BoM should have playable demo - Page 2

Robert · #1 05-07-2012, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

yeah sure. Now go here and read the minimum and recommended specs again

It's deceiving to say the least, don't you think? If I go to the Ubisoft website and browse through the games, it takes me to the official page, which just like the current status of the sim, is a farce.

But hey, we're sitting here patiently, we have for more than a year now..

I'm not disagreeing with you regarding minimum specs, Stern. I am saying that anyone with an ounce of common sense in this day and age has a multitude of ways to verify a purchasing decision before they plunk they're money down. I don't know of a single game that doesn't have it's forum. Google and BING can give copius amounts of links that detail the issues with any game/car/dentist/or hair dryer. While I understand and agree with the frustration regarding CoD, there has never been a time where a buyer has had more avenues open to them so they can avoid bad purchasing decisions.

The Russian release was March of last year. We all heard the ney sayers and disatisfied rightfully be upset. How many non Russian players found a way to DL the game? I bought the U.S. prerelease through GoGamer and got trapped in that "Code is already used - your installation is invalid" fiasco. So I eventually bought a second copy after not getting satisfaction through STEAM or GG. I KNEW the status of the game. At this point I don't think to many of us are getting hoodwinked. We may be eternal optomists getting our hopes dashed over and over again, but we did buy CoD knowing what we have.

My PC is a minimum spec machine. I can turn down the settings to what I consider quite ugly, and have some good battles with minimum issues.... but it looks horrible. I turn everything up as high as I can and use CoD for created missions and site seeing - ala MSFSX.

Caveat Emptor. At no time in history has this been easier to do.

KeBrAnTo · #2 05-07-2012, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carguy_

Wrong on many accounts. Many people read the CloD reviews and knew what they were buying. The prevailing motivating factor was the developper support of IL2 Sturmovik through the years. So far the support is there, though a bit different in terms of quality.

I understand you're saying that you know what motivated the people to buy the game?.

Ok.

Just talk for yourself, m8.

ATAG_MajorBorris · #3 05-07-2012, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RickRuski

If the current state of affairs carries on for too much longer I think that the "Team" should seriously consider a free playable demo for BoM before releasing it to the market to assure their paying customers that they finaly have things fixed. The results of this beta patch are not convincing enough to get the largest part of the community behind them. Most of us were hoping to have a major improvement with this patch, but it hasn't happend for at least 50% of us. With the original Il2 series there was a playable demo available, this convinced a large % of the supportive community to try and then buy the series. With CoD there wasn't a demo, so we went in relying on what we thought we were going to get from the advertising and the good will that had been developed with the community. From a lot of threads and replies after patch 17582 most of the goodwill is starting to go down the gurgler. I hope things get better quickly, but I've stopped expecting too much too soon.

Have just noticed that RoF are due to release the "Channel" map, how far away would it be from adding a Hurricane or Spitfire and Bf109 to RoF. Once the support base for CoD starts losing it's followers it will be very difficult to get them back.

How far? I ask how much? With over 40 variants of the bf109, would you pay $7-$14 a plane? with no reason for the rof devs to develop anything other than sellable content (scarf anyone, $3.99 please).

These are two different approaches to a business model and for ww1 the RoF model works ok but ww2 I think not...

As far as the patch goes it has fixed some major things for some(for me the ctd when when flying bombers in formation) and the fps upgrades are still to come it would seem, patience is required for any new cfs in the begining after all if this was RoF we would have another 6 months before the ctd's would be fixed if you compare the timelines(to be fair)...

bongodriver · #4 05-07-2012, 01:56 PM

Quote:

oh! and Bongodrums

What I spend my money on is my business......assman.

SiThSpAwN · #5 05-07-2012, 02:06 PM

If they can get BoB to the level it needs to be at then I dont have a fear of buying BoM, that said, if they were to release BoM tomorrow I wouldnt buy it.

BoM is supposed to use the same engine that BoB is currently using, so here is your demo, base your buying decision on where BoB ends up at the time of release of BoM, simple as that.

bongodriver · #6 05-07-2012, 02:11 PM

I wouldn't buy BOM tomorrow on the basis theres just no 'community support', too many people working too hard to try and kill this series off.

Blackdog_kt · #7 05-07-2012, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MajorBoris

How far? I ask how much? With over 40 variants of the bf109, would you pay $7-$14 a plane? with no reason for the rof devs to develop anything other than sellable content (scarf anyone, $3.99 please).

These are two different approaches to a business model and for ww1 the RoF model works ok but ww2 I think not...

As far as the patch goes it has fixed some major things for some(for me the ctd when when flying bombers in formation) and the fps upgrades are still to come it would seem, patience is required for any new cfs in the begining after all if this was RoF we would have another 6 months before the ctd's would be fixed if you compare the timelines(to be fair)...

Big fat +1 from me on the above.

RoF sold everything separately and it still took 18 months to fix. Terrain shimmers at distance, no SLI support, CTD's, you name it, RoF had it's fair share of them all, plus it also had a more constant supply of cash to throw at the problems.

Initially at least, because last i heard (a few months ago) they too were facing some financial problems.

Also, the "pay per plane" model tends to shoehorn development a bit too much for my taste. If we had a WWII sim with a similar business model, it would be full of Spits, 109s and P-51s, but nobody would buy the not so hot-rod, workhorse aircraft like the Hurricanes, Henschels and Blenheims.

I've seen numerous RoF pilots complain about this in previous months, don't know if they got around to modelling more obscure planes as a result of those complaints though.

It's a matter of personal taste in any case. I prefer the 1c way of "give me 50, i'll give you an operational theater", instead of RoF's "give me 5 and i'll give you a plane/airspeed dial/fancy gunsight" approach. Your mileage may vary of course.