A new article in SimHQ about Cod

[icarus]

Originally Posted by cheesehawk

haha, you know, I originally thought, "This article is like one of Tree's posts, but better written!"

That would make Tree_UK right then, because the article is bang on.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by cheesehawk

Yes, but irrelevant in terms of how the game is running atm.

No, its some of the reasons why it runs this way at the moment and why it shouldn't have been released that way. And how it affects the likelyhood of a good outcome. Highly relevant.

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by cheesehawk

How does the why it got released the way it does effect anything now? Either they have the money/desire to continue working on it, or they don't. Publicizing an opinion on why it's that way won't change a thing, as all the warring and whining on here has shown. The good outcome is entirely dependent on the motivation of the developer to continue fixing, not looking to the past, but the future.

Yes, but common sense and being happy about the fact that it's much improved from its initial release state doesn't give people the ability to rub it in and chant their "i told you so"s, so we end up delving in the past, day in and day out
In other words:

Originally Posted by SiThSpAwN

As for the article, well, it's pretty funny considering all the soft massaging that RoF got over on SimHQ during its early days but i guess the reason is already mentioned in the article: people expect more from someone who's already released a flight sim series than they expect from an up-start company, aka double standards.

The comparison with DCS in terms of business model is only partially valid as well. Doing it like DCS:A-10 and releasing CoD as a beta for people who pre-ordered would indeed be better and deflect the negative criticism. Just make a PC gamer feel he's somehow privileged and the ego swell will take care of the rest even if you provide them with the same build of the game: "wow, i'm part of the beta and get to play before everyone else woooohooo!" as opposed to "man, this game is buggy"
On the other hand, the people who work on DCS have some pretty lucrative contracts with the military in various countries and that's how they subsidize their flight-sim department: make a 100% sim for a military client to train their pilots on, get money, replace the top secret bits and military-specific interface with a gamer packaging and feel in terms of menus/mission editors/etc and sell to the wider public.

Maddox games has nothing of the sort to subsidize their efforts, unless there are air forces who still fly Spitfires and we don't know about it.

Other than that, i think the article is accurate (if a bit aggressively worded at a couple of points). It's just not relevant to the present.

Funny how people can't move on to better things while the game that gave them so much grief is doing exactly that. I mean, i knew each one of us flight sim fans is a bit of a masochist deep down inside, but some do make the extra effort in that department to keep feeling bad as long as possible

[Bryan21cag]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

Yes, but common sense and being happy about the fact that it's much improved from its initial release state doesn't give people the ability to rub it in and chant their "i told you so"s, so we end up delving in the past, day in and day out
In other words:

I would be with you on this point Blackdog but I think the reason people are still taking time out of there lives to "beat the dead horse" (funny caption by the way) is because to a great many of us (about 50% according to the last pole on the subject ) still do not find the game in a condition that makes it enjoyable over other options.

Even though it has been improved to a point where you can play it, all of the stuffing so to speak really is not that interesting to play for a big chunk of the fans yet. At least not for more than a few minutes at a time. This is the category that i fall into at the moment

Now the writer of the article may have had ulterior motives but after reading it word for word I think if he really had intent to destroy the game no matter how improved it is, it could have been done much more viciously. In my opinion the article sounded very accurate and even reminds the reader that this company has a long standing history of constant and free improvements of their products LONG after their release. For me as I read it I got more of a frustration, and disappointment feeling, not a malicious I hate this game no matter how good it gets, feeling.

I am am an electrician by trade so even though I still choose to play IL246 over CLOD for what i find to be its better aspects I.E. Offline campaigns, sounds, Stability, e.t.c. If I were a video game reviewer and had an interest in flight sims, because I do not find the game in a state that keeps me busy playing it instead of thinking up reasons why it didn't have the success of its predecessor then I might find myself writing a similar article

Again I do not know this person and have no idea of his motives but their are two sides to every coin and it its possible that the reason that anyone including this reviewer are still beating this so called dead horse as some of you put it is because the game still really is not fun enough to keep them quiet I have a feeling that when it does reach this level for most of its target audience there will be an abrupt and lasting silence with very few exceptions until then the repetitive and often very accurate reviewing done by professionals and amateurs alike will likely continue. In the end I guess its all subjective.

one last thing on the constant repeating of peoples opinions good or bad. They are really both very necessary, weather you want to hear them or not. Any time you have a product out on the market and your intent is continue to grow and sell more of them, every day you want as large a group as possible to be telling you what they like and don't like about your product. I feel that this also goes for your business practices, customer service e.t.c. The more repetitive the feed back in either direction the more it drives a company to improve on its existing product or to move on to the next step in its evolution. So some see the beating of a dead horse, others see a constant and continuous improvement opportunity.

Cheers

[icarus]

Originally Posted by cheesehawk

How does the why it got released the way it does effect anything now? Either they have the money/desire to continue working on it, or they don't. Publicizing an opinion on why it's that way won't change a thing, as all the warring and whining on here has shown. The good outcome is entirely dependent on the motivation of the developer to continue fixing, not looking to the past, but the future.

This is how.

7.Promise that everything will be fixed and that the game will be great. I know that the team in the past has done a good job trying to update the original IL-2 game, but this game has so many things to update and without good cash flow I don’t know if it will be done.

It is very relevant. It will take much more than motivation to fix this sim. Blinders on won't make it better either.

[Ze-Jamz]

Originally Posted by icarus

This is how.

7.Promise that everything will be fixed and that the game will be great. I know that the team in the past has done a good job trying to update the original IL-2 game, but this game has so many things to update and without good cash flow I don’t know if it will be done.

It is very relevant. It will take much more than motivation to fix this sim. Blinders on won't make it better either.

Again...

Do you realize what state IL2 was when it was released? and other sims that we wont mention?

At what point now do YOU think that this game cannot get fixed when youve had an update from wait for it..the Dev team on what is being worked on..a complete engine overhaul, sound overhaul etc etc etc

I dont know about you, but if my intention was to chuck this game at the wall i wouldnt be winding people up more by continuing to talk trash about updates and posting here....id be long gone

Yes it will take more than motivation to fix this sim, it will take time and hard work, nothing to do with blinkers being on..

Youd have the same BS posts but about other things...porked FM's uber planes..better this and worst that even if this SIM was working 100%, been like that since the beginning of Forums and Sims and its not going to stop now..

[Tiger27]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

The strange thing is that I posted similar thoughts to Tom on the SimHQ website and got myself a life time ban!!

Tree, if this was really similar to what you had been posting over at SimHQ we would all be forced to read this review in every thread everyday for the next six weeks, I think they banned you to save the sanity of the rest of us

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

The strange thing is that I posted similar thoughts to Tom on the SimHQ website and got myself a life time ban!!

i wondered why you hadnt posted for some time in simhq

Originally Posted by SsSsSsSsSnake

i wondered why you hadnt posted for some time in simhq

lol, yes its been a while, the mad thing is that noone even noticed the post i got banned for, even one of the mods contacted me and said he couldn't believe I had been banned for such a post.

[MACADEMIC]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

lol, yes its been a while, the mad thing is that noone even noticed the post i got banned for, even one of the mods contacted me and said he couldn't believe I had been banned for such a post.

Surprised as well I must say. What's the point of having this secondary forum over there, I thought it's meant to allow more critical voices?

MAC