PDA

View Full Version : A little Dissapointed



ClnlSandersLite
02-01-2005, 12:25 AM
Ok, I know full well that I'm going to get flamed for this but it's my honest opinion.

Even though this is my first post on ubi (I think, at least with this account), I have been playing IL2 for quite some time now. I've been with the series since il2, a couple of months before the FB release. I've had PF since X-mas, so I'm not just running my mouth based on first impressions.

1. By far the biggest dissapointment to me in pf was the lack of ships. Even on the merged install, the number of ships is simply inadequate for a pacific theater sim. Especially in some instances like, it's impossible to tell a friendly cargo ship from an enemy since they're the same thing and you can't even padlock them.

2. For some time now, I've been upset with the lack of control over the AI. I'm NOT repeat NOT complaining about the AI's fighting capabilities here. There have been far too many instances where I wish I could do things like send a shot up fighter and his wingmate back to base, tell them to ignore this target or that, target a SPECIFIC ship, etc.

3. I've been simming for years now and in basically every sim I've played since 90, the AI wouldn't slam into hills like they didn't exist during normal flight operations. Dogfights have always been a problem, I know, but I mean during things like simple landings or level flight.

4. Reading through this board I haven't seen this one yet, but the case design for PF really sucks. I had to return 2 copies of the game because they CAME scratched. I imagine that it was due that single pilar that the cds fit (losely) on. It's probably too tall for it's own good. I thought that the first one was a fluke, but after the second....

5. The Game (out of box) really plays more like a Stand Alone expansion pack. You know, like Rainbow Six: Covert ops. It can integrate but doesn't have to. Not worth the 50 dollars I spent on it at christmas.

6. The loadout system has bugged me since the begining and after 2 sequals and 1 expansion, it still hasn't been fixed. A simple Hardpoint/weapon selection system would be ideal and has been common in sims for a long time now. True, not necessarially in ww2 sims, but common nonetheless.

7. The mission briefings are Still sparse. I don't mean on user made missions, that's the responsibility of the user. I'm refering specifically to generated and prebuilt missions.

8. I know the official line on this one but the lack of swastikas on german aircraft bugs the **** out of me. Somehow someone feals that swastikas are bad but the red star is acceptable. Baffels the mind, truly. But this is an old complaint.

9. Of course the lack of torpedo bombers on all sides. I would rather have liked to see swordfish as well as the common complaints here.

10. The reason we have a big addon coming is supposedly that it couldn't have fit on 2 cds as it was. Honestly folks I don't buy that at all. It's been over a month now. If that was the case, it would have been available for download nearly, if in actually, immediatly. The simple fact is that it just isn't done. They rushed the game out for a christmas release rather than a month or 2 after the season.

11. No **** infantry, ever. I don't expect every man to be modeled in full detail. But as a mud mover, I would like maybe a company or platoon all modeled as one unit. Maybe in fixed positions or advanceing. I'm not asking for super detail here, just a blob of men that move and kinda shoot.

12. It's sad that the best dynamic campaigns aren't to be found in the game. I absolutely love and appreciate Lowengrin for the work that he has done in that regard.

13. The complete lack of aircraft statistics in this incarnation. At least fb and aep had engine settings for it's aircraft in a pdf file. Still though in the whole series the planes have been missing documentation on things like corner speed, best sustained turn speed, G threshold, Dive limits, etc. IL2C is good but it's missing some essential information.

I know that this is the best out there as of now. Hell, that's the ONLY reason I have invested so much cash into the sim (total up the realease prices of 4 games, yeah, it's alot). I'm not really disappointed with the series as a whole, there where some extreemly memorable moments for me. Like when AEP came out and my favorite plane (the p-38) was modeled in the best sim ever. I **** near creamed my shorts. I just spent like 12 hours just flying it, no combat, just flight. But to be honest, this incarnation hasn't done that for me unlike all the others.

GR142-Pipper
02-01-2005, 12:59 AM
The IL-2/FB/PF series is certainly a nice sim and it's definitely a lot of fun. However, it's clear that the developers are a small team and their products' breadth (i.e. many plane types, etc.) have stretched things sometimes beyond the limits of supportability. One thing that is glaringly obvious is the very weak beta program that currently exists. I have my own software company and I know first-hand what's required and I can recognize when a product has been released without thorough beta testing.

Overall though, it's a lot of fun and the development team rates a well-deserved pat on the back for their efforts.

Just keep in mind that it's a small team that seems to be stretched very thin.

GR142-Pipper

Badsight.
02-01-2005, 01:13 AM
imho , the AI is this games biggest let-down

i mean its the representation of the game for offliners, you fly with & against AI accomplishing whatever your objective is

although the fight reasonably well the crashing into the ground for instance is a one thing that is actually pretty major

FB/PF by far doesnt have the worst AI tho in a CFS , noo rather the AI in FB/PF are some of the best

HotelBushranger
02-01-2005, 01:18 AM
Wow, thats great........

Now why don't you go away. Your post is IDENTICAL to every other "Im dissapointed/The game needs.../Why isn't/Theres something wrong..... post in this entire forum, and as of late theres been a lot. Alright thats your opinion, but so what? We're not the developers so why are you telling us this. WE ALREADY KNOW. A game is still a game, and a good one at this. You can't expect everything to be perfect, if there was then if you think about it this game woudln't have been made as there wouldnt have been a war. As for the infantry post, there was a discussion before, if you had checked. Making even a company of troops would be hard work, coz you gotta remodel them all, give them all different routes for running away, for example.

As for the box, well........ boofriggedyhoo. You get that, its just a box!

ClnlSandersLite
02-01-2005, 01:51 AM
"Now why don't you go away. "

Now, that's hardly polite in a public place. Instead, why don't you go sit in the corner.

"Your post is IDENTICAL to every other "Im dissapointed/The game needs.../Why isn't/Theres something wrong..... post in this entire forum, and "

Forgive me if I have not the time nor the inclination to read EVERY post on the message board but the fact that there is "as of late theres been a lot" might tell you something.

"Alright thats your opinion, but so what? We're not the developers so why are you telling us this. WE ALREADY KNOW. "

I'm telling you this because I had to voice my concerns. If I can't do it here, then, where?

"A game is still a game, and a good one at this. You can't expect everything to be perfect, "

I never did expect perfection. Granted a game is a game, but apparently you missed the spirit of my post.

"if there was then if you think about it this game woudln't have been made as there wouldnt have been a war."

I'm sorry, but perhaps you'd like to have another try at that line there. It's in no way anything approaching understandable english

"As for the infantry post, there was a discussion before, if you had checked. Making even a company of troops would be hard work, coz you gotta remodel them all, give them all different routes for running away, for example."

Like I said. I'm not looking for an extremely high end solution, although one would be great. I don't need 50 men to run in different directions. There have been a number of sims that model infantry on SOME level. I'm not asking for operation flashpoint here, just something basic.

"As for the box, well........ boofriggedyhoo. You get that, its just a box! "

Not when it trashes 2 copies of the game. That means I had to waste A WHOLE ***** day running back and forth to the store just so I could even SEE the game run. In any case, box design is important to any game. If it wasn't, why wouldn't they make larger boxes with decent manuals anymore?

Nice job completely ignoring the other 11 of my concerns BTW.

Old_Canuck
02-01-2005, 02:02 AM
Don't you people see what's going on here?

New sig.

First post.

This is really the Terrible Ivan having some fun on a laptop before the drinks arrive at his beachside hideaway ... right? ... Ivan?

dannyworkman
02-01-2005, 02:04 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gifI tghough the box was cool holds all my cds

ploughman
02-01-2005, 02:21 AM
Well said mate, that's constructive criticism not brazen negativity and yes you've got a point.

