|
Bitter Mushroom posted:I've been an IL-2 fan since I was 11 years old, I love it dearly but haven't played it in about 5 years. Why is Cliffs of Dover so bad then? What exactly went wrong Oleg and company managed to work for 6-7 years and blew through millions (allegedly over 8 million) to give us a product that... -Ran well on only 5% of the highest or high-end PCs. -Had little to no documentation included, and what was included was out of date by the first week. -Players had to actually go to the forums to figure out how to use certain functions. -Nobody knew how to make co-op missions, and even making a quick mission was an exercise in frustration. -The sound guy couldn't make a working engine after 6 years, and as soon as Oleg was fired, he was booted as well. -Priorities were 1,000,000,000% backwards. With weeks taken to get the right shade of grey on tower bridge. -Flight modeling was atrocious, with none of the aircraft performing anywhere close to their actual abilities. -Trees had no collision detection. -The online community were so spergtastic that they would never play with icons, so everyone flew as low as they could, scanning the sky for enemies. -The campaigns were absolute poo poo, with every mission being, "Intercept/Escort 10 bombers", giving you no sense of the scale of the conflict. -Glaring graphical bugs that were really annoying (three blue lines, random square lakes, flickering trees, etc.) -Horrible slowdowns when approaching bombers, land, or the city. -20 mb textures for Pilot trousers. -Patches that made the game better or worse. . . flip a coin to decide. -Possibly the worst User Interface ever made in the history of software. -Nearly a full year between patches. -Patching that focused more on adding a useless static/AI units instead of something that actually affected the game. -Little to no communication with the fans, and the ones that they catered to represented 0.001% of the average fan's desires. -Horrible sound. -Announced dates that were never met. -5 months between releases in different countries. -Different FOV and Zoom options for the two main antagonists (BF-109 and Spit) -Very limited number of aircraft that can fly in a mission. (Rowans BOB had hundreds in the air at one time, CLOD could do 50 on an i7) -Generally being no fun to play as the only thing to do was fly the same 3 dogfight scenarios over and over again. I can see CLOD ending up going the Falcon 4.0 route and getting a total fan-made overhaul like the post earlier said. Unfortunately, you're probably going to see a lot of the priority being devoted to fonts and vegetation because it seems the average CLOD fan wants that much more than a playable game. I'm hoping that someone at Maddox Games lets the dev tools slip online and this allows modders to fix this turd and someday make it a game I'm ashamed to have spend $15 on. Then again 777 studios are now in charge of the reigns, so there is hope!
|
| # ? Mar 19, 2013 15:04 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2013 20:12 |
|
|
Well, I'm glad I didn't have the money to buy that when it came out, would've fallen for it for sure. But speaking of this: Blistex posted:
What can the original IL2 do nowadays? Is there some engine limitation on how many aircraft you can have in a mission or is it only limited by your machine?
|
| # ? Mar 19, 2013 22:53 |
|
|
I'd imagine there'd be an upper limit somewhere, especially being a 32 bit app with not so great netcode.
|
| # ? Mar 20, 2013 00:18 |
|
|
Blistex posted:presumably years of rage That was an incredibly comprehensive list, I feel your pain. I guess I'll stick with the original, I remember waiting an hour on 56k to download the patch that added the JU 87 stuka. Now that was a patch you could depend on.
|
| # ? Mar 20, 2013 10:21 |
|
|
Bitter Mushroom posted:That was an incredibly comprehensive list, I feel your pain. I guess I'll stick with the original, I remember waiting an hour on 56k to download the patch that added the JU 87 stuka. Now that was a patch you could depend on. There is one other critical point, and that is that they abandoned BoB to work on the sequel without ever fixing BoB, which pissed off a lot of people. To clarify, the sentiment was essentially "Sorry about that, we've fired some people and are just going to make a new game".
