Post made by Jason at Sim HQ

[furbs]

What was leaked by people after the russian release is one thing, being told by the developers before release is another.
Yes the sound in that update was described Oleg as placeholder and everyone ripped it apart, and as you say nobody thought it would ship like that!
All im saying is please dont dress it up.
Keep it real man...lol

[kendo65]

I'm with Furbs on this one Blackdog.

That's how I remember it too

It wasn't all as clear as you're implying. Hindsight has made it seem much more obvious, but for every issue coming out of the Russian launch it was possible to come up with alternative explanations - I know because I did it. I decided that until I had it on my own PC I couldn't rule out people running with un-optimised settings, below spec HW etc, as reasons for the apparently bad performance. (With hindsight I can see that I did that because most of us had been doing similar for months already - constantly shooting down the opinions of Tree and the few others who picked up that there were possible issues. Trust and faith in the devs was a big factor too. I believed that if we were going to be served what was effectively a beta then they would spell it out)

Are you really saying that you and Tree were singing from the same hymn-sheet prior to the game launch (?!) and that the rest of us were mugs because we hoped for something better, because that's not how I remember it?

Your take on the Spit start-up sound has the feel of hindsight about it too - the obvious way to interpret Oleg's statement is that the sound in the video was a place-holder that would be switched to release-standard sound prior to launch, not that we could expect placeholder sound at launch

Originally Posted by kendo65

I'm with Furbs on this one Blackdog.

That's how I remember it too (see my previous post : http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...814#post327814
)

It wasn't all as clear as you're implying. Hindsight has made it seem much more obvious, but for every issue coming out of the Russian launch it was possible to come up with alternative explanations - I know because I did it. I decided that until I had it on my own PC I couldn't rule out people running with un-optimised settings, below spec HW etc, as reasons for the apparently bad performance.

Are you really saying that you and Tree were singing from the same hymn-sheet prior to the game launch (?!) and that the rest of us were mugs because we hoped for something better, because that's not how I remember it?

Your take on the Spit start-up sound has the feel of hindsight about it too - the obvious way to interpret Oleg's statement is that the sound in the video was a place-holder that would be switched to the release standard sound prior to launch, not that we could expect placeholder sound at launch

I dont remember many people at all singing from the same hymm sheet as me at the time, I was the resident baddy and all round Troll, sadly nothing as changed much there, I called it as i saw it and now forum members have reinvented the past to make it look like I was just shooting from the hip, i guess that is just human nature though.

[kendo65]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

I dont remember many people at all singing from the same hymm sheet as me at the time, I was the resident baddy and all round Troll,

...

That's because you did it in such an annoying way mate

You were incessant - like a bulldog with a bone - never let up - on and on and on...

(that's what it seemed like at the time anyway. You're right though - not much has changed... )

[lothar29]

Seen from my point of view, it is true that we do not have a finished Simulator, which has many problems, but someone is to wonder, who would take the baton to this great Simulator?. I think that many will think about neoqb, but they currently are not interested in the topic, they are more than delighted with the Flight of Riseo and I hope they continue on the path that lead, many years more. give my point of view as I say, this is time to start to reflect and give more support to the only people who are in our genre simulation, stop complaining, I think that LUTHIER, is an honest person, and this show with the latest update are working on it, and not stop us lying, I hope that people, will all the clients of the IL-2 are enough mind ripe as to understand that criticizing his work we cannot anything positive, "this I what I am applying to myself" that beginning by me, believe that we have been quite unfair to LUTHIER des progress of OLEG.
what I am trying to say is that it is becoming time to support this product orally and stop dirtying the image because does not work us well, because we all know that the issues be resolved sooner or later...


with regard to the development of the Simulator and its aircraft and the money to continue developing this beauty, we all know that if implmentaran purchase of RoF system would be a great solution for development of IL-2 and my personally not me mind, already paid by RoF aircraft and I think that if you listen to people it need not be bad...


a greeting

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by furbs

What was leaked by people after the russian release is one thing, being told by the developers before release is another.
Yes the sound in that update was described Oleg as placeholder and everyone ripped it apart, and as you say nobody thought it would ship like that!
All im saying is please dont dress it up.
Keep it real man...lol

Originally Posted by kendo65

I'm with Furbs on this one Blackdog.

That's how I remember it too

It wasn't all as clear as you're implying. Hindsight has made it seem much more obvious, but for every issue coming out of the Russian launch it was possible to come up with alternative explanations - I know because I did it. I decided that until I had it on my own PC I couldn't rule out people running with un-optimised settings, below spec HW etc, as reasons for the apparently bad performance. (With hindsight I can see that I did that because most of us had been doing similar for months already - constantly shooting down the opinions of Tree and the few others who picked up that there were possible issues. Trust and faith in the devs was a big factor too. I believed that if we were going to be served what was effectively a beta then they would spell it out)

Are you really saying that you and Tree were singing from the same hymn-sheet prior to the game launch (?!) and that the rest of us were mugs because we hoped for something better, because that's not how I remember it?

Your take on the Spit start-up sound has the feel of hindsight about it too - the obvious way to interpret Oleg's statement is that the sound in the video was a place-holder that would be switched to release-standard sound prior to launch, not that we could expect placeholder sound at launch

All i'm saying is you guys had a different interpretation of the same facts and were more interested in different features than i was.

If the writing was on the wall and all the people who were claiming release failure months ahead of time knew it, then how come the "negative-minded" people rushed to preorder while i was seriously thinking of cancelling my CE preorder (which i could only get if i didn't cancel, since i had a relative in the UK for a few months)?
Short answer: wishful thinking.
I knew there was trouble but i wanted the printed map and Spitfire manual, so i went ahead with it. Other people just assumed there would be no trouble because they wouldn't like it to be, even though they were predicting it. Sorry, i can't wrap my head around it and that prevents me from sympathizing with such a viewpoint.