Basically, though, you do need to adopt a less "we're being screwed here" mind-set. Although every one here's a little affraid the link up with Ubi-soft may've put a corporate barrier betwix the developer and us Maddox games interacts very closely with the community andhas given a lot of stuff we haven't paid directly for. Try and think of the money you spent merely a sort of subscription to keep Oleg and Co. in beer and nappies while they work hard on an ongoing project. What you got in the box may have dissapointed, but you'll be getting a lot more before you're asked to hand over hard earned readies again.

ClnlSandersLite
02-01-2005, 02:38 AM
"Don't you people see what's going on here?

New sig.

First post.

This is really the Terrible Ivan having some fun on a laptop before the drinks arrive at his beachside hideaway ... right? ... Ivan?"

Sorry, not Ivan. I'm just not the messageboard poster type. I tend to spend all my time Laning with friends, programming, playing these games, and playing Operation Flashpoint. Between those items I'm pretty busy. Just posted because It was really bugging me.


"Well said mate, that's constructive criticism not brazen negativity and yes you've got a point."

Thank you ploughman.


"Basically, though, you do need to adopt a less "we're being screwed here" mind-set."

Sorry about that. I really didn't mean to come off in that particular way, just pent up fustration I guess.

"Try and think of the money you spent merely a sort of subscription to keep Oleg and Co. in beer and nappies while they work hard on an ongoing project. What you got in the box may have dissapointed, but you'll be getting a lot more before you're asked to hand over hard earned readies again."

Thank you for that. I didn't really think of it quite that way before. Makes me feel somewhat better about it, still though. You know what I mean.

EnGaurde
02-01-2005, 03:01 AM
you point out some valid issues indeed.

my mystified face still remains... why bother typing all this out, and why not just return the game quietly and let the fan base who have not experienced your troubles continue unconcerned by this?

Are you satisfied by posting your complaints?

Did anyone really want to read them?

I read an excellent, excellent post about pilot comparison of the fw190 and f4u / f6f... worthy posts i still read again and again. Im saddened i cannot contribute like that... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

i just dont understand why ppl bother posting complaints... just return it, and leave the series behind. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

why tell us ?

wh... fu..... ca....

ok, i do understand im a serial complainer hater.

i vote with my feet, not my mouth, when i dont like something.

moddys, please create a Complaint (sticky) Thread and delete anything that is not posted there. For the love of god these complaints are drowning this thread. Why?? * beats fists on table and sobs....*

I love this sim, i see its shortcomings but i accept the compromises of smaller developers vs immense publisher vs fantastic idea.

defend the people that will further the series, indeed this forum survives by them? And, at the same time, allow the ones that dont like it a voice.

a Complaint Thread.

PLEASE

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

EnGaurde
02-01-2005, 03:05 AM
A complaint is a gift.

CONTINUED complaints are nothing but a pain in the ar$e.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

HotelBushranger
02-01-2005, 03:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I'm sorry, but perhaps you'd like to have another try at that line there. It's in no way anything approaching understandable english <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif you make a good point. what I was TRYING to say was that, everything isn't perfect, if everything WAS perfect there wouldn't have been a war. As for infantry, yes I actually was also one to ask about that, but another bloke on these forums who was an IT bloke, said well...what I said. I'm looking for some nice scattered infantry too. But seeing is there none, and once you've voiced your opinions, theres nothin really you can do, unless you are able to find a way to implement it into the game.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>6. The loadout system has bugged me since the begining and after 2 sequals and 1 expansion, it still hasn't been fixed. A simple Hardpoint/weapon selection system would be ideal and has been common in sims for a long time now. True, not necessarially in ww2 sims, but common nonetheless. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What do you mean by that? What's wrong with it?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>10. The reason we have a big addon coming is supposedly that it couldn't have fit on 2 cds as it was. Honestly folks I don't buy that at all. It's been over a month now. If that was the case, it would have been available for download nearly, if in actually, immediatly. The simple fact is that it just isn't done. They rushed the game out for a christmas release rather than a month or 2 after the season. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

While I agree yes it should have been released after Chrissie, there are also points which makes you understand their position. Whilst they might have guaranteed buyers from the sim community, they also might of been trying to get new people in the simming community. And it would have been hard work, time consuming, in terms of business unwise, and costly to release a SECOND cd barely after the first one. How would it be packaged/advertised/costs etc.?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>8. I know the official line on this one but the lack of swastikas on german aircraft bugs the **** out of me. Somehow someone feals that swastikas are bad but the red star is acceptable. Baffels the mind, truly. But this is an old complaint. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I agree with you on that.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>3. I've been simming for years now and in basically every sim I've played since 90, the AI wouldn't slam into hills like they didn't exist during normal flight operations. Dogfights have always been a problem, I know, but I mean during things like simple landings or level flight. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ahhh.....AI. This has a loooong debates on it, and most people agree the opinion you have, and it's alright as long as you do make a HUGE fuss over it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>1. By far the biggest dissapointment to me in pf was the lack of ships. Even on the merged install, the number of ships is simply inadequate for a pacific theater sim. Especially in some instances like, it's impossible to tell a friendly cargo ship from an enemy since they're the same thing and you can't even padlock them. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As for ships, I would put it down to the rush to release it in time for Christmas.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>7. The mission briefings are Still sparse. I don't mean on user made missions, that's the responsibility of the user. I'm refering specifically to generated and prebuilt missions. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What sort of things do you want in the mission breifings? History, equipment, enemy info, Sqn info, weather, what? Try to specify.

And to finish it off, for my previous bad attitude, well put it down to a bad day. But, nonetheless hopefully we can get along from now on, and welcome to the PF forums! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

ClnlSandersLite
02-01-2005, 03:56 AM
"6. The loadout ........

What do you mean by that? What's wrong with it?"

Well, the system, right now, uses fixed combinations of ordinance. I'm going to use the P-38 L here as it's one of the aircraft I'm most familiar with. You can have either 2 bombs on the center 2 racks, with or without rockets on the outer wing. You can have drop tanks on the center racks. You can have .50 cal gunpods or rockets on the outer wings. Those are your choices. Now, with a hardpoint selection system, you could mix it up a little. Perhaps carry a pair of drop tanks center and the gunpods outer. Or drop tanks+rockets. Or Bombs and Gunpods. In adition to all of the above. This just means that for every hardpoint/pair of hardpoints, you select the ordanace that goes there. You would and should be limited by weight and historical restrictions, like no bombs on the outer wings, too much weight and you won't get off the ground or you'll go splash at the end of that flight deck etc.

"While I agree yes it should have been released after Chrissie, there are also points which makes you understand their position. Whilst they might have guaranteed buyers from the sim community, they also might of been trying to get new people in the simming community. And it would have been hard work, time consuming, in terms of business unwise, and costly to release a SECOND cd barely after the first one. How would it be packaged/advertised/costs etc.?"

Honestly I don't know. Right now I'm just kinda irritated that they've been promising this since the release, "Two Weeks" as someone around here likes to say, and it hasn't come to fruitation.

"Ahhh.....AI. This has a loooong debates on it, and most people agree the opinion you have, and it's alright as long as you do make a HUGE fuss over it."

No intention of making a huge fuss. This Topic is most probably the one and only time I'll bring it up.

"As for ships, I would put it down to the rush to release it in time for Christmas."

I sincerely hope so.

"What sort of things do you want in the mission breifings? History, equipment, enemy info, Sqn info, weather, what? Try to specify."