|
| # ? Mar 20, 2013 13:25 |
|
|
JerikTelorian posted:There is one other critical point, and that is that they abandoned BoB to work on the sequel without ever fixing BoB, which pissed off a lot of people. Can't believe that I forgot to mention that one. What pissed me off more than anything else was Luthier bragging that Maddox Games was patching their product a year after the release date, saying how great it is to have a studio that supports it products. Naturally he received much virtual-fellatio, and nobody bothered to mention that most studios can make a game work without a patch, and usually have everything fixed (barring new hardware innovations) within a month or two. What MG/1C did was the software equivalent of a high school girl delivering a baby in the toilet at prom, then running out to get knocked up by the same loser. If it wasn't for the fact that Freetrack will not work with my hardware, and IL-2 still doesn't have proper 3DOF without installing some manner of horribly complicated patch, I'd be playing it instead of venting rage about CLOD. It was supposed to be the new platform that an entire new generation of Combat flight sims were to be built on. There was supposed to be WWII, Korea, and an MMO. Now we have 777 buying the license, and just using the ROF engine to make a WWII sim. It's a nice engine and all, but it is nowhere near what CLOD was promised to be (well neither was CLOD). Bitter Mushroom's edited quote is pretty on the mark. I had been following CLOD for nearly 5 years prior to the original release. The devs made it sound like everything was perfect, and they were always just ironing out the wrinkles and straitening the edges. In reality they had a shambles of a program that honestly didn't even clue into the basics of what direction computer hardware was heading in. When they started working on the new engine in 05-06 dual core systems were pretty much the standard, and Intel and AMD were saying that they were putting all their eggs into quad core (and more) design. Instead of taking this into account, Oleg and co. design a product made to run off of a single core. I can't find the post now, but a guy on the 1C forums figured you'd need a 6ghz system to run CLOD properly. It wasn't until a year before release that they started to jam in some very rudimentary code that would even offload some of the work to another core. They were designing a game, with enough trees being accounted for in a map, that even just tracking them (not rendering them) would bring a modern system down to single digit FPS. The dynamic weather was such a resource hog that they couldn't even enable it. How do you design a game for 6 years and just hope that somehow the Game engine, Weather Engine, and Keeping track of tens of thousands of trees would be possible on a single core system? It's this kind of stupidity and the years of lying that have made me so bitter. It wasn't until it was released that people started to figure out that IL-2 was a fluke, because these guys honestly didn't know how to code. Blistex fucked around with this message at Mar 21, 2013 around 04:53 |
| # ? Mar 21, 2013 04:40 |
|
|
Good lord. I remember playing IL-2 a few years back on my 2008 budget box (in 2010), thinking it was super great to be playing this pretty game on a machine that could actually handle it, and then seeing screenshots for this next gorgeous IL-2 game, all this excited buzz, and thinking, "Well, looks like I'm about to be left behind yet again by those hot dog kids with their quad cores, Dual SLI, and TrackIR." Trees without collision detection, that's great. Do you know how many WWII pilots would have KILLED to have trees with no collision detection????
|
| # ? Mar 21, 2013 16:16 |
|
|
The greatest thing about the no collision trees was it forced a lot of people who had the horsepower to handle rendering them to disable them anyway. If you didn't, you were forced to contend with people popping out from under the tree canopy to reverse bounce you.
|
| # ? Mar 21, 2013 21:50 |
|
|
EvilJoven posted:The greatest thing about the no collision trees was it forced a lot of people who had the horsepower to handle rendering them to disable them anyway. If you didn't, you were forced to contend with people popping out from under the tree canopy to reverse bounce you. For those who have not been following, what EJ is talking about is the tactic that became standard in all CLOD servers. The reverse-bounce ruined the online experiences just as much as the lovely engine did. The only servers running were so loving spergalicious, that they never enabled tags/icons, so everyone tried to fly as low as they could because it was impossible to see someone below you over land unless tags were enabled. SO gaining altitude was a bad idea, because you were essentially being stalked by an invisible foe who could clearly see you silhouetted against the sky. After 2 hours and 4 servers, I had enough of scraping my belly on the ground and gave up on the online aspect of the game.
|
| # ? Mar 22, 2013 04:14 |
|
|
It's mind-boggling that a developer can gently caress up that bad. It's also interesting to see how one missing "feature" (I'm not sure collision-rendering on trees should be considered a feature.) can totally change the gameplay. Even in sim games. I think I should install IL-2 again now.
|
| # ? Mar 22, 2013 07:25 |
|
|
MrOnBicycle posted:It's mind-boggling that a developer can gently caress up that bad. It's also interesting to see how one missing "feature" (I'm not sure collision-rendering on trees should be considered a feature.) can totally change the gameplay. Even in sim games. What pisses me off the most is that Oleg not only ruined his company and CLOD, but he actually hurt the entire WWII flight simming industry. In 2006 it was announced that MG/1C would be producing a brand new WWII flight sim that would have a brand new engine, and be second-to-none in realism and features. Now having seen how IL-2 dominated the WWII flight sim market for the better part of a decade, do you think that any other company was about to go ahead and develop anything even remotely close to a realistic WWII flight sim? Everyone who was starting a WWII flight sim, or was thinking of starting one stopped. They all said, "Who is going to buy our game if Oleg and company are going to make one that will put ours to shame?" Nothing got done, a few "lite sims" were made, but that was it. Oleg's incompetance actually hurt an entire industry, and continues to do it to this day. "You want to start a realistic WWII flight sim? Look at CLOD sales, no way we're going to go down that road as well!" or.... "You want to start a realistic WWII flight sim? If the guys who did IL-2 couldn't pull it off, what makes you think we can?"
