Let's help the Developer's of BoM. What would you like to see in the new sim

[SlipBall]

What do you guys think luthier was referring to here, the part in bold. I hope it not something I'm using.

Quote:
Can we increase even more the degree of realism e.g. available & working aircraft systems?
Just a side note, please remove the ever icing clouds, most of them are not, especially flying low, it's not that often sub zero.
We are seriously addressing our approach to modeling various systems. A lot of the stuff that we spent so much effort on with Cliffs of Dover ended up being a dud, no one wants it, no one uses it. At the same time a lot of systems people clearly want and need are not modeled with enough details.
So do expect a more sane approach in the sequels.

[major_setback]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

What do you guys think luthier was referring to here, the part in bold. I hope it not something I'm using.

Quote:
Can we increase even more the degree of realism e.g. available & working aircraft systems?
Just a side note, please remove the ever icing clouds, most of them are not, especially flying low, it's not that often sub zero.
We are seriously addressing our approach to modeling various systems. A lot of the stuff that we spent so much effort on with Cliffs of Dover ended up being a dud, no one wants it, no one uses it. At the same time a lot of systems people clearly want and need are not modeled with enough details.
So do expect a more sane approach in the sequels.

I think he is referring to icing of windscreens, headshake, other cool visuals, etc. that are of less direct importance to gameplay. Especially those that particularly have a negative effect on gameplay, and that people have complained about.

Note to community: Never, ever, ever complain about such things

I remember Oleg saying a long time ago that they removed headshake because people complained it was unrealistic (they do actually listen to us).

[planespotter]

Massive multiplayer online battles, online coop, online total war with moving front, clans, magic, dragons with lasers.

[major_setback]

I want cows that die, sprout wings and fly to heaven when killed.
Player should jump out of a burning plane on the ground, produce a sausage on a stick and fry it in the fire.
No parachutes, just long-johns attached to the harness. Some Mary Poppins umbrella parachutes.
A crow should land on your nose/windscreen and walk about as you try to aim.
You should see your own breath on a cold day.
Puddles on the tarmac.
A jack-in-the-box snake pops out of the instrument panel when you try to release the canopy. You fry.
You hear all your lose change flip around in the cockpit when you invert.

[Feathered_IV]

Less gimmicks. More soul. A development team that knows its capabilities a and does not overreach itself. I'd rather have a very good sim that works, than a brilliant one that does not.

[JG27_brook]

If they want to make money they need to bring on 1944 sooner , we the buys want and love IL2 46 with fw190,s vs P47,s etc . and i mis the GUI that IL2 46 had for off line coops and quick dogfights for training and hypo loppy.

And they sold us Stream ? just Sad !

[MadTommy]

Dynamic weather: precipitation, wind, turbulence, various cloud types at various heights.

A Full Mission Builder that i can understand and make work!

[ElAurens]

More early war aircraft.

Personally I've had my fill of late war uber planes.

Oh, and a game that works.

Just sayin'.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

What do you guys think luthier was referring to here, the part in bold. I hope it not something I'm using.

Quote:
Can we increase even more the degree of realism e.g. available & working aircraft systems?
Just a side note, please remove the ever icing clouds, most of them are not, especially flying low, it's not that often sub zero.
We are seriously addressing our approach to modeling various systems. A lot of the stuff that we spent so much effort on with Cliffs of Dover ended up being a dud, no one wants it, no one uses it. At the same time a lot of systems people clearly want and need are not modeled with enough details.
So do expect a more sane approach in the sequels.

It may be engine management and start procedures. That would take alot of work thats still causing the development alot of headaches. Personally the engine start procedures are especially immersive for me, while I haven't flown enough to get a handle of the engine management procedures. It will be interesting to see what the usage figures are, as I think it would be a huge loss if they dumbed down the procedures in the Sequel.

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

What do you guys think luthier was referring to here, the part in bold. I hope it not something I'm using.

Quote:
Can we increase even more the degree of realism e.g. available & working aircraft systems?
Just a side note, please remove the ever icing clouds, most of them are not, especially flying low, it's not that often sub zero.
We are seriously addressing our approach to modeling various systems. A lot of the stuff that we spent so much effort on with Cliffs of Dover ended up being a dud, no one wants it, no one uses it. At the same time a lot of systems people clearly want and need are not modeled with enough details.
So do expect a more sane approach in the sequels.

anthropromorphic control would be my guess.