You know, things like flight time, At each Waypoint IAS, TAS, Altitude, heading to next waypoint, weather, forcast (probably not relevant as I personally haven't experienced a weather change with the exception of light level) Expected resistance if known, photo recon if available, etc.

"And to finish it off, for my previous bad attitude, well put it down to a bad day. But, nonetheless hopefully we can get along from now on, and welcome to the PF forums! "

No problem and thank you.

I also have numerous gripes that where either too small to bring up, already mentioned numerous times (from the comparitively small amount of the board I've been able to read), not really worth the devs time to fix (IMO), etc.

pettera
02-01-2005, 03:57 AM
ClnlSandersLite, I think all your points are well founded and I hope Oleg & Co. takes your advices seriously.

On the other hand, I disagree totally when you think it is expensive. I also have "invested" in all the boxes (IL2, IL2FB, AEP and PF) and think it is incredibly cheap for all the fun. Compare to the price of your rig, your broadband connection, TV,... Also I think Ploughman has a very good point:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Try and think of the money you spent merely a sort of subscription to keep Oleg and Co. in beer and nappies while they work hard on an ongoing project. What you got in the box may have dissapointed, but you'll be getting a lot more before you're asked to hand over hard earned readies again. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So all in all try to look at the bright side of things: An incrdible variation in planes and scenarios, very stable software (maybe not PF?), great online fun, lots of free add-ons and actually very cheap for being a niche product.

But, there are surely room for improvements. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Petter

Flakenstien
02-01-2005, 04:13 AM
ClnlSandersLite: You must understand by posting here you are posting to a majority of 9 year old and younger, so harsh nonsense replies are to be expected http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>my mystified face still remains... why bother typing all this out, and why not just return the game quietly and let the fan base who have not experienced your troubles continue unconcerned by this? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My mystified face still remains... Isn't this what forums are for??
If not for posting complaints, input, advice etc what is the point of a forum??

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Your post is IDENTICAL to every other "Im dissapointed/The game needs.../Why isn't/Theres something wrong..... post in this entire forum, and "

Forgive me if I have not the time nor the inclination to read EVERY post on the message board but the fact that there is "as of late theres been a lot" might tell you something. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And the reason for not wanting to read through every post to see what might have already been said is just because of the fact that every post in these forums has people just like you Hotel that will waste space bashing the original poster! Don't you see how stupid you sound??
Your bashing Sanders for babbling away about stuff that has already been posted but yet you reply with the same thing the other children replied with in those very exact post that you mention. Double standards I guess???

No worry Sanders as you can tell the ones who waste space in these forums bashing others are also the ones that call this a "game" and not a "sim", this proves that they offer nothing but critism against a members post because it is obvious they can't post anything to offer help or constructive critisim because they are flying a game not a sim http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
These are also the same ones that will complain about how a particular aircraft is "porked" even though they have never flown a P38 fully loaded with drop tanks and armorment in real life, but are experts on how one handles http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Hell if half the postings in these forums were anything of use there would be a few topics and 3 pages to read through to find answers.

HotelBushranger
02-01-2005, 04:24 AM
Flakenstein, as I stated previously, "for my previous bad attitude, well put it down to a bad day."

I'm not so critical most of the time lol, however seeing you're low number of posts, I'd say you haven't been round long enough to see that.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>No worry Sanders as you can tell the ones who waste space in these forums bashing others are also the ones that call this a "game" and not a "sim", <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I would say this is a "game", being on your "computer", maybe in your "games" folder.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>These are also the same ones that will complain about how a particular aircraft is "porked" even though they have never flown a P38 fully loaded with drop tanks and armorment in real life, but are experts on how one handles Wink <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As for that, I have never said anything about porked planes, nor have I complained in any way about the game. I appreciate what I get

Sqn81-Blacksky
02-01-2005, 04:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by EnGaurde:
you point out some valid issues indeed.

my mystified face still remains... why bother typing all this out, and why not just return the game quietly and let the fan base who have not experienced your troubles continue unconcerned by this?

Are you satisfied by posting your complaints?

Did anyone really want to read them? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess he posted this because (like many people more including me) on one side he loves the game on the other side he is disappointed with what we get...and he is quite correct with it.

I still do not understand why an unfinished programm was rushed to the market with some lame excuses and promises about what will follow (well, we are still waiting)...you won´t gain new sim-lovers with this, but you will loose a few that gave the game a try.
I love it because i play the series since the day the demo came out and because i fly most times online with my squadmates. I tried PF offline and i hate it. The missions are a bore, the campaigns the same, the ever crashing AI is just plain horrible.
Yes i know we will get in the end, what we where promised on the box and hopefully more (well we ever did in the past) but somebody new to this game won´t be happy to be forced to dl several 10-100mb just to get what she/he has allready paied for.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>i just dont understand why ppl bother posting complaints... just return it, and leave the series behind. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess its just a matter of tastes, you may return the game, others like him and me love it despite the huge faults and would like to see it improved...and like the past shows, by complaining we get the game better..remember the MF-discussion? If we would have belived the" they will never change it"-group we would still be blinded by the guns..

Recon_609IAP
02-01-2005, 04:41 AM
I see the community is really growing to be a positive one...... makes you want to hang out here and get insulted for posting opinions that were truthful, well written, etc...

PF was done in a limited time and only promised a limited arena. Continued work and patches are to supplement the game. It was that, or wait months and months and months. You should have seen this place before Christmas, people going crazy to get the game. It satisfied many, disapointed some.

The positive again is that 1C continues to update and make it better - think 'work in progress'.

There is a tons to enjoy in the game, try to focus more on that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I see you found DCG, that will fill many hours of your day - great program.

Flakenstien
02-01-2005, 04:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Flakenstein, as I stated previously, "for my previous bad attitude, well put it down to a bad day."

I'm not so critical most of the time lol, however seeing you're low number of posts, I'd say you haven't been round long enough to see that.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand your contraction and it is respected that you have done that most replies lack that.
But as for my post count, counts mean nothing it in no way represents how long I have been at these forums just how long I have posted under this screen name http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I assure you I have been around for quite awhile http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

As for the "porked" aircraft comment that was not directed only at you but the many others here that do exactly what is stated as my making a point as to why so many of us don't bother weeding through every topic wich is filled with insane amounts of useless babble (just trying to keep my opinions all in one post instead of many for others to have to go through http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )
I just feel that Sanders posted a valid post, well written and to the point, something these forums lack greatly. Yours was the first post i came across that grabbed me the wrong way so I used you as a referance for placing my reply although not all was intended directly at you but the numerous others that reply with garbage http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I appologise if it appears I am only refering to you!

PS. I don't have a games folder on my hard drive http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif but do have a UBI Sims folder. LOL

ClnlSandersLite
02-01-2005, 05:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> ClnlSandersLite: You must understand by posting here you are posting to a majority of 9 year old and younger, so harsh nonsense replies are to be expected <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Undoubtedly.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR><BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> why bother typing all this out, and why not just return the game quietly and let the fan base who have not experienced your troubles continue unconcerned by this? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>My mystified face still remains... Isn't this what forums are for??
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

For "mystifying" faces? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Seriously though, the reason is, because I care. Assuming we are playing the same game here, 3.04 and/or 3.04m, we should all be experiencing the same problems. Of course some of us care more about some problems more than others.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I guess its just a matter of tastes, you may return the game, others like him and me love it despite the huge faults and would like to see it improved... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Spot on

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I see you found DCG, that will fill many hours of your day - great program. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Been using DCG for awhile now, just cuz I don't post doesn't mean I don't have a clue. But yes, the program is truly great, it's provided me with many hours of an enjoyable game.

