Hardware, software and the future of flight combat sims.

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger

Damn! I just spent half an hour crafting a beautifully worded response to this topic - distilling my thirty years experiences in computing, software development and flight simming and - my bloody computer turned itself off!!! **&^%$* %%^&&% $#^%%^ - Heres the short version

One of the problems is that although our hardware is still improving and processor power is increasing and following the old moores law, we haven't developed ways of harnessing that power.

This may be the answer:

http://developers.slashdot.org/story...ores-law-gains

Of course, it may also turn out not to work, but I don't know why it wouldn't.

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger

Damn! I just spent half an hour crafting a beautifully worded response to this topic - distilling my thirty years experiences in computing, software development and flight simming and - my bloody computer turned itself off!!! **&^%$* %%^&&% $#^%%^ - Heres the short version


The scary thing is is that any development needs to be spending part of their profits on
research and development or the life of their product will be limited. Oleg knew this and this approach showed it through out the life of the Il2 series up until present. Unfortunately he forgot that they do have to make an actual profit and they couldn't get it together before funds ran out and COD development came to a crashing halt.

My biggest fear is that the new il2 sim will go the other way and will not get that fundimental development to the core of the product and the development will be focused on content. The problem with this approach is that when something does arive that is fundimentally better it will be too late to catch up.

To fund this development a steady stream of income is required. It shows how distructive the whinning, and snide remarks can be to these products.

From what I read on the BoS developer's Friday updates they have very deliberately been conservative, staying within a set time limit and (presumably) budget. I'm in favour of this because, much as I enjoy playing CLoD, I'm aware of its underdevelopment and the limitations that have resulted.

I haven't been around the entire time of CLoD development and introduction to the market, so I'm probably not as loyal to it as some are. However, I do know that CLoD unfortunately garnered a bad public reputation on Amazon and elsewhere, which still hasn't been fully dispelled, and sales must have suffered. Sad, considering how much time, energy and money was poured into it. CLoD deserved to succeed, and I hope someone will be able to use the software to develop a good immersion combat sim.

I also hope that the new IL2 iteration will succeed because success will hopefully lead to more developments more in tune with the wants and expectations of players. It must be a fine balancing act to develop a game which will go some way to satisfying the wants and desires of "immersion" gamers, versus those of the console variety.

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by flyingblind

Yes, thats my point. If there is enough demand. But if the cost of writing the code becomes greater than the demand can support then no one will write it.

It is why console games do so well. Because the power of a console is limited in comparison to a good PC there is no point in producing large, complex maps and all the other things simers expect plus the users are quite happy with the limited input of their controllers. If it can be done on a PC people want it but they will only get it if developers get a return.

Maybe 1C will hold on to the engine for a few years and then re release. I'm talking about the original code being the starting point and further developed and polished for the Mediterranean for example. Who here wouldn't buy it?