Friday Update, February 24, 2012

[carguy_]

Originally Posted by Osprey

This is directed at our bunch of complainers.

I recently posted a thread on the Games forum of my football club to ask why the flight genre is so overlooked. There are loads of crappy FPS and other genres which are healthy yet CFS struggles. The answers were:

1. Too complex to learn (steep learning curve).
2. Boring (ie long flight times vs short action). Gamers want to fire up the XBox and be instantly into the action.
3. Not portable to console.

So, the market is limited, the income is small and the detail required is large. Therefore we have to ACCEPT that in order to keep this going it either has to be programmed for FREE by a community or it has to be extended into other income streams. That or nothing at all.

That is unless you can persuade the multitude of BF3 and CoD:MW players to buy a PC and flight controls. They won't, but we can move into areas that meet the demands of others.

Regarding tank "Simulator". Don't assume that just because you are nerdy enough to want every detail in a tank replicated that everybody else does too. If you take into account the above and couple it with the short attention span for entertainment today (movies need instant action, pop music is instant stardom for a year only) then it makes perfect sense to have an 'arcady' tank sim anyway. I re-iterate, the majority of gamers want instant action - that means something easy to learn. Just means players jump from unit to unit as they point and destroy - which means a bigger battle on the ground anyway!

Looking forward to it, bring on the Navy!

Let me repost this because some people obviously don`t understand anything of what is happenning.

[carguy_]

Originally Posted by Baron

People going "tanks, WTF?" also doesnt think about the fact that the same can be said for ships for ex. I personally couldn't care less if we have a german minsweeper or a fishing trawler, i simply dont care and yet we had another massiv "we are doomed" reaction on that very topic a while ago (some of them are the very same people going "WTF" now btw) . What i am trying to understand though is that its not allways about me me me. If just one person on this forum was allowed to decide the entire content of this flightsim i guarantee u that it would look a lot different than, for ex, your perception on how it SHOULD look.

You said it all.
I`m a fighter jock, but I do not oppose making bombers flyable. After all, if I was the same mindset as some poeple commenting this update, I`be against modelling bombers which I NEVER fly and which take much more time and resources to make. That I could also say about any single ground object, as straffing is about 9% of all of my combat sorties.

Hell, why even make British fighters as I never fly them?

[5./JG27.Farber]

Originally Posted by carguy_

You said it all.
I`m a fighter jock, but I do not oppose making bombers flyable.

+1

Hear hear!

Its going to be in the game, get over it.

[carguy_]

Originally Posted by swiss

With (well simulated)tanks?
Everybody interested in the Genre probably owns the game by now. It was available for $10, remember? Now, If you look at the sales numbers one year after release you get an idea of how many units you potentially could sell.

Imho a dismal future - I mean, ROF is struggling too.

Not entirely true. I get repeated questions from interested gamers, if the game is yet fixed - this means CDTs and fps performance. If the patch introduces fixing of those issues, I will be able to give them a go ahead with buying CloD, as I could not really recommend the game before.

[Chivas]

There is no way the developer would take away assets that are necessary to develop the flight sim aspects to work on ground sim aspects. I certainly could see IC publishing expanding the developers budget to hire a couple of people to develop the ground sim. I'm not so sure putting those people to work on the FM, DM, AI, etc instead would have a positive effect or just get in the way of the people who already working on them.

Personally I don't think all the angst about the ground sim aspects is merited. Although it does keep the forum as lively and negative as if there no updates at all.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by carguy_

If the patch introduces fixing of those issues, I will be able to give them a go ahead with buying CloD, as I could not really recommend the game before.

Huh? For $10 you cant go wrong. No matter how buggy the game still is.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by carguy_

Let me repost this because some people obviously don`t understand anything of what is happenning.

Had the same idea, with pretty much the same wording.
You should quote him tomorrow again, but with bold letters. Some still cant see them.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by carguy_

You said it all.
I`m a fighter jock, but I do not oppose making bombers flyable. After all, if I was the same mindset as some poeple commenting this update, I`be against modelling bombers which I NEVER fly and which take much more time and resources to make. That I could also say about any single ground object, as straffing is about 9% of all of my combat sorties.

Hell, why even make British fighters as I never fly them?

Outstanding post!

They're already making tanks. Putting a human in them will only make them more fun to blow up.

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

Outstanding post!

They're already making tanks. Putting a human in them will only make them more fun to blow up.

True. Give us more stuff to explode

[pencon]

I think the priority should be first fix the various problems in the Sim with the AIRCRAFT , AI , Multplayer etc , and add the tanks and trains etc. after all the problems related to the FLIGHT sim are dealt with . Don't get me wrong the Ground vehicles are cool and all but first things first . (Not to be a snivler of course )