In anycase, it's 0603 here and I really needing some sleep so I'll check back here tomorrow.

HotelBushranger
02-01-2005, 05:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I understand your contraction and it is respected that you have done that most replies lack that.
But as for my post count, counts mean nothing it in no way represents how long I have been at these forums just how long I have posted under this screen name Wink I assure you I have been around for quite awhile http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fair enough http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>As for the "porked" aircraft comment that was not directed only at you but the many others here that do exactly what is stated as my making a point as to why so many of us don't bother weeding through every topic wich is filled with insane amounts of useless babble (just trying to keep my opinions all in one post instead of many for others to have to go through Wink )
I just feel that Sanders posted a valid post, well written and to the point, something these forums lack greatly. Yours was the first post i came across that grabbed me the wrong way so I used you as a referance for placing my reply although not all was intended directly at you but the numerous others that reply with garbage Wink <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks, I'm glad you think my posts are rubbish http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

And as for Sanders post, well looking back a few hours later, yes I agree. So yeah, I guess it was just wrong place at the wrong time.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I appologise if it appears I am only refering to you! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah no worries, I was unsure how to reply because what you said could have been read several different ways.


Recon put it best:
There is a tons to enjoy in the game, try to focus more on that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

EnGaurde
02-01-2005, 06:28 AM
seems we need a dedicted complaint thread...

please.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

EnGaurde
02-01-2005, 06:32 AM
why didnt anyone quote this part of my post...

moddys, please create a Complaint (sticky) Thread and delete anything that is not posted there.

solves my problems.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LEXX_Luthor
02-01-2005, 06:45 AM
Poster made good suggestion though...write your Politician to Fix FB.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Somehow someone feals that swastikas are bad but the red star is acceptable. Baffels the mind, truly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The countries of former Soviet Union allow FB to be sold with Swastika enabled. And, they lost more from the Nazis than anybody (along with Poland). Ask your western Leader to Fix FB.

You want to display Hammmer~n~Sickle to go with your Swastika. But the Soviets didn't put the Political symbol on combat airplanes. Ya, a little dissapointing. But, the game can display Black Cross and Red Star military symbols.

Waffels the mind. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

carguy_
02-01-2005, 07:02 AM
A valid post with valid complaints and suggestions.The guy just wrote what he doesn`t like in the game,let him.

What I don`t like is "I got screwed" attitude.Now if a only-PF owner say this it`s ok cuz PF as a standalone is very limited and not really worth a title of a standalone game IMO.However anybody who bought it`s predecessors should be happy with the grand 3.04m compilation which has many flaws but also far more cool stuff.Also I think it is about user perspective.Those that prefer western&eastern front tend to be satisfied wheareas PTO maniacs have every right to complain.PTO is just not well modelled,the dev strategy had made some serious mistakes.
Moreover though we should stick stricktly to constructive criticism.

I`m a 3.04m user and setting all DM/FM whines aside the compilation is great IMO.

I have installed both standalone and merged but the first didn`t last two hours on my hard drive.

papaboon
02-01-2005, 07:13 AM
Geez, I'm glad someone has the time to type out all these posts!

Sometimes I come in here to read the posts and pick up a few pointers here and there and then other times it's like reading the year end prospectus from my 401K provider!

I'm afraid I'm guilty as anyone (many may not want to admit it)... by passing over a post that looks to be long a drawn out and beating the proverbial dead horse!

For that I apologize, I know some of you put quite abit of thought into your posts and are honestly trying to be "constructive"!
But in retrospect many valid points were brought out, which again, we all know about! I just try to enjoy what the game has to offer!

Bottom line is.....at least we are all still here discussing the game and debating the issues, that's more then some games can say!

ImpStarDuece
02-01-2005, 07:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ClnlSandersLite:
Ok, I know full well that I'm going to get flamed for this but it's my honest opinion.

Even though this is my first post on ubi (I think, at least with this account), I have been playing IL2 for quite some time now. I've been with the series since il2, a couple of months before the FB release. I've had PF since X-mas, so I'm not just running my mouth based on first impressions.

1. By far the biggest dissapointment to me in pf was the lack of ships. Even on the merged install, the number of ships is simply inadequate for a pacific theater sim. Especially in some instances like, it's impossible to tell a friendly cargo ship from an enemy since they're the same thing and you can't even padlock them. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The lack of ships is a little bit of a sore point with the community. Look at the "what ships will be in the next patch" thresd to see what people are doing constructively about it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 2. For some time now, I've been upset with the lack of control over the AI. I'm NOT repeat NOT complaining about the AI's fighting capabilities here. There have been far too many instances where I wish I could do things like send a shot up fighter and his wingmate back to base, tell them to ignore this target or that, target a SPECIFIC ship, etc.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You can use the padlock views to get the AI to target individual planes or ships. there is a plane padlock ( defult is F6) and a ground targets padlock (default is F7).



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 3. I've been simming for years now and in basically every sim I've played since 90, the AI wouldn't slam into hills like they didn't exist during normal flight operations. Dogfights have always been a problem, I know, but I mean during things like simple landings or level flight. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The upgrades to the DGEN seem to have fixed most of the problems regarding AI crashes, but they still occur. They have been a constant factor in the sim and unfortunatly I think that wihtout a rewrite of the AI coding we will just have to endure. Mostly it seem to me that the AI hit low hills with slow rises. Large hils are usually avoided.

For what its woth the AI HAS got better in this respect in the past few patches. It still happens but noticably less. I put it down to "insufficent training" for AI pilots or operational accidents and just deal with it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 4. Reading through this board I haven't seen this one yet, but the case design for PF really sucks. I had to return 2 copies of the game because they CAME scratched. I imagine that it was due that single pilar that the cds fit (losely) on. It's probably too tall for it's own good. I thought that the first one was a fluke, but after the second.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think you were HIGHLY unlucky there. Thats not a sim design problem though. Its a production and marketing design thing. I would rather look to the publisher than the game desiners for this one. Mine survived shipping from the US and then down to Kumamoto with out a scratch though.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 5. The Game (out of box) really plays more like a Stand Alone expansion pack. You know, like Rainbow Six: Covert ops. It can integrate but doesn't have to. Not worth the 50 dollars I spent on it at christmas. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well thats because it sort of is. Kind of. I NEVER considered PF a real stand alone product. No offense to Illya and the team for their outstanding work but it was always just an adjunct to the FB serise to me. Yes it works as a stand alone. Sure, there are a **** lot of airplanes, carriers, new ground objects, new features in the game but it is basically an extension of the existing game engine. It didn't try to reinvent the wheel but contine an excellent tradition. That "Bright, Shiny, New" feeling will have to wait until BoB it released.

AS for the game costing $50 dollars US, hmmm. How much did the expansions for Warcraft or Operation Flashpoint cost. Now take those expansions and see if they add as much to the basic game as PF did to FB. I dont think they compare at all. What you have is an essentially complete game that plays well out of the box, not just an addition to FB.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 6. The loadout system has bugged me since the begining and after 2 sequals and 1 expansion, it still hasn't been fixed. A simple Hardpoint/weapon selection system would be ideal and has been common in sims for a long time now. True, not necessarially in ww2 sims, but common nonetheless. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The user interface in IL is more than a little clunky. As the game gets longer in the toothh so do the scrolled lists of planes, ships, weapons, loadouts ect. Still I have little problem with the variety of loadouts presented to us or the variability of said loadouts. Still a tailored loadout system would be nice. What we have works but its ot the mose elegant system ive seen.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 7. The mission briefings are Still sparse. I don't mean on user made missions, that's the responsibility of the user. I'm refering specifically to generated and prebuilt missions. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think this comes from its lineage as a VVS sim where tings were a little simpler than the European and Pacific. In the east, initially at least, a lot of the missions were; "take off, circle point X to cover our forces, return when fuel is low. we dont have any idea on enemy numbers, strenght or equipment". There was a certain directness to the briefing system (some might call it bloody blunt) that i sort of like though.

