Is CoD going to be patched to a 'final state' ?

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

Skoshi, you're saying you want it to remain as boring as it is for offliners, so you can maybe come back one day and find something you might have missed?

No Philip! Those are your words.

I would like a continual improvement of the series so as new content and features are introduced they become available in the previous titles. Just like in the original IL2 series.

Earlier theatres in IL2 never became stale because as the series expanded the improvements effected the entire series.

The 'final state' that this topic is titled means that it will not change or improve thereafter. That will be the death knell of the title.

Do you want COD to enter a 'final state'?

Cheers!

[Bounder!]

I can only speak from my own experiences with CoD and the biggest improvement I have found is investing in a new PC.

Pre beta patch the game ran ok on my old PC but I did get stuttering online in dogfights and big furballs were a no-go. About the time of the beta patch I bought a brand new PC and that fixed it for me. Performance wise the game now runs extremely smooth on full settings - I have no slow downs, no fps issues, no stuttering etc etc in the largest online furballs and I have no CTDs anymore. I know not everyone can do it right now and I don't want to be harsh but CoD is still a reasonable new game and if you want to be able to run a next gen game flawlessly you need a high end PC. People trying to run a next gen game on old hardware are going to have performance issues unfortunately. Hopefully the devs will be able to streamline game performance but I imagine there's only so much they can do.

[philip.ed]

Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger

No Philip! Those are your words.

I would like a continual improvement of the series so as new content and features are introduced they become available in the previous titles. Just like in the original IL2 series.

Earlier theatres in IL2 never became stale because as the series expanded the improvements effected the entire series.

The 'final state' that this topic is titled means that it will not change or improve thereafter. That will be the death knell of the title.

Do you want COD to enter a 'final state'?

Cheers!

I see what you mean, and I agree with you. 'Final state' sounds very foreboding.
However, I'd rather see an effort made to move it closer to that state, instead of diverting resources to new products.
Finish Moscow (by finish I mean get it up to a more than acceptable level) and then revisit CloD and work on it, model the later channel battles after the BoB, perhaps go back and focus on the BoF and then use the existing models to expand into the MTO.

[Stublerone]

@Skoshi: You know what I mean with my post... Just wanted to say that higher viewing range on same detail have big effect. That is, why shooter are looking so detailed: because they drastically screw down the distance to get more detail, or polygons, as you say.

On the detail where clod is graphically and what is happening on the playground and with reference to the disadvantages of a streaming engine, we shouldn't wonder, why this game is so hungry on ram, vram, disc speed, cpu and gpu.

Sure it is not satisfying for most of us, bit this should be taken into account, when comparing the game to a shooter. Arma is also not running very fast. It is buggy, bit also uses streaming engine and has a lot of events going on on the map. In arma you just get the fps, which the server is able to provide u.
Warfare at the beginning =sufficient fps and after some hours of playing, there is so much to calculate for the server, that your fps decrease more and more.

Streaming engine =a lot of cool possibilities and recommended for big maps and scenarios, but on the other side still not fast performing due to high workload for server and some restrictions in current hardware.

I bet, that it will run great, if hardware gets the suficcient ports to interact fast enough in all kinds of ways.

[jf1981]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

I see what you mean, and I agree with you. 'Final state' sounds very foreboding.

Fully agree with you, not final state in that sense, only end of the main issues that prevent it from its potential.