|
| # ? Mar 22, 2013 13:21 |
|
|
I'm more disappointed about how Clod, between the terrible engine and Ubi's marketing meddling, ruined the franchise. You see, it was originally going to be called Storm of War: Battle of Britain and was going to be the first of the that series. The claim was that the engine could handle many eras of planes and the next game would be a Korean War era game, finally joining the ranks of Chuck Yeager's Air Combat and Mig Alley as the only games about that war. Ubisoft wanted to change it to IL-2 to sell more games and then the engine clusterfuck killed it all.
|
| # ? Mar 22, 2013 21:43 |
|
|
So the netcode and FPS changes in the TF patch seem to be pretty good, ATAG got up to 120 players smooth and stable. Also the cockpit glint and fixed high alt performance helps stop ground skimming now.
|
| # ? Mar 22, 2013 23:33 |
|
|
How big is the patch? I'm not about to download 12 gigs worth of crap just to try it out. Hell, I've had the CLOD update on steam paused since whenever the last update was released. EDIT: it also better not require me logging on to the banana forums. I went and got myself permabanned there a short while after 1C did it's 'Eat a dick, CLOD players, we're making a new sim now!' bullshit and the sycophants on those horrible forums started kissing their asses again. EvilJoven fucked around with this message at Mar 23, 2013 around 01:15 |
| # ? Mar 23, 2013 01:09 |
|
|
The last official patch was pretty big and is from steam, the TF patch is 380 and you just download it from the torrent or link from last page, it has a more complicated install though. New stuff they're working on: Before  After + No framerate drop.  Wip Carrier  Wip Med 
Flannelette fucked around with this message at Mar 23, 2013 around 12:29 |
| # ? Mar 23, 2013 07:22 |
|
|
I'm thinking of getting into IL-2. I tried Pacific Fighters years and years ago, but the combination of my mediocre computer and craptacular joystick made the whole thing impossible. I've been playing War Thunder, and while it's a fun enough game, the arcade mode is a little arcadey and the other modes are... expensive (in in-game money, anyway). I was thinking of picking up this stick: http://www.saitek.com/uk/prod/x52.html and I've also got a webcam on order already for Track NoIR or whatever the best free program for that is. Have I made a terrible mistake with the stick? I was hoping to play space fighter games with it too, those are awful on an xbox controller.
|
| # ? Mar 31, 2013 15:29 |
|
|
X52 is a good stick, affordable, lots of programmable buttons and axis', adjustable and robust. Only problem I've ever had with it is the area under the return springs can need maintenance. Also you can probably find them a lot cheaper than that site, I got mine for half that price years ago. Flannelette fucked around with this message at Mar 31, 2013 around 16:18 |
| # ? Mar 31, 2013 15:55 |
|
|
CLOD Team Fusion Patch trip update. First of all, if you want to try this, disable Mumble overlay or the UI menus won't even launch properly. But to be honest, I'd not bother. There's still issues trying to spot aircraft. There seems to be a 1-2km deadzone where you just can't see anything. Apparently this is due to FOV but I haven't heard anything on how to fix it. Despite getting the game to launch and at least remembering how to turn on and fly a Hurricane, I just don't care. After getting shot down in my Hurricane by something I simply couldn't see, I tried to remember how to start up a Blenheim, failed once and decided I just can't be arsed to bother trying to like this game. Maybe I'll be able to drum up some enthusiasm for the IL-2 777 Studios puts out. EvilJoven fucked around with this message at Apr 1, 2013 around 22:03 |
| # ? Apr 1, 2013 19:28 |
|
|
Looks like they released the change log/readme for version 4.12. You can read the full thing here, but these are the highlights: New aircraft - Beaufort I (AI only) - Beaufort I late (AI only) - Beaufort II (AI only) - Do 217 M1 (AI only) - Ki-45 KAI OTSU - Ki-45 KAI KO - Mohawk IV (AI only) - Wellington III (AI only) New cockpits - B5N2 Kate - Hawk-75 (finnish) - Ki-45 (for all available versions) - SB 2M-100A AI changes - New taxi waypoints for AI (they can now taxi to the runway before takeoff). - Improved land avoidance. - AI detects when under AAA fire and can break the attack. - Shooting model changed to be more human like. - Added more options to the ‘order list’ (default key TAB). - Planes with co-pilot don't "go dead" when pilot is killed and co-pilot is still alive. - Fixed bug in ground collision detection, that could cause AI to crash into ground if