As the DGEN is a random mission generator there is only so much that a per flight mission briefing generator can handle wihtout it becoming awkward and clumsy. I remember some EAW missions where the mission brief had NOTHING to do with the actual msission flown.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 8. I know the official line on this one but the lack of swastikas on german aircraft bugs the **** out of me. Somehow someone feals that swastikas are bad but the red star is acceptable. Baffels the mind, truly. But this is an old complaint. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is a legal issues and cant be considered a real criticism. The Swastika cannot be displayed legally in several countires. There are large penalties both financial and legal for doing so. It is simply not possible for 1C to include the swastica in the European market.

There are add-ons ilike IL2STAB that do allow you to place correct political markings on the fighters though.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 9. Of course the lack of torpedo bombers on all sides. I would rather have liked to see swordfish as well as the common complaints here. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There ARE torpeedo bombers last time i checked. The Beaufighter, Il2 T, He-111, A-20 and B-25 all carry torpedoes.

I think what you mean is the lack of carrier launched American and Japanese torpedo bombers. Hmmm, well as far as I can see teh title of the game/expanson is called "PAcific Fighters'. Fighter, not bombers but you got three flyable bomers into the mix. Personally I dont see that many people flying the currently available torpedo planes so I wonder sometimes what all the fuss is about.

True, without the torpedo bombers there is a hole in the sim. However, I dont think that 1c or Illya made any claims that this was wholly going to represent the entire pacific campaign and every facet there of. After all, Il2 didn't come close to representing the depth and scope of the Eastern front and it still doesn't. It has however, grown immensly in the past 3 years. It has more than double the amount of planes, tripled the flyables, tripled the maps and added countles other things. Patientce is a virtue. I have a feel ing some, if not all, of you bombing need will be fulfilled.

10. The reason we have a big addon coming is supposedly that it couldn't have fit on 2 cds as it was. Honestly folks I don't buy that at all. It's been over a month now. If that was the case, it would have been available for download nearly, if in actually, immediatly. The simple fact is that it just isn't done. They rushed the game out for a christmas release rather than a month or 2 after the season.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 11. No **** infantry, ever. I don't expect every man to be modeled in full detail. But as a mud mover, I would like maybe a company or platoon all modeled as one unit. Maybe in fixed positions or advanceing. I'm not asking for super detail here, just a blob of men that move and kinda shoot. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

All this means is extra polys and an extra drain on RAM. Companies dont really move as a cohesive unil, to do so is sor of defeating the point of cover, concealment and movement. We dont have bushes, hedges or ground cover in Il2 so i dont really think that having massed 'blobs' of infantry is going to be much of an improvement. Besides, isnt the fleeing infantry in the armoured columns and the Gunners on the AAA guns enough?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 12. It's sad that the best dynamic campaigns aren't to be found in the game. I absolutely love and appreciate Lowengrin for the work that he has done in that regard. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is always room for improvement. What one man can build another can improve on. You do have a better campaign generator though, so why are you complaining?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 13. The complete lack of aircraft statistics in this incarnation. At least fb and aep had engine settings for it's aircraft in a pdf file. Still though in the whole series the planes have been missing documentation on things like corner speed, best sustained turn speed, G threshold, Dive limits, etc. IL2C is good but it's missing some essential information. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I havent looked for these yet. Maybe the community could get together and try and sort something out. I can just imagine the flaming and argments now, Ivan would be really happy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

plumps_
02-01-2005, 08:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>6. The loadout system has bugged me since the begining and after 2 sequals and 1 expansion, it still hasn't been fixed. A simple Hardpoint/weapon selection system would be ideal and has been common in sims for a long time now. True, not necessarially in ww2 sims, but common nonetheless. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I wouldn't expect a simple 'fix' to a basic concept of programming... With about 250 plane types that we now have it would be an enormous task to change a loadout system that was once created to give us a choice of historical loadouts for a very limited range of types. And you're likely to break something if you change it. This also has deep implications in the net code.

The system will be different in Oleg's next generation of sims.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>11. No **** infantry, ever. I don't expect every man to be modeled in full detail. But as a mud mover, I would like maybe a company or platoon all modeled as one unit. Maybe in fixed positions or advanceing. I'm not asking for super detail here, just a blob of men that move and kinda shoot. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
There are a few new infantry objects with soldiers in PF (mortar position, AAA guns...). You need to add 3dgunners=1 to the conf.ini to see the men (see readme file). You'll also see people manning the AAA guns on aircraft carriers.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>12. It's sad that the best dynamic campaigns aren't to be found in the game. I absolutely love and appreciate Lowengrin for the work that he has done in that regard. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
OK, you found dynamic campaigns that are better than the stock ones. REJOICE!

Sharkey888
02-01-2005, 08:18 AM
I really have to agree with the OP. Having lurked on these forums since the beginning in 2001, I only really started to post when I saw things going downhill!

This is what these forums are for, people should not take the ctriticism so personally, unless of course, they were the programmer/modeler being criticized!!

I have all the games and have a great time with them. I guess I'm one of the hardcore 10,000 who play air sims seriously. What worries me are the potential 1,000,000 other casual simmers who bought PF as a stand alone only to see an unfinished/rushed product.

What will they do when BOB is released and say "Oh yea, those were the guys who made the half-baked PF", will they buy it?! I certainly hope so, as I love these games.

I guess I look at these "criticism posts" as a warning to 1C, NOT as heresy against the IL2 series!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

actionhank1786
02-01-2005, 09:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ClnlSandersLite:
Ok, I know full well that I'm going to get flamed for this but it's my honest opinion.

Even though this is my first post on ubi (I think, at least with this account), I have been playing IL2 for quite some time now. I've been with the series since il2, a couple of months before the FB release. I've had PF since X-mas, so I'm not just running my mouth based on first impressions.

1. By far the biggest dissapointment to me in pf was the lack of ships. Even on the merged install, the number of ships is simply inadequate for a pacific theater sim. Especially in some instances like, it's impossible to tell a friendly cargo ship from an enemy since they're the same thing and you can't even padlock them.

Since when weren't ships padlockable?

2. For some time now, I've been upset with the lack of control over the AI. I'm NOT repeat NOT complaining about the AI's fighting capabilities here. There have been far too many instances where I wish I could do things like send a shot up fighter and his wingmate back to base, tell them to ignore this target or that, target a SPECIFIC ship, etc.

3. I've been simming for years now and in basically every sim I've played since 90, the AI wouldn't slam into hills like they didn't exist during normal flight operations. Dogfights have always been a problem, I know, but I mean during things like simple landings or level flight.

-AI isnt human. It does what the game tells it, for the most part it does just fine, every now and then it gets a little crazy, but it's nothing show stoppig. A bit of a neausance at times, but that's not that big of a deal.

4. Reading through this board I haven't seen this one yet, but the case design for PF really sucks. I had to return 2 copies of the game because they CAME scratched. I imagine that it was due that single pilar that the cds fit (losely) on. It's probably too tall for it's own good. I thought that the first one was a fluke, but after the second....

-That isnt anything Oleg can do as far as i'd know. I think most of that was left up to Ubisoft, Oleg himself said he was dissapointed with the box for a number of reasons.

