Reviewing Luthier's roadmap

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Phil,

I understand the concept of criticism and how fanboi'ism will not help, but the criticism is becoming a stuck record, and I don't think a constant barrage of DCS is better or ROF is better will help the sim suceed, rather it will make people go and buy DCS and ROF and forget COD......no? but how about this for a concept, every aspect of the games bugginess has now been discussed to death, and there have been sadly only a couple of threads that really go into highlighting the bugs, the rest is just mud slinging, this is why I see no logic to the current form of criticism....it just wont help the sim suceed at all.

Exactly. Sorry for the off topic tangent, but this needs to be stressed somewhat and maybe hammered into some of the thicker skulls.

The difference between a whine and a legitimate, constructive complaint is the tone the message is delivered in.

If people think there's things broken in the sim, they want to tell us about it and expect some reasonable feedback to their posts, they should at least put some effort in how they tell us about it all.

I have a bucket load of things i would like to see fixed, but my description of the issue is generally a bit more eloquent and detailed than "plz fix the crap ai/sounds/green fields/flavor of the month whine".

Is it because i'm smarter than most? Not really. So what gives? Well, i'll just go on out on a limb here and make a guess, i think it's e-laziness.

You know, the kind of laziness where i want things to work without any intervention from my part as an end user but at the same time i hypocritically rely on a bunch of other people getting knee dip in it, not all of them developers on a payroll but members of the community as well, to do all the testing, bug hunting/reporting/fixing, FMB tutorial publishing, making new missions/campaigns/tools/etc and what not, so that little precious me can enjoy CoD with all the shiny graphical and audio features of DCS:A-10, ROF and CoD itself combined while at the same having the content, multiplayer user base and seamless functionality of the 10 year old IL2:1946...all that without ever lifting one finger to that effect myself but on top of that, constantly berating those who are trying to move things in that direction.

You see it's a win-win situation: if the other people make it work i get a functional game, if they don't i can gloat and go all "i told you so" on everyone and all the while, i don't really have to do any of the hard work myself and i've talked so much hot air and contradiction over time that i can easily have a bunch of different, conflicting quotes bookmarked to quote depending on how each argument is going, so that i always end up on top...the true essence of a forum warrior.

They just seem too lazy to describe the problem properly, too lazy to try and come up with a workaround, too lazy to search the forum on their own for existing fixes, even too lazy to read whatever little stuff is included in the manual (which usually ends up in hilarious "bug reports" that are actually a case of the user not understanding why things don't work the way he expects, but work perfectly fine if he follows the manual's advice) and the list goes on and on ad nauseum.

If i had a penny for every time i've heard "i'm out of here, game XYZ is so much better", only to have them repeating their message and still be here constantly debating what needs to be fixed in a game they supposedly have no interest in, i'd probably be able to afford a real aircraft by now or at least hire a few extra developers for Luthier. In reality they are not leaving us, they are just trying to coerce everyone else into fixing the gameplay experience for them by a constant stream of complaints



As for the main topic of this thread, i think it's a very balanced assessment of how things are going. Like i said before i've got a load of things i'd like to see getting fixed or improved upon, but it's perfectly clear that if we care to apply a bit of deductive reasoning and revisit older threads to make a comparison between today and how things were immediately post-release, we can all see that:

1) Targets were set and the most pressing ones were met pretty fast.

2) The developers are out of the woods financially (they are planning expansions and hiring a new sound engineer to remake all the sounds from scratch), so work continues on the issues still remaining.

3) Feedback or no feedback, the developers are in fact reading the forums. This can be clearly seen from the fact that they react on the issues mentioned, either by the infrequent development updates or the actual changelog on the patch readme files.

It's just that some people want their hand held more than others, or a bird's eye view of their offices to feel content, but in reality nobody can say they are oblivious to our bug reports, especially since various little details, some of them pretty obscure stuff, that was spotted by certain knowledgeable, dedicated community members has been fixed at various points in time (small details on aircraft and how some aircraft systems operate).

