Oleg Maddox's Room #1

[csThor]

You're missing my point, Feuerfalke. I do not judge aircraft usefulness merely by their prominence, but their historical relevance for the operation/timeframe/geographic are simulated by a software release. For example if Oleg chose to release an AddOn for SoW depicting the operations over North Africa from 1940 to the end of 1941 a Spitfire - while highly iconic - wouldn't have a place because historically there were none!
As Oleg said: Each aircraft fulfilled a role in the war. But to a flight simmer not every plane and every role is worth simulating (i.e. not everyone would want to fly 5-hour weather recon sorties all across Europe). There's the simple question whether the gameplay value of a certain type is worth the investment of the developer (time, money and manpower).

I, for example, do question the usefulness of the autogyro. I'm a strictly historically minded player who puts history way above any "KeWl" factor. The autogyro fulfilled one role in limited numbers in a very limited timeframe. It can't be used (historically) outside of a narrow scope so it doesn't offer as much relative gameplay value as, say, a cockpit for the Do-17Z or perhaps a Fairey Battle.

[Tbag]

What if Oleg included the autogyro primarily as a proof of concept: Helicopters can be implemented in SoW as well. What do we know? Sorry for speculating again.

[Feuerfalke]

Originally Posted by Tbag

What if Oleg included the autogyro primarily as a proof of concept: Helicopters can be implemented in SoW as well. What do we know? Sorry for speculating again.

Exactly

[Feuerfalke]

I'm sorry, I'll make my point more clear, because I think you missed mine:
Again: I think this is not only about planes we'd like to fly or that are important for some addon in an historical context.

A simulation of this magnitude and with the goal of lasting a decade, different aspects become important, that go beyond historical considerations.
For the Battle of Britain the role of the autogyro might have been negligible, for demonstrating what can be done with this engine, attracting 3D-Party developers and players who are NOT ONLY interested in exact historic missions, this unique aircraft can really be a new step in flightsims.

Remember, the SoW-Engine is moving from early WW1 and 2 and Korea on into the future and if it the physics engine of SoW is capable of realistically modeling a rotary aircraft, this is an devastating blow for any competitor. So the reason for including an autogyro IMHO is just the same as with including the Su-26m and a lot of fans didn't get the idea behind that either.

[csThor]

Originally Posted by Feuerfalke

I'm sorry, I'll make my point more clear, because I think you missed mine:
Again: I think this is not only about planes we'd like to fly or that are important for some addon in an historical context.

This is where we seem to disagree then. A historical simulation must remain true to itself IMO. And as such historical relevance is the "Make or Break" criteria for me - it was either relevant or it wasn't. I have no use for the "KeWl" factor some people seem to be so fond of ...

Originally Posted by Feuerfalke

A simulation of this magnitude and with the goal of lasting a decade, different aspects become important, that go beyond historical considerations.
For the Battle of Britain the role of the autogyro might have been negligible, for demonstrating what can be done with this engine, attracting 3D-Party developers and players who are NOT ONLY interested in exact historic missions, this unique aircraft can really be a new step in flightsims.

Remember, the SoW-Engine is moving from early WW1 and 2 and Korea on into the future and if it the physics engine of SoW is capable of realistically modeling a rotary aircraft, this is an devastating blow for any competitor. So the reason for including an autogyro IMHO is just the same as with including the Su-26m and a lot of fans didn't get the idea behind that either.

Quite frankly the Su-26 is more a proof of concept than the autogyro. I don't want to cling to this example too much,though, as I'm talking about a general principle here. As I said above the core of a historical simulation is its attempt to simulate historical air combat. Any other ... derivated use ... is and has to be secondary to historical accuracy. Such use can be derived from a historically correct base, but a historically correct use cannot be derived from a fundament made of "KeWl" objects which aren't historically relevant.

[Feuerfalke]

Originally Posted by csThor

This is where we seem to disagree then. A historical simulation must remain true to itself IMO. And as such historical relevance is the "Make or Break" criteria for me - it was either relevant or it wasn't. I have no use for the "KeWl" factor some people seem to be so fond of ...



Quite frankly the Su-26 is more a proof of concept than the autogyro. I don't want to cling to this example too much,though, as I'm talking about a general principle here. As I said above the core of a historical simulation is its attempt to simulate historical air combat. Any other ... derivated use ... is and has to be secondary to historical accuracy. Such use can be derived from a historically correct base, but a historically correct use cannot be derived from a fundament made of "KeWl" objects which aren't historically relevant.

Well, that seems to be the problem, then. SoW is not a historic simulation. BoB is.
SoW is a unique engine to simulate aircraft and vehicles in a combat environment.

BoB however is the first "addon", if you allow me to put it like this. The first of a series of addons with historic content on a limited area and time-setting.

Bringing both things together in SOW:BOB means showing what can be done on the one hand, simulating the Battle of Britain on the other. IMHO the autogyro is a child to both fathers, the SU to the first, the other planes to the later.

It has little to do with the cool-factor, but rather with the fact that MG has a wider perspective than just putting up a game for us with a few historic planes.

[csThor]

I think you have a different perspective than I. I think each release within the SoW series has to be self-sufficient meaning it has to contain everything it needs to run as a stand-alone. As such each individual release is a single project and not just an "AddOn". This is why I place so much emphasis on the "historical relevance".

[Feuerfalke]

Originally Posted by csThor

I think you have a different perspective than I. I think each release within the SoW series has to be self-containing meaning it has to contain everything it needs to run as a stand-alone. As such each individual release is a single project and not just an "AddOn". This is why I place so much emphasis on the "historical relevance".

No, I think we have quite the same perspective. It's just that the initial release of SoW has to prove a lot more than IL2 had to. And it's clear to me that this cannot be achieved by just historically rebuilding a few planes, that were already in IL2.

You know the boards as well as I do and I doubt you have missed the comments, what's the deal with BoB, as you won't see the eyecandy on a plane from 200m away, anyway, or the hedges down below from 30,000ft, that turbulences and exact physics, startups and stuff are irrelevant for a large portion of players.
Just look at Hyperlobby and tell me the relation of players on FullReal-Servers and those on easier settings. Or just count the number of servers. And like it or not, I am convinced the hack has also pushed the line further up.

As you can also see from the game I advertise for in my signature, I love decent simulation, but I also see that it's not us hardcore-simmers alone that can pay Oleg off and again, we're at the beginning of something really big ahead.

[csThor]

Originally Posted by Feuerfalke

No, I think we have quite the same perspective. It's just that the initial release of SoW has to prove a lot more than IL2 had to. And it's clear to me that this cannot be achieved by just historically rebuilding a few planes, that were already in IL2.

The difference will be in the framework - the GUI, the interaction between AI and user, the campaigns, the single missions, the online part etc ... Incorporating unusual types is not going to draw more non-hardcore simmers than a solid gameplay part. This is where SoW will succeed or fail.

[major_setback]

Originally Posted by csThor

....

Quite frankly the Su-26 is more a proof of concept than the autogyro. I don't want to cling to this example too much,though, as I'm talking about a general principle here. As I said above the core of a historical simulation is its attempt to simulate historical air combat. Any other ... derivated use ... is and has to be secondary to historical accuracy. Such use can be derived from a historically correct base, but a historically correct use cannot be derived from a fundament made of "KeWl" objects which aren't historically relevant.

I don't see the Su-26 as just 'proof of concept' or 'Kewl object'.
It is an important inclusion for gaining the interest of those who are mainly orientated toward General Aviation aircraft. There are people who will buy SoW:BoB just for this aircraft knowing Olegs reputation for accurate modelling (look at the price of some third party add-ons for FSX, some cost more than '1946'). More importantly third party devlopers will (probably) use the SoW engine to make GA sims when Oleg releases his third-party tool set allowing aircraft and limited map modelling. This isn't a minor inclusion, it may well lead to GA add-ons that out-sell combat related ones (probably requiring users to buy a SoW title to host the add-ons).
The Su-26 model's performance can be compared to real world aircraft performance. It will prove the accuracy of Olegs modelling, as well as giving him a bench-mark when calibrating amounts of turbulance/wind/buffeting/ground-effect etc. for the game.
The involvement of third parties in making add-on releases (especially General Aviation types) will determine the sucess of the game series IMHO.
It don't think it will take too long after the release of the third party tool-kit before we see a Red Bull air racing add-on.