5. The Game (out of box) really plays more like a Stand Alone expansion pack. You know, like Rainbow Six: Covert ops. It can integrate but doesn't have to. Not worth the 50 dollars I spent on it at christmas.

-It does, because that's what it is. It's a new theatre, not a brand new game. People are expecting PF to change Il-2 into something it's not. It's the same game, same engine, same everything. Only moved to a new location, with some new maps, and carriers and wavey water.
As for not being worth 50 dollars i'd say that's quite an understatement, i've had more fun since installing PF than i can remember ever having with any other Stand Alone Game. If this is just an add on, it makes lots of other real games look bad.

6. The loadout system has bugged me since the begining and after 2 sequals and 1 expansion, it still hasn't been fixed. A simple Hardpoint/weapon selection system would be ideal and has been common in sims for a long time now. True, not necessarially in ww2 sims, but common nonetheless.

-The Loadout system is just kept simple. No reason to knock it. You've got a huge variety for most planes, you just can't load individual hardpoints to your liking. No big deal...

7. The mission briefings are Still sparse. I don't mean on user made missions, that's the responsibility of the user. I'm refering specifically to generated and prebuilt missions.

8. I know the official line on this one but the lack of swastikas on german aircraft bugs the **** out of me. Somehow someone feals that swastikas are bad but the red star is acceptable. Baffels the mind, truly. But this is an old complaint.

-That isnt up to Oleg and Co. either. You want them, you should download Aces_High_2 i thinks, MAT manager program. you get Swastikas and more.
The reason they're left out (as i'm sure has been stated time and again...) is that in germany, the Swastika (maybe more places than just germany too) has been banned. Since there's the Russian version of the game, then the rest of the world version of the game, Oleg has to eliminate them so that he can ship to those countries.


9. Of course the lack of torpedo bombers on all sides. I would rather have liked to see swordfish as well as the common complaints here.

-Yeah yeah, this ones been run into the ground before.
It's been addressed, so yeah...i'll leave it.

10. The reason we have a big addon coming is supposedly that it couldn't have fit on 2 cds as it was. Honestly folks I don't buy that at all. It's been over a month now. If that was the case, it would have been available for download nearly, if in actually, immediatly. The simple fact is that it just isn't done. They rushed the game out for a christmas release rather than a month or 2 after the season.

That may not have been true, but regardless of that. It's coming, and since you've been with the game for some time, the level of support you'er going to get shouldnt even be in question.
Oleg has never failed to do what he says. He alwyas goes a step above what he should do. Hell Oleg isnt even required to give us anything else, he could have left the game as it was out of the box, but he didnt, and i know he wont stop supporting this game, until he absolutely has to.

11. No **** infantry, ever. I don't expect every man to be modeled in full detail. But as a mud mover, I would like maybe a company or platoon all modeled as one unit. Maybe in fixed positions or advanceing. I'm not asking for super detail here, just a blob of men that move and kinda shoot.

That's a personal preference. That would take up a lot more CPU cycles, and or look really bad. So it's a lose-lost situation. Add bad looking models/sprites, everyone pisses and moans that they look bad, dont die right, have incorrect DMs, or demand they be flyable. If he were to make them nice, it's take up a lot of CPU power, and we'd all be stuck watching a slide show.

12. It's sad that the best dynamic campaigns aren't to be found in the game. I absolutely love and appreciate Lowengrin for the work that he has done in that regard.

-With all the time they spend fixing bugs, and correcting DMs and FMs from people whining, who has time to make new missions?

13. The complete lack of aircraft statistics in this incarnation. At least fb and aep had engine settings for it's aircraft in a pdf file. Still though in the whole series the planes have been missing documentation on things like corner speed, best sustained turn speed, G threshold, Dive limits, etc. IL2C is good but it's missing some essential information.

-That's something you can look up, it's just something that would take up that much more space on the CD, and could just as well be found by your standard person.

I know that this is the best out there as of now. Hell, that's the ONLY reason I have invested so much cash into the sim (total up the realease prices of 4 games, yeah, it's alot). I'm not really disappointed with the series as a whole, there where some extreemly memorable moments for me. Like when AEP came out and my favorite plane (the p-38) was modeled in the best sim ever. I **** near creamed my shorts. I just spent like 12 hours just flying it, no combat, just flight. But to be honest, this incarnation hasn't done that for me unlike all the others. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

cwojackson
02-01-2005, 04:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ClnlSandersLite:
Ok, I know full well that I'm going to get flamed for this but it's my honest opinion.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>If only you had managed to work in the words "open source" you could have been totally villified.

LEXX_Luthor
02-01-2005, 09:17 PM
No flight sim is open source, I may be wrong though. I heard somebody made AI see clouds in Rowan's BoB, so that may require recompile of source, if that's how it worked in BoB.

ClnlSandersLite
02-02-2005, 03:01 AM
*Edit* Whoops accidently chopped the top off in my copy-paste ops.

Wow almost a full page of replies since I signed off yesterday. This thing's actually fairly active.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>why didnt anyone quote this part of my post...

moddys, please create a Complaint (sticky) Thread and delete anything that is not posted there. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
2 reasons engaurde:
1. Firstly it is somewhat off topic. Even if it is a somewhat moderate Idea.
2. Because you are apparently whining about whining...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The countries of former Soviet Union allow FB to be sold with Swastika enabled. And, they lost more from the Nazis than anybody (along with Poland). Ask your western Leader to Fix FB. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The US and many other "Western" nations don't have any laws about swastikas. I have seen many games which have swastikas and are shiped globaly. The way they get around this has traditionally been either A. a togle, B. detection the users local settings and automatically disabeling them if in certain zones, or C. a combination of the 2.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>A valid post with valid complaints and suggestions.The guy just wrote what he doesn`t like in the game,let him. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I didn't say I didn't like the game, I said specifically that I'm dissapointed with this particular incarnation.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>However anybody who bought it`s predecessors should be happy with the grand 3.04m compilation which has many flaws but also far more cool stuff. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I am playing 3.04m. These flaws, which in your post you mention a few times, have moved my opinion on, specifically, pf from happy to moderately displeased. I can understand and justify many of the flaws in FB+AEP. Especially as a programmer. But as a "Sequal", which is what it has been billed as, some of the code reworks that prevented fixes in the past should have been changed.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Bottom line is.....at least we are all still here discussing the game and debating the issues, that's more then some games can say! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Very true. This games community is still here now, and probably for a few years to come. One of the things that any gamer can appreciate.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>plane padlock ( defult is F6) and a ground targets padlock (default is F7) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Those are external padlocks. I know the **** controls. The internal ground targets padlock does not target ships (99% positive). I also do not ever use any external/no cockpit views with the sole exception of tracks. IMHO these features detract from my in game combat experience. Some will doubtlessly disagree on that point, but that's my 2 cents.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The upgrades to the DGEN seem to have fixed most of the problems regarding AI crashes, but they still occur. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, they have not. The only thing that did was set the waypoints higher. This would fall under the catagorey of workaround, not fix, as many airstrips and possible flight paths are unusable when AI is present. You also assume I use DGEN.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I think you were HIGHLY unlucky there. Thats not a sim design problem though. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Maybe it was just bad luck. I'm not positive on that one. Still, even if it is not a "sim" problem, it is still a game problem.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Well thats because it sort of is. Kind of. I NEVER considered PF a real stand alone product. No offense to Illya and the team for their outstanding work but it was always just an adjunct to the FB serise to me. Yes it works as a stand alone. Sure, there are a **** lot of airplanes, carriers, new ground objects, new features in the game but it is basically an extension of the existing game engine. It didn't try to reinvent the wheel but contine an excellent tradition. That "Bright, Shiny, New" feeling will have to wait until BoB it released.

