PDA

View Full Version : Why does the debate about theFW gunsight hurts



zugfuhrer
04-07-2004, 04:01 PM
A master is a person that can pick out the essential detail out of a ocean of details.

One thing seems to stink in this forum, the FW190 gunsight.
It is like some old conflict that has never been solved.

Why has there got prestige in this detail out of a mass of details.
Is it hurt feelings, is it disrespect.

As what I have heard the man of power Oleg, has stated that he wont change this although that many men of perhaps less power can say that the revi sight in the FW is a mistake.

Perhaps like Fehler says "if it sounds like a duck, it smells like a duck, it looks like a duck, maybee it is a duck" although the sound can be from a canadian goose, the smell from a canard, and the siluette can be donald duck.
Then it can be anything.
Ivan wont you silence this with the power of deletion?

zugfuhrer
04-07-2004, 04:01 PM
A master is a person that can pick out the essential detail out of a ocean of details.

One thing seems to stink in this forum, the FW190 gunsight.
It is like some old conflict that has never been solved.

Why has there got prestige in this detail out of a mass of details.
Is it hurt feelings, is it disrespect.

As what I have heard the man of power Oleg, has stated that he wont change this although that many men of perhaps less power can say that the revi sight in the FW is a mistake.

Perhaps like Fehler says "if it sounds like a duck, it smells like a duck, it looks like a duck, maybee it is a duck" although the sound can be from a canadian goose, the smell from a canard, and the siluette can be donald duck.
Then it can be anything.
Ivan wont you silence this with the power of deletion?

georgeo76
04-07-2004, 04:08 PM
The worst thing about this debate is it never ends.

______________________
Fiend (http://webpages.charter.net/Stick_Fiend)

crazyivan1970
04-07-2004, 04:10 PM
Zug, can you please explain to me something.. what exactly are you trying to achieve by starting FW view thread every hour?

So?

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/coop-ivan.jpg

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/vfc/home.htm

Kozhedub: In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down.

arcadeace
04-07-2004, 04:21 PM
Zugfuhrer is a heavy dude!

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/222_1080289735_2032.gif

ZG77_Lignite
04-07-2004, 06:43 PM
Zugfurher wrote: 'One thing stinks in these forums'

Actually many things stink in these forums, if you can't smell it, it might be coming off of you. Thanks to Ivan (and the other moderators present and past) for attempting to air it out in here.

Zugfurher wrote: 'why is there prestige in this detail out of a mass of details'

Welcome to forum politics 101; when some-one is able to write 'proof' enough times in his post, it becomes forum legend. At some point it begins to sway others regardless of if it is true, relevant, or even coherent. Later in the cycle it can become so engulfing that everyone begins to take it as fact, regardless of the details true nature. Usually before something gets as big as the FW190 project, it is disproven or forgotten; however there is an army of post-zombies regarding this subject (you Zugfurher are now a front line soldier in this army) that will not let it be forgotten, or give in that it won't be changed, and are relentless in flaming anyone that disagrees (I think the FW190 has a great view, best in the sim, would love to see it better, but don't see why it should be).

It is all a natural cycle, it happens for many details (not just the FW190 view). However to date the FW190 view is the most extreme example of the cycle.

Sturmtrooper
04-07-2004, 07:18 PM
Zug ,
Drop it , dude .
This has been a thouroughly discussed topic .
Oleg has the Revi on the FW-190 the way he wants it .
It's gonna stay that way .
You are beating a dead horse .
Repeat after me : " the gunsight is fine the way that it is " .
There .
That wasn't hard , was it ?

http://home.bellsouth.net/coDataImages/p/Groups/183/183586/pages/456377/untitled1.gif

zugfuhrer
04-08-2004, 12:50 AM
I am not writing about the FW-sight, I am writing about the debate in general, and that is a totally different question.

Its that the FW-sight discussion seems to be a good object to analyze.

The discussion is the subject. Like a sort of meta-discussion.

The sightdiscussion has reached its endpoint, as you told me that Maddox he wont change it.

My purpose to write to this forum is to make a good game better.

I think that for example, if the inline engine radiators would be included in the damagemodel, the game would be better.

I have to my disapointment read that the FW dont have the correct revisight and to change this seems to be out of the question. I couldnt imagine that it was wrong.

Other more diffucult things to manipulate like to give the airplanes a higher degree of correct flight characteristics is perhaps to difficult. I dont say that it is wrong today, only that it could be better. Perhaps it is good enough? I dont know I havnt flown any of thoose planes that is in the game.

My conclusion is that the people who works with IL2/FB are very devoted to their job and the game and put lots of pride in what they do.
Perhaps thats why the game is as good as it it.
If its so it is to bad that it has become deadlock in some issues.