Also, during the development phase i was paying closer attention to certain aspects that not many people cared about and when it was pretty clear that these new features would be part of the sim, i naturally thought "this will cost development time from other stuff".
So yes, i pretty much expected the kind of initial trouble we got and that's why i didn't consider it a big deal: i was sure it would be there in exchange for other, new stuff that i really wanted to see. And by really i mean that it would seriously diminish my opinion of the title if they weren't included.

Flying with old IL2 sounds for a few months in exchange for all the scripting goodness and foundation laid in terms of online campaign capabilities, plus the new CEM/DM and aircraft systems modeling? Glass half full for me, it's just a matter of time for the patches to complete the rest of the features.
Flying with perfect graphics and sounds right from the word go in exchange for an engine that lacks aforementioned foundation for long term development? Sure, i'd still buy and fly it, but it would be IL2:redux with no innovation in the long run. Glass half empty for me in this case and a much shorter attention span for the title.

In the end they went with the first option and i couldn't be happier about it.

I didn't expect things to be perfect neither did i expect them to be awful and due to what i considered more important i found things acceptable when looking at the bigger picture, even if i had to wait for two patches to get the sim to a playable state.
That's what also made it easier for me to accept the initial reports at face value and not assume something was wrong on the user's end. When we saw the gaming expo footage i thought "ok, PCs are under-specced and they have a bit more time to optimize things".
When i saw the footage and reports from the Russian release i thought "turns out they ran out of time and money to optimize things further because they were working on the other stuff i consider so important, no biggie, i'll wait".

In other words i knew there would be issues just like others did, i just considered it a minor annoyance in the grand scheme of things (in contrast to them) when compared to what i did get under the hood of the sim. It's not about right or wrong, it's about what i like in terms of features and what other people like and these things called opinions tend to differ greatly among humans.
If someone tells me that AA doesn't work i won't put my blinders on and say "no it works". I'll just say "i don't care as long as i have cool new feature X in exchange for that and they add functional AA at a later date". Same for sounds, or any other feature that is among the first bits of sensory input i get from the game. That stuff is easier to gradually fix for a developer studio with the relevant experience.

It's the stuff that isn't immediately perceptible i care most about, because coming up with a new engine from scratch that can do things the previous one couldn't is the bulk of the work and can't be shoe-horned into a finished game at a later date.

We just have different priorities and jaggy aerial masts are pretty low on the list of mine, that's all there is to it.

[Blackdog_kt]

Also, thread clean up. Some of it was personal attacks, some was spam and some innocent bystanders got caught in the crossfire as well and made posts commenting on the above.

As a bit of extra information, inserting jabs that break the forum rules during one of those charming "exchanges" and then deleting the posts before they get a chance to be reported doesn't prevent moderators from viewing them anyway.

Watch your language, temper and smugness levels when dealing with other posters gentlemen. If these shenanigans keep going on the bans will be handed out in pairs or even teams to the offenders regardless of their opinions about CoD, just for the sake of being impartial and preventing point-scoring among the "duelists". It's not what we all believe and say, but how and with what kind of manners (or lack thereof).

Those of you responsible know what i'm talking about, either straighten up and fly right or find another place to throw your tantrums and play out your personal feuds.

Commenting on this post is not necessary regardless of negative/positive opinion: whether one wants to complain about it or high-five me please don't, it will only drag the discussion off-topic and back to the kind of posts i just had to delete...and then i'll have to delete the new posts too

Let's play nice

[Codex]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

The COD team is still working on the application. IMO, that is as good as it gets.

I'm half way around the world, can I change anything? Can you? Can we?

Maybe we can with encouragement and being more patient. When I look at the videos made by BarFly I realize this is going to be one fabulous air combat sim when the dev pulls it together. I'm as anxious as every one of you, and have been for over six years.

http://www.avsims.com/cfsim/content/...ain-kanalkampf

The video is friggin' awesome, and it's made with Cliffs of Dover by BarFly Simulations.

I have to say mate you've renewed my spark for COD with this post.

[sorak]

Originally Posted by Havoc04

WHO CARES!!!!! Jesus. Conspiracy theory's, Facts, so bloody well WHAT! Why do people have to go digging this crap up? Haven't you got better things to do?

Go spend time with the missus, go for a walk etc? And by posting this crap, what do you think it is going to do? Bring the patch quicker? Or better yet A HUGE APOLOGY TO THE COMMUNITY? Like that will happen LMFAO! Head outta the ass i say. And move along.

For once I'd love to come to these forums with out all this sludge crap posts.

you know you dont have to read the forum post if you dont want to.... which only means you really want to read all this 'sludge crap posts' deep inside... which makes it even stranger for you complaining about it. I think it funny some people like to bring up the old "go spend time with the missus".. Are you trying to make your self look cool or something?

puff puff.. wierd stuff

[kendo65]

Blackdog - I'll grant that you are right to a degree in describing the conclusions I reached before release as 'wishful thinking. My only response would be that it was still possible to do that because the situation was confused. If the devs had spelt it out instead of various (sometimes conflicting) voices in the community I would have come to a different conclusion.

My only real reason for commenting on all this was that I (and obviously others) felt that the OP and yourself were rewriting history to some degree. We'll have to agree to disagree I think.

My point in going over this was not to complain about the state of the game at release. It was just to disagree with the idea voiced that it was all perfectly clear at the time.

I agree with your views about the complex future-proofed features and the continual improvement and development of the sim and I'm looking forward to the upcoming patch.

Time to move on.