AS for the game costing $50 dollars US, hmmm. How much did the expansions for Warcraft or Operation Flashpoint cost. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
It is, no ifs ands or buts. I'm not sure what resistance cost me, but it made flashpoint easily 3X the game it was before, even with the official free addons made for the original. PF can't say that at all as far as I'm concerned. As far as war3 was concerned, I couldn't even stand the original so I ended up returning it and never bought the expansion. I'm not, however, going to critique war3 here. As to war2, well that was TOO long ago http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I think what you mean is the lack of carrier launched American and Japanese torpedo bombers. Hmmm, well as far as I can see teh title of the game/expanson is called "PAcific Fighters'. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, carrier based. British as well, I want my swordfish.... Anyways, regardless or what the games title is, it is supposed to be representitive of army and navy ops in the pacific. These consisted of mainly (from an a pilots POV) of Air Superiority, CAS, Anti shipping and Strategic Air Power. We've had the first 2 of those elements for a long time now, the third is essential for a pacific sim.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Companies dont really move as a cohesive unil, to do so is sor of defeating the point of cover, concealment and movement. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
They still move as cohesive units, just not so much massed. Still, things of the WW2 mentality where much more massed than modern standards. What I'm really wanting is to fly in support of infantry assaults and the added ground fire from dispersed targets.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>so why are you complaining? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Simple really, the dev team has access to everything. Despite the fact that lowe, and others, has done much for us, the dev teams could really do a much better job just cause they know thier sim better than anybody. Not to mention the fact that there are and always will be people unaware of this and will rate the game strictly on it's own merits. The ingame generator is not sufficient to win fans over from that crowd.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Maybe the community could get together and try and sort something out. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not likely to happen, but one can dream.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I wouldn't expect a simple 'fix' to a basic concept of programming... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
If it's billed as a sequal and not an expansion pack, I would and do expect a fix. This also has nothing to do with a basic concept of programming. I'm talking about the weapon loadout system here, not object orientation.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>There are a few new infantry objects with soldiers in PF <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Please, rendering or not rendering the men is as meaningless to gameplay as rendering the ground trees in the higher detail levels. Perhaps even more so since the men don't affect visibility of ground objects.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>What worries me are the potential 1,000,000 other casual simmers who bought PF as a stand alone only to see an unfinished/rushed product <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This is probably my second biggest worry for this series. It's basically one of the major things that all these other add together to create, kinda like how the constructicons all merged into one big devastator.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Since when weren't ships padlockable? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
External padlock only AFIK. See above.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>but it's nothing show stoppig. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Until your squadron transfers to an airbase that it can't land at sucessfully or you hit a mission that you cant pass because your squadron keeps slamming into a **** mountain.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>That isnt anything Oleg can do as far as i'd know. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Maybe not, but then, this was never addressed to Oleg was it?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>he could have left the game as it was out of the box, but he didnt <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This here, my past experiences with 1c, is the only reason I didn't return PF after week 1.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>or demand they be flyable <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
LOL, flyable infantry, that I have to see http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>That's something you can look up, it's just something that would take up that much more space on the CD, and could just as well be found by your standard person. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes and no, the historical values can be looked up to some degree for many of the more common planes. However, historical values do not always match up with in game values. Not to mention the fact that the in game values change and the historical ones don't. But seriously, that would not take up all that much space. Hell, not much more than il2c, maybe even less if it didn't have that nice gui, and it's only .8mb.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>If only you had managed to work in the words "open source" you could have been totally villified. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Doubtlessly so.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>No flight sim is open source <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I thought the source for one of the Falcon series had been leaked? Perhaps I'm thinking of something else though. Even so, the few fairly modern games (anything post dos) that where officially made open source can be counted on one hand.

HotelBushranger
02-02-2005, 03:47 AM
My god man! How big is that post!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Now if a only-PF owner say this it`s ok cuz PF as a standalone is very limited and not really worth a title of a standalone game IMO <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I'm a stand-alone PFer, and I cant find any reason to complain, nor for anyone ELSE to complain. From my perspective, PF is a very complete game, but thats imo I'm not much of a carrier bloke so I'm sure if I was I would be having a big fuss.

Flakenstien
02-02-2005, 03:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>no flight sim is open source <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong

http://www.targetware.net/index.php

ClnlSandersLite
02-02-2005, 04:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>My god man! How big is that post! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Some people took the time to reply, it's only fair and right that I write back?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR><BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>no flight sim is open source <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Wrong <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ok, I'll add a caveat to my earlier post,

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I thought the source for one of the Falcon series had been leaked? Perhaps I'm thinking of something else though. Even so, the few fairly modern games (anything post dos) that where officially made open source can be counted on one hand. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Where the game was distrubited on store shelves.

LEXX_Luthor
02-02-2005, 07:20 AM
TargetWare is closed source.

Mjollnir111675
02-02-2005, 07:34 AM
Oh No you didn't bring up Constructicons and Devestator!!!
Yes you did!!
So for others you are saying that P.F. is Voltrons right arm and it is amputated?!?

HEY 1-C: PIMP OUR TORP PLANES!! Voltron needs his complete arm!!

cwojackson
02-02-2005, 12:01 PM
I only broached the second hive taboo, open source, in jest. I didn't actually intend to stir the hive up.

Perhaps one of the greatest weaknesses of PF, and the whole IL2 series, is how thin skinned some of it's fans are. I used to laugh at how they ripped themselves to shreds over turn rates, weapons effectiveness and which aircraft is best.

Lately it seems just about anything sets them off. One poor fellow posted a thread asking the simple question about how to remove profanity from the speech pack. The swarm quickly attacked not just him and his beliefs.

Then there are the "is it just me or..." threads where the chest thumpers sit around defending the hive and measuring each others longevity in posting. Of course this is happily ignored by the moderators who are often quick to close down a thread where hive mode isn't prevailing.

With your comments regarding the failings of PF and now the words open source out there I probably won't give this thread long to live.

Bearcat99
02-02-2005, 10:23 PM
Get the UQMG and downlaoad VAC 1.2.7.. get them in the Essentials link in my sig. May help..

And for what its worth I am not crazy about the profanity either.. it can be edited out...just find the wav file and replace it.

Smidlee
02-03-2005, 08:45 AM
People complaining about the AI isn't just something in PF. It seems to be very common with all PC games especially in strategy games. There's even complaining about good AIs like Civilization. When it comes down to it Pacifer Fighter is just a game just as Pac-man or 1942.True, the planes in PF may react close to a real plane but it still just a shooter. 1942 is one of my favorite old-time shooters. As I play 1942 the more I can predict the AI pattern in the game yet never heard someone complain about the AI back in those days. PF is no different since all AI runs on some kind of pattern. After you play the game for hundreds of hour you will easily learn the holes in the AI's pattern in any game. So even if they did change the pattern with enough hours you will once again learn how to take advantage of the new pattern .kind of when I started playing "1943".
This is even true in Chess even though now it's take a lot of time to find holes since it's been built up though the years. When I played a Chess program and was playing white, one of my first moves would be pawn to a3. This basicly disables the PC's opening liberty which help the computer not to falls into traps in the openning. Once I knew a trap the computer would fall for I could continue win with a3 openning. Now with the new chess program and the speed of PC's it a lot harder to find these holes yet I'm sure there are still there in most home pc chess programs.
(By the way, This sorry AI keeps shooting me down.)

raisen
02-03-2005, 10:45 PM
IL2/FB/PF AI has been pretty good, and in the not too distant past too. Just when the crazed AI kamikaze/snipers seemed to have disappeared, they're back. Personally my own questions were on a "Has anyone else seen this ?" basis.
It's always a bit of a shock when you patch the game, fire it up, and what worked fine last time out has taken a very notable turn for the worse.