[jimbop]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

3) Feedback or no feedback, the developers are in fact reading the forums. This can be clearly seen from the fact that they react on the issues mentioned, either by the infrequent development updates or the actual changelog on the patch readme files.

It's just that some people want their hand held more than others, or a bird's eye view of their offices to feel content, but in reality nobody can say they are oblivious to our bug reports, especially since various little details, some of them pretty obscure stuff, that was spotted by certain knowledgeable, dedicated community members has been fixed at various points in time (small details on aircraft and how some aircraft systems operate).

Good post, Blackdog_kt. Very true and I agree with it all except this bit. It seems to me there are a few cases where people with IL-2 history have a somewhat more direct channel to the team but more broadly I don't think much attention is being paid to this forum. This reduces incentive to properly report.

Take my case which I'm sure is not unique. Between work and family I have very little time for gaming. When I can actually sit down in front of my gaming machine I have a choice of a) playing a game and unwinding a bit, or b) hunting down bugs, reproducing them and properly reporting them. I would be willing to do b) but only if I am sure that my effort will be useful to the dev team. Otherwise it is a waste of time and time is valuable to me.

Now assume it is the same for many others which I think is a safe assumption given the average age of this forum. The result is that you have many poor quality reports (i.e. 'game is broken constant ctds plz fix yesterday') but relatively few good quality ones.

I would really like to be proven wrong! If the team is reading then let them post. It wouldn't even need to be exhaustive feedback, just the occasional reminder that they are using our feedback.

[Rattlehead]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

You see it's a win-win situation: if the other people make it work i get a functional game, if they don't i can gloat and go all "i told you so" on everyone

Spot on.
Unfortunately I don't expect things to change.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

I have a bucket load of things i would like to see fixed, but my description of the issue is generally a bit more eloquent and detailed than "plz fix the crap ai/sounds/green fields/flavor of the month whine".

You know, the kind of laziness where i want things to work without any intervention from my part as an end user but at the same time i hypocritically rely on a bunch of other people getting knee dip in it

Not to say a little verbose. - Sorry mate, you know I respect your views.

What we're talking about here is a piece of computer software. If you'd paid Norton or McAfee some money for a piece of software, you'd expect it to work out of the box, without any input from any kind of 'community', yes?

Imagine describing 'bugs' to the Adobe company. Are there 'bugs' in photoshop? I don't know. But I'm a consumer, not an unpaid worker for a software development company, and if I was as positive in my approach to the problems with 'Cliffs' as various members evidently are; sorry but I'd expect to be paid for my services.

The work being done by the community in researching online bugs, offline bugs, and designing and building the kind of campaigns I expected when I purchased what was purported to be a 'Battle of Britain' simulation is exemplary, and indicative of the dedication of the community's enthusiasts.

I wish I could be one of those people but unfortunately real life takes up most of my time.

When I want to escape from real life, I'd like to be able to turn to the same software company I've relied on for the last ten years of good times, especially as they promised to produce 'Storm of War - The Battle of Britain', a subject very dear to my heart.

I'm still waiting patiently for this to happen.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

Not to say a little verbose. - Sorry mate, you know I respect your views.

What we're talking about here is a piece of computer software. If you'd paid Norton or McAfee some money for a piece of software, you'd expect it to work out of the box, without any input from any kind of 'community', yes?

It doesn't, it is continually getting patched just like anyother peice of commercial software. These companies continually seek information from the community to keep their products up to dates with bug logs and beta programs.

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

Imagine describing 'bugs' to the Adobe company. Are there 'bugs' in photoshop? I don't know.

I use CS4 at work, Adobe Photoishop has ongoing patches just like any other peice of commercial software.

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

But I'm a consumer, not an unpaid worker for a software development company, and if I was as positive in my approach to the problems with 'Cliffs' as various members evidently are; sorry but I'd expect to be paid for my services.

The work being done by the community in researching online bugs, offline bugs, and designing and building the kind of campaigns I expected when I purchased what was purported to be a 'Battle of Britain' simulation is exemplary, and indicative of the dedication of the community's enthusiasts.

I'ld say very little work is being done by the community on this forum. And the problem is that the format that the critics are using to state their problems is next to useless to the developers.

As with the beta patches, Luthier was quite specific about HOW to report the bugs with log files, hardware, software and the setting that the issues. All we got were endless pages of whining.

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

I wish I could be one of those people but unfortunately real life takes up most of my time.

When I want to escape from real life, I'd like to be able to turn to the same software company I've relied on for the last ten years of good times, especially as they promised to produce 'Storm of War - The Battle of Britain', a subject very dear to my heart.

I'm still waiting patiently for this to happen.

I share your frustration over some issues but I don't consider myself wasting time, I'm having a hoot playing the game. But there are plenty of other good sims arround! If you think your wasting your life here why continue?

Maybe there are alot of people who stay around here our of loyalty for the "last ten years of good times"? If so many have a very funny way of showing it.

Cheers!

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger

It doesn't, it is continually getting patched just like anyother peice of commercial software. These companies continually seek information from the community to keep their products up to dates with bug logs and beta programs.
I use CS4 at work, Adobe Photoishop has ongoing patches just like any other peice of commercial software.

Hmm, ongoing patches to keep this type of software improved or up to date isn't really the same thing as bugs and probs in 'Cliffs', but maybe the comparison wasn't ideal.

Let's alter the analogy to something more appropriate.

Dateline - July, somewhere in England.....

After warming up the engines for what seems like an age, you trundle down the runway and the Blenheim reluctantly leaves the ground, slightly crablike. You should have dialled in a bit more rudder trim. Gear up, throttle back, coarsen pitch, let her gain some airspeed and then settle down, set course and trim for a gentle cruise climb.
After what seems like no time at all, you're halfway across the channel, worrying about engine management, because they're sensitive these babies. You're really worried about whether you'll get hit by flak, or whether the fighters will find you. The tension rises as the target area approaches. You give the southern area a wide birth because that's where the flak seems most intense, and turn precisely in order to line the crate up for the best angle to the target. The tension is growing, the moment of truth is upon you. The flak intensifies and you're getting very nervous.

'For God's sake this flak is heavy - and oh my goodness there're two 110's in the sun!!'

Your gunner shouts - 'Drop the bombs! Drop the Bombs and let's get out of here!!'

Then your Bomb Aimer comes through on the intercom;

'Sorry skip, looks like the ground crew forgot to load the bombs!'

You immediately turn away, the sweat is streaming down your neck, your heart feels like it's going to burst out of your chest any moment, but you're getting away. Suddenly a flak burst on your port side. 'Jesus! there's a hole the size of a dustbin lid in the port wing!' After trimming her out as best you can, you nurse your damaged Blenheim back across the Channel and back to base. You wrestle with the controls, the trims won't compensate for the hole in the wing, but you line her up adequately and come in for a bouncy but safe touchdown.

'Where's the blasted ground crew, I'll tear their silly heads off!'

You run across to where the ground crew are on their third cup of tea of the day and scream,

'We just went through hell over the Channel! We got hit by flak, the 110's almost got us, the engines were overheating all the way back, and you bunch of fools had forgotten to load the blasted bombs!!'

The ground crew don't even look at you, they just stand up, turn around and walk away.

Then you feel a tap on your shoulder, it's that pretty girl from the NAAFI that makes such wonderful buttered scones, and she says;

'What you need to do is go into the Full Mission Builder, find the Blenheim in the objects viewer, select the Blenheim, go the armament bit and change the default loadout to the weapon of your choice, not forgetting to select the correct fuse type, make sure you click save, then go back and do the whole mission again'.

'Thanks darling' you say 'But I would have been far happier had the ground crew loaded the bombs in the first place. Are you doing anything later?'

'Well I'm going to go on the RAF forum and have a damn good moan, fancy coming along?'

'You bet, I want to see if other squadrons are as fed up as we are. I'll get a few cans in first.'