plane was banked too much. New effects - Various visual effects have been changed, such as smoke, fire, water splashes and more. Efforts were made to keep the current minimal configuration specs. User interface changes - Widescreen UI (user interface) - All resolution supported by OS can be selected from the video setup UI. No conf.ini tweaking required. - Larger FoV (field of vision) for widescreen enabled. This is made with old controls and automatic conversion when the feature is enabled. - New “Misc” settings menu that includes lots of new settings and also old settings that previously could be changed only from conf.ini file. - Added UI color & detail customization from new Misc settings menu. - Added new splash screens and background screens. - FoV is adjustable when aiming with bomb sights. FoVs are unified for all bomb sights which means that Russian sight have better “zooming” level. Other features and fixes - P-38J cockpit repainted - New textures for several buildings - Added German IXB sub - Added German VIIB sub - Russian T-28 & T-35 tanks with multiple turrets can now shoot each gun independently. Russian AT Bunker (DOT103) also. - New landing gear failures - Adjustable reticle brightness - Added new key for opening & closing bomb bay doors. - Added option in tracks selection UI for disabling icons in track playback. - Added Air Force selection to FMB aircraft window. No need to scroll through all regiments. - Added yellow & blue runway lights. - Adjusted the white navigation light so it doesn't get bigger than the red & green when viewed from far away. - Added a new view key that cycles through only stationary cameras. - Changed radio station icons so that they are rendered in minimap & briefing if the army color is neutral or matches player's army. - User BMP skins enabled for stationary planes. - Added full screen map with adjustable transparency level. - Added red night light for maps when plane is flown at night and cockpit lights are on. - Changed old padlock difficulty option into two separate padlock options. Padlock air & padlock ground. - Bombsight added to D3A1 Val. - Added conf.ini option NoMissionInfoHud=1 under [game]. This will hide the "Mission completed" and similar messaged from HUD. - Added conf.ini option NoKillInfoHud=1 under [game]. This will hide the "Enemy/friendly xxx destroyed" messages from HUD. - Added conf.ini option SaveTrk=0 under [game]. This will disable automatic in-flight data storing for TRK tracks and reduce memory consumption. TRK cannot be saved after the mission. - Enabled ship padlocking. - Fixed spawn points problem on Midway sea base. - Fixed R-5 stationary plane ski orientation. - Adjusted IL-2 controls damage & toughness. - Fixed Fulmar's landing gear shock absorber movement. - Fixed IL-4 artificial horizon instrument movement. - Fixed bug that caused speed bar settings to reset back to default instead of using saved value.
|
| # ? Apr 2, 2013 00:58 |
|
|
Sackmo posted:Looks like they released the change log/readme for version 4.12. This is enough to get me playing again.
|
| # ? Apr 2, 2013 12:10 |
|
|
I'd love if we could get some IL2 groups going again. I'd totally drop the cash for TrackIR5, too. TB3 Jousts woop
|
| # ? Apr 5, 2013 17:37 |
|
|
Team Daedalus owns.
|
| # ? Apr 5, 2013 17:46 |
|
|
JerikTelorian posted:I'd love if we could get some IL2 groups going again. I'd totally drop the cash for TrackIR5, too. Am I the only one that uses my mouse left handed?
|
| # ? Apr 5, 2013 20:06 |
|
|
dayman posted:Am I the only one that uses my mouse left handed? What do you control the throttle with?
|
| # ? Apr 5, 2013 22:22 |
|
|
JerikTelorian posted:What do you control the throttle with?  Think I am gonna have to plug back in my joystick once this patch releases. I still got a couple of those moving dogfight servers I was working on.
|
| # ? Apr 5, 2013 23:40 |
|
|
JerikTelorian posted:What do you control the throttle with? That's the only difficult part, i need to remove my hand from the mouse for throttle control. Still works very well though, I've never felt restricted. I bring this up in case some guys are thinking of starting up but don't want to mess with freetrack/trackIR.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2013 13:19 |
|
|
All of my excitement is centered around the new visual effects and the Hawk. 
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2013 14:03 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2013 20:12 |
|
|
My TrackIR5 arrived today. It is amazing. Millions of times better than the Freetrack setup. So much better.
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2013 05:11 |
|