I've very rarely posted in the forums in the past (I've read the forum for the entire life of IL2), specifically because of the childish nature of a significant number of users. Instead of welcoming in what may be a passionate newcomer, or long term prowler of the forum, they get yelled down should they have the nerve to post.

I thought fora of this type were provided for users and for the developers, in this case at least, to exchange information. Who the hell appointed the **** thought police in here ?

It's not a good advertisement for our mutual hobby.

Raisen

LEXX_Luthor
02-04-2005, 01:26 AM
raisin:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I've very rarely posted in the forums in the past (I've read the forum for the entire life of IL2), specifically because of the childish nature of a significant number of users. Instead of welcoming in what may be a passionate newcomer, or long term prowler of the forum, they get yelled down should they have the nerve to post. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The real Newbies are wellcomed every day. The people not wellcomed are hostile or jealous Old Timers from competing flight sims that are angry for some reason or another. I am guessing that their Developer(s) either do not support them any more or never did.

But, the good thing is the recent rash of Angry Old Timers show the game is getting more widely known, for better or worse, and so attracts both real people and the "Angry Old Timers." http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Sanders:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The US and many other "Western" nations don't have any laws about swastikas. I have seen many games which have swastikas and are shiped globaly. The way they get around this has traditionally been either A. a togle, B. detection the users local settings and automatically disabeling them if in certain zones, or C. a combination of the 2. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Exactly. I would just ship a game with Swastika disabled, not having to be worried about Zoning Laws in each country, but allow a 3rd Party program to enable Swastika. Ask around for that program, I don't use it myself but use 3rd Party skins with Swastika. And, you can still write your Political Leader to get the Zoning Laws changed.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Somehow someone feals that swastikas are bad but the red star is acceptable. Baffels the mind, truly. But this is an old complaint. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Red Star military insignia is the equivalent of the Black Cross military insignia. What you want is Hammer and Sickle political symbol as the equivalent of Swastika. But, nobody ever put Hammer and Sickle on WW2 combat aircraft. I bring this up because I am thinking that confusing Red Star with Swastika is a classic slip up of the Angry "old timer newbie" from the failing western made flight sims -- or why do they ~always~ equate "red star" with Swastika and not "white star" or "red meatball" or "roundel" military insignia ??

Baffels the Mind, truly. But this is an old observation http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

ElAurens
02-04-2005, 06:26 AM
Lexx, many of my countrymen are still suffering from "cold war fever", and conviently forget that that the USA and USSR were allies agianst the greater evil of facism.

I blame it on their history teachers.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ClnlSandersLite
02-04-2005, 08:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>So for others you are saying that P.F. is Voltrons right arm and it is amputated?!? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's about right actually. More like broken or incomplete really though.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Lately it seems just about anything sets them off. One poor fellow posted a thread asking the simple question about how to remove profanity from the speech pack. The swarm quickly attacked not just him and his beliefs. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Seems people are on edge...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>People complaining about the AI isn't just something in ...SNIP... sure there are still there in most home pc chess programs. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm not complaining about the fighting AI at all, specifically the way they slam into hills during basic flight operations. This is something of rarity, even in somewhat older games.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>IL2/FB/PF AI has been pretty good, and in the not too distant past too. Just when the crazed AI kamikaze/snipers seemed to have disappeared, they're back. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Which version do you think the AI took a dive in? I might just take a close look at that.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I am guessing that their Developer(s) either do not support them any more or never did. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Are you saying I'm of this group? If so, you are wrong. The il2 series has been about the only group of fixed wing sims I've played since a little before FB came out. It's undoubtedly the best there is for prop sims, and I'm not into jets. However, I do love a good heli sim, but they are few and far between... I'll likely pick up Knights Over Europe when/if it comes out and give it a go.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>And, you can still write your Political Leader to get the Zoning Laws changed. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not likely as my country has no such laws (it's other nations that have them) and we've strained international relations enough as it is.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I bring this up because I am thinking that confusing Red Star with Swastika is a classic slip up of the Angry "old timer newbie" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ok, so I said red star... the hammer and sicle is in the **** game though. Take a look at the unit emblem for 66th ShAP (66thShAP.bmp if you just do a search of your il2 folder). This also has no relevance as to wether I'm of the group you seem to hate, or just a lurker.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Lexx, many of my countrymen are still suffering from "cold war fever", and conviently forget that that the USA and USSR were allies agianst the greater evil of facism.

I blame it on their history teachers. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Seriously, do not even begin to question the depth or bredth of my knowledge of history. I look upon that as a direct slap in the face and I will not reply to any further such remarks. Further, fascism is no more evil than communism. The one and only reason that england and france (and others) went to war is that their security was threatened, indirectly at first and directly later, by hitlers rapid expansion and his willingness to use his army (imperialism). We (the U.S. of A.) went to war indirectly, in the form of lend-lease, at first for the same reason, then directly due to Japan's attack on us. The only reason we had no qualms about the communists fighting the facists was the fact that every person that EITHER side killed, made our position stronger. If you remember, there was a good deal of high ranking poeple who wanted to go to war with the USSR immediatly after the war while we had nuclear capability and they didn't. To suggest that Stalin was a bad man, regardless of what side he fought on would indicate that I know a little something more than your average farm boy. But, I have said all I'll say on that matter.

actionhank1786
02-04-2005, 10:01 AM
I rule

cwojackson
02-04-2005, 12:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
If you remember, there was a good deal of high ranking poeple who wanted to go to war with the USSR immediatly after the war while we had nuclear capability and they didn't. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>This was one of the things that got Patton in so much trouble. It wasn't just his outspoken attitude towards the Soviet Union but that he was caught keeping German Units that were POW in his area in a combat ready state (albeit unarmed) to act as reserves for our fight with the Soviets.

LEXX_Luthor
02-04-2005, 06:43 PM
Sanders:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Not likely as my country has no such laws (it's other nations that have them) and we've strained international relations enough as it is. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Yes we have strained relations, at least in front of closed doors. I am Ussian too. Well, actually from Mississippie, a "farm boy" as Lois Lane called Clark Kent in the first season of Lois~n~Clark, The New Adventures of Superman -- the first and by far best season, with John Shea http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif naturally as Lex Luthor.

If this were my flight sim, I would not bother worrying about which nations had or did not have Swastika Flight Sim Zoning Laws and just releace it with Swastika disabled, but I would code my sim to allow 3rd Party programs to enable Swastika. Have you asked yet for the 3rd Party program that enables FB Swastika? I don't know anything about it myself, but use 3rd Party skins with Swastika.

Sanders:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Ok, so I said red star... the hammer and sicle is in the <span class="ev_code_yellow">**** game</span> though. Take a look at the unit emblem for 66th ShAP (66thShAP.bmp if you just do a search of your il2 folder).... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif A single unit's individual emblem is not a national military insignia that appears on all aircraft on that nation's aircraft wings and fuselage. At least the game ships with Finnish military insignia enabled.

Why is the political symbol Swastika equated with military insignia Red Star instead of political symbol Hammer and Sickle? And why not other nations military insignia like Red Meatball or White Star?

Are we seeing a tiny glimpse of reason for Jealousy of this "<span class="ev_code_yellow">**** game</span>" ?? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif