users here are all about.

Hello,

Please don't let it get to you. The vast majority of mod users love your work and soon stock IL-2 users will love it too.

Cheers & respect!

Fafnir_6

[KG26_Alpha]

Originally Posted by |ZUTI|

Pointless. Just pointless. I can finally see what some users here are all about.

Yes

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

Well, "massive work" if you want no glitches at all, and I can understad that. He's a perfeccionist. And his team is working in a NEW TITLE WITH FULL 6DOF SUPPORT. Keep this in mind. DT is working in an "old" sim engine. And this "old" engine can handle 6DOF, but at some cost.

To the folk who said about 3D models, please don't assume everyone who talks with you is an idiot about some subject you believe you are some "mastermind" of universe, be more humble.

It's just a point of view issue:

- Some people believe isn't up to IL-2 standards have 6DOF with glitches, because the cockpits was moddled with 3DOF parameters in mind;

- Some people believe isn't up to IL-2 standards don't have 6DOF at all.

And I DOUBT any serious simmer like to fly without 6DOF. Please make official patches but stop assuming that peole are stupid. I'm the final user of the sim, the customer. If the "official opinion" goes opposite of the final consumer, it's a really strange marketing strategy.

Thanks!

While i partially agree with you, you are also making a mistake yourself. Just because you, me and a lot of other people want an official 6DOF implementation and would be happy to live with the occasional glitch, it doesn't mean that this opinion is shared by everyone

I think the current situation is very good. We have officially produced and tested content being released which we know will always work well. If we want to make some compromises in quality or resource use, we also have the chance to use other, non-official content as well. However, just because i am willing to read documentation to try to make it work and live with the occasional glitch, it doesn't mean that this view is shared by everyone in the community.

Like i always say, choice is a good thing. Just like i would be disappointed if suddenly TD locked the game and made mods non-working, i believe there are thousands of users who would be disappointed as well if they were forced to learn the technicalities of maintaining a mod installation or had to live with features that are not done to an industrial standard. Forcing my opinion on them is just as bad as them forcing it on me.

In that sense, i believe TD is doing the right thing. They spend their time on implementing changes that need access to original coding resources to work well and fluidly, like mission triggers, radio navigation, guided weapons and radar.

I'm sure some prodigy modder could do it too, but it's better if you have the game's developer helping you. Doing it on your own would present more problems and the solution would be harder to achieve due to the lack of official resources.

Since this is what this thread is about let's use this example, just look at the progression of Zuti's awesome work. It's not that Zuti can't deliver a flawless MDS version, the guy is obviously a very smart and dedicated fellow and i believe he can. So why are people having problems with MDS? Simple, because when Zuti started working on MDS he didn't have Oleg Maddox to tell him all the inside info and little secrets of the game engine's code.
If he had access to that information, i bet we'd have an all-in-one MDS version with dynamic online campaigns by now. Adding a new flyable might be time consuming, what with the 3d modelling and flight model research, but now people know how to do this. Adding new features and mechanics the original engine was never intended to support however is a totally different type of work, the more help you have from the people who originally wrote that code the better you will do.

That's the advantage of DT, they have access to the developer. And since the developer asks for something in exchange, they have to stick by the standards he asks of them, or they would risk losing that channel of communication.

So, TD is focusing on implementing new game mechanics, with the occasional new flyable or fixes to an old one done at a very high standard thrown into the mix.
They are also open to making mods official, as long as the modders are willing to bring their work within the specs requested by Oleg Maddox. Finally, they leave the door open to the rest of the modding community to do as they please and the users to choose what they want to run in their installations. This gives us users total freedom of choice to tailor our installations to what we want to do with IL2, which is not only downright awesome, but also contrary to the way most gaming software companies treat their customers today. We get all this stuff for free, while other people have to pay for individual units in a strategy game, individual maps in an FPS, individual armor sets in an RPG or individual aircraft in their sims. Wanting more is good, it's what drives the hobby forward, but let's have some perspective here as well, shall we?

I think this is the best compromise. I'm not saying TD or the modders are better/worse codders. All i'm saying is that TD has access to in-house development tools and data, so it makes sense for them to work on the stuff that need these resources more, as well as use these resources to help modders "transform" unofficial game mechanics enhancements like MDS into official ones.

You don't need Oleg Maddox to tell you how a 109 looks like if you know where to look for technical drawings, but you need him to tell you how he coded that part of the game 10 years ago if you want to add new game mechanics, because it might conflict with what you are trying to do.
It's one thing to create a new slot flyable and another thing to cram new gameplay mechanics and features into a 10 year old engine, doing the second one benefits much more from having the "secret" knowledge of the developer himself than the first one.

I wouldn't mind at all if TD released updated cockpits, in fact i would be grateful, but i don't need them to . If i want to fly a fw190 with high resolution cockpit textures, 6DOF and no cockpit bar i already have that with the mods. It's better to let them work on the things that modders won't do due to a lack of the necessary in-house resources, or use their insider information to help transform the best of these mods, like MDS, into official additions to the core game engine.

I don't see this situation as competition between TD and modders, i see it as making the best allocation of those talented community members, both TD and modders, according to the tools they have at their disposal.

Remember, just because some features are important to you and me doesn't mean they are important to everyone. Or they might be, but others are even more important for them. Sure, widescreen support would be a very good feature, but i believe there are hundreds of people out there who would like it but still consider something else a bigger priority. For example, i have a 16:10 monitor and a TrackIR, so for me, it's not such a big deal to lose some of that vertical rendering. However, for someone else who flies without a TrackIR, it is going to be a big deal and guess what, we would both be right
When you say that TD's priorities are wrong, it looks like you are trying to speak on behalf of the entire community and that is in poor taste because frankly, there are other people around here that have totally different priorities than you and me.

Widescreen support, MDS, new flyables, new game mechanics, we all agree that all these things are desirable new features. This is the part of the argument that's based on logic and we can more or less say what is "true" and "false".
However, deciding the priorities of what feature should come first at the expense of the other ones is the "personal opinion and taste" part. Right and wrong doesn't apply to this, because even when all of the people here will like these features, the majority will like different things the most and other things not so much.

[LoBiSoMeM]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

Remember, just because some features are important to you and me doesn't mean they are important to everyone. Or they might be, but others are even more important for them. Sure, widescreen support would be a very good feature, but i believe there are hundreds of people out there who would like it but still consider something else a bigger priority. For example, i have a 16:10 monitor and a TrackIR, so for me, it's not such a big deal to lose some of that vertical rendering. However, for someone else who flies without a TrackIR, it is going to be a big deal and guess what, we would both be right

I fly using FreeTrack and all the others folks who fly online with me believes wider FOV into IL-2 core will be great. Widescreen monitors are default today.

And the point here is: IT'S SIMPLE TO DO, if you have access to code and dev support.

Why don't include that? And why the subject is always ignored by TD? I don't understand.

I'm OK if something will cause a big trouble and work to be putted in IL-2, but simples things, it's beyond reason.

In what world better skis on some plane are a priority in a patch and widescreen full support isn't?!?!

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

IT'S SIMPLE TO DO

Who says that's true? do you code, or are you just guessing? Coding is not simple.

[klem]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

While i partially agree with you, you are also making a mistake yourself. Just because you, me and a lot of other people want an official 6DOF implementation and would be happy to live with the occasional glitch, it doesn't mean that this opinion is shared by everyone

I think the current situation is very good. We have officially produced and tested content being released which we know will always work well. If we want to make some compromises in quality or resource use, we also have the chance to use other, non-official content as well. However, just because i am willing to read documentation to try to make it work and live with the occasional glitch, it doesn't mean that this view is shared by everyone in the community......................................... .....

Well summed up BD.

The restrictions placed on TD means they will never deliver in IL-2 the wider expectations of a 'current Simming community', too much work is involved. That community is served by the modders in the rare circumstances of even being able to blend in TDs work.

Those vehemently anti-mod are trapped between what TD are able to deliver (for the reasons BD gave) and what they may be enjoying in other sims. Their choice.

You only have to look at Hyperlobby to see the extent of interest in the mods and that is a fact of life even Oleg has to live with albeit without his blessing. It would be churlish of him/TD to lock out the modders because of the offence it would cause his future customer base for SoW so the wiser thing is for everyone to just quietly accept the situation, make our choices and wait for SoW. We have the best of both worlds.