Look at all the features

[BadAim]

Originally Posted by TacKY

Research? Isn't a list of features better then searching through multiples of Russian sites and piles of forums for Oleg's comments. I guess some people value money more then others around here also. It seems as though the IL-2 consumers on promises have to turn even a simple request/suggestion for a COHERENT LIST OF FEATURES into a big ******* argument. I don't know whether you people seem to think that everyone is out to get you, like Steam lol, or you don't like it when people disagree or ask for something so minuscule but would help so much but then again, nobody wants any info or for this game to release because they would rather sit in the dark and hope to be surprised.

The only people lacking common sense are all of you that hate knowing the technical features of what you are going to buy. Blind ignorance at its best.

I said in my first post that a list of features is of no value if you don't trust Oleg, and you answered by saying that you would rather have a list of features than trust Oleg. If you are at all capable of rational independent thought please apply this skill to the above concept.

[brando]

Well, I'm happy to risk my money on the new game and face whatever comes in terms of "technical features" and how to tune a) the software, b) my hardware and (c) my game in order to enjoy what Oleg & Co have been busy producing for the last six years.

It's been something like ten years since the original IL-2 Sturmovik arrived and overturned the world of WW2 flight-simming. I've flown just about every incarnation of IL-2 since then, online most every evening, punctuated with sessions of mission-building and hosting co-ops. All through this there's been constant updates, patches and expansion packs from the developers - and a deluge of third-party input from the community (long before modding started) which has made the progress of the game a joy to behold.

A point which seems to have been missed in this thread is this organic nature of the development. We have been given planes, maps, ground units and, imo, a fair representation of flight and damage modelling, plus the ability to use these features to create scenarios and share them with anyone who happens along. Ten minutes spent browsing http://mission4today.com will give you an idea of just how much has been created using the basics that Oleg's crew have provided over the span of the game. So, "the game" as it exists now, is a fusion of Oleg & Co's brainchild and the positive efforts of an active community. It's much more than a bit of software that plays out an interactive script bedecked with all the available bells and whistles that are a measure of much of the current genre.

I will bet you that this new IL-2 series will start good and just grow better with time as before. I think it's a pity to find oneself unable to trust what so many people are saying about the nature of this series and how good it can and will be.

I'm happy to buy to, infact i have just pre-ordered it. Thank-you wife
But one thing though I do hope its not like birds of prey, I really wasnt keen on that one so much compared to the IL2 1946 style, but I heard that BoP was made buy a different dev team to Oleg's is that right?

[The Kraken]

Originally Posted by BigPickle

I'm happy to buy to, infact i have just pre-ordered it. Thank-you wife
But one thing though I do hope its not like birds of prey, I really wasnt keen on that one so much compared to the IL2 1946 style, but I heard that BoP was made buy a different dev team to Oleg's is that right?

Correct; apparently they got the flight model code (or parts of it) from Il2, but the rest is a completely separate production from a different team in their own engine. I wouldn't worry that CoD goes that direction, it's clearly aimed at being a more serious flight sim.

[TacKY]

Originally Posted by BadAim

I said in my first post that a list of features is of no value if you don't trust Oleg, and you answered by saying that you would rather have a list of features than trust Oleg. If you are at all capable of rational independent thought please apply this skill to the above concept.

Looks like everybody is riled out and sending insults out like whores send STDs. I have never said I dont trust Oleg so how about you stop making stupid ******* assumptions but seeing as how you have put "rational thought" in trying to make a worthless comeback that will only further this argument, how about you read the rest of the thread and see that everything has all but ceased. There is no comprehensive feature list and I mean COMPREHENSIVE, not a rough overview but maybe we can leave at it that instead of trying to insult because isnt this forum supposedly suppose to be full of adults?

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger

IL-2 is 10 years old and I'm sure there are still features you (or I) don't know about. That's why it's important to keep a developer's diary and make it public, so people know about details like cylinder damage models, airfoils, oil temps model etc..

Someone actually gets it. Most people are content with having little to no information or just a rough overview but there are some people that like to know in depth features that watching as minute long video or listening to biased opinions wont tell. Somehow, the people that are irate over differing opinions and people wanting to know more then the rudimentary list will send insults and other nonsense into this thread.

[LoBiSoMeM]

Oleg can't even aswer if this new title will suport FreeTrack - after MASSIVE discussions about the subject - and some fanboys really are moving on with this discussion with TacKY?

Gimme a break... IL-2:CoD is near "vapouware" even when it's maybe going gold! It's one of the most pathetic examples of computer game marketing ever! Let's pray to the technical aspects of the game exceeds the marketing abilities of 1C, Ubi...

Remembers me Duke Nukem Forever... I hope we can have a good sim, but really I don't know how it will be launched...

[nearmiss]

IMO, there aren't enough distributors.

There isn't enough competition among distributors, that is why the promotion on products handled by distributors is so puke poor.

The developers that distribute their own stuff do a great job marketing.

Originally Posted by nearmiss

IMO, there aren't enough distributors.

There isn't enough competition among distributors, that is why the promotion on products handled by distributors is so puke poor.

The developers that distribute their own stuff do a great job marketing.

Rise of Flight had even a narrower market if possible, but the developer team published regularly video and picture updates showing the physics feature of the game: I still remember the marvel of seeing how they modelled the propeller airstream and how they showed it in action..

Oleg and his team are great, but they always lacked this intelligent approach to the developing side of things (probably because of lack of time and maybe for a bit of arrogance, but hey, you gotta give em credit for the results!)

[BadAim]

OK you win Tacky, I've changed my illogical ways. I've decided that I don't trust Oleg either so I have now joined you in demanding that he tell us how great his game is!

You can now have the last word Tacky since I refuse to further engage in a battle of whits with an unarmed man.

P.S. Please feel free to put words in my mouth, question my sexual orientation, legitimacy of birth or anything else you wish.

[Royraiden]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

Oleg can't even aswer if this new title will suport FreeTrack - after MASSIVE discussions about the subject - and some fanboys really are moving on with this discussion with TacKY?

Gimme a break... IL-2:CoD is near "vapouware" even when it's maybe going gold! It's one of the most pathetic examples of computer game marketing ever! Let's pray to the technical aspects of the game exceeds the marketing abilities of 1C, Ubi...

Remembers me Duke Nukem Forever... I hope we can have a good sim, but really I don't know how it will be launched...

Thats all you think about, Freetrack?