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

Hmm, ongoing patches to keep this type of software improved or up to date isn't really the same thing as bugs and probs in 'Cliffs', but maybe the comparison wasn't ideal.

Let's alter the analogy to something more appropriate.

Dateline - July, somewhere in England.....

After warming up the engines for what seems like an age, you trundle down the runway and the Blenheim reluctantly leaves the ground, slightly crablike. You should have dialled in a bit more rudder trim. Gear up, throttle back, coarsen pitch, let her gain some airspeed and then settle down, set course and trim for a gentle cruise climb.
After what seems like no time at all, you're halfway across the channel, worrying about engine management, because they're sensitive these babies. You're really worried about whether you'll get hit by flak, or whether the fighters will find you. The tension rises as the target area approaches. You give the southern area a wide birth because that's where the flak seems most intense, and turn precisely in order to line the crate up for the best angle to the target. The tension is growing, the moment of truth is upon you. The flak intensifies and you're getting very nervous.

'For God's sake this flak is heavy - and oh my goodness there're two 110's in the sun!!'

Your gunner shouts - 'Drop the bombs! Drop the Bombs and let's get out of here!!'

Then your Bomb Aimer comes through on the intercom;

'Sorry skip, looks like the ground crew forgot to load the bombs!'

You immediately turn away, the sweat is streaming down your neck, your heart feels like it's going to burst out of your chest any moment, but you're getting away. Suddenly a flak burst on your port side. 'Jesus! there's a hole the size of a dustbin lid in the port wing!' After trimming her out as best you can, you nurse your damaged Blenheim back across the Channel and back to base. You wrestle with the controls, the trims won't compensate for the hole in the wing, but you line her up adequately and come in for a bouncy but safe touchdown.

'Where's the blasted ground crew, I'll tear their silly heads off!'

You run across to where the ground crew are on their third cup of tea of the day and scream,

'We just went through hell over the Channel! We got hit by flak, the 110's almost got us, the engines were overheating all the way back, and you bunch of fools had forgotten to load the blasted bombs!!'

The ground crew don't even look at you, they just stand up, turn around and walk away.

Then you feel a tap on your shoulder, it's that pretty girl from the NAAFI that makes such wonderful buttered scones, and she says;

'What you need to do is go into the Full Mission Builder, find the Blenheim in the objects viewer, select the Blenheim, go the armament bit and change the default loadout to the weapon of your choice, not forgetting to select the correct fuse type, make sure you click save, then go back and do the whole mission again'.

'Thanks darling' you say 'But I would have been far happier had the ground crew loaded the bombs in the first place. Are you doing anything later?'

'Well I'm going to go on the RAF forum and have a damn good moan, fancy coming along?'

'You bet, I want to see if other squadrons are as fed up as we are. I'll get a few cans in first.'

Did you check in the bomb bay for a receipt from M&M enterprises for "1 Bomb Load"?
But, Hey! I've had similar expriences in IL-2 but couldn't blame it on a bug in the software!

Hopefully it's on the short list for things to fix.

Cheers!

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger

Did you check in the bomb bay for a receipt from M&M enterprises for "1 Bomb Load"?

Catch 22 is the perfect book to quote mate, given the circs.

where's all the cool stuff that has always been in IL2 that not in this game, like blowing wings off and the airframe ripping apart. I have seen 1 wing get blown off in over 70 hours worth of play and i havent seen anthing disintergrate like in IL2 46, those were features that i felt were great!
Dont get me wrong i love the dmage models we have now but it feels like the weapons cant do nearly enough damage to see the extent of the damage experience.

[furbs]

Or ...

"And there goes my 145th kill, now home!" you say into the radio to your wingman.
"you see fritz, i told you all you have to do is wait for the spitfires to disengage then you can fly right up behide the whole sqd and shoot the whole lot down with out worrying!"
The trip home was uneventful until your wheels touchdown on the runway, when the rest of your flight piles into the ground in a huge ball of flames for no reason.
you shrug your shoulders and sigh "oh well, that always happens"