PDA

View Full Version : Will BOB be more open source?



turbografx16
08-22-2006, 05:02 AM
Just asking because people are always asking for new planes/adjustments etc and the DEV team and their contractors always seem to have their hands full. If the game were more open people could create their own planes and release them as free mods. If you think this would interfere with multiplayer than you could just make multiplayer use only server side data.
I really can't see any negative points for such a move. If anyone does anything to make the game the way you dont like it then just dont download their mod.

Personally, I'd love to have been able to add a Fokker DXXI for my defense of Holland but oh well, another time maybe.

Vacillator
08-22-2006, 05:31 AM
I think that'll be a fairly firm 'No'. Personally I'd be happy to be able to buy the occasional add-on with Oleg-approved planes, maps etc. that have been developed by 3rd parties, as well as the full 1C releases. This works okay as we're seeing now for PF. Granted we might wait a bit longer, but it keeps things controlled and up to quality in IMO.

JG52Karaya-X
08-22-2006, 06:41 AM
But Oleg already stated that BoB will be semi-open to 3rd party mods. People will be able to add their own content (Planes, objects, etc.) and will even be able to use them online on special "open planeset" servers but of course it will also be able to lock anything "non-official" for sake of compatibility and realism.


Like Vacillator I'm sceptical about plane mods because although the 3D models are of high quality I'm afraid the FM and DM will either be very basic and/or totally made up because people base them on anecdotes and their personal idea of what the plane should be like...

Vacillator
08-23-2006, 02:07 AM
That's interesting Karaya, I hadn't read that from Oleg.

LEXX_Luthor
08-23-2006, 04:20 AM
turbo::
Will BOB be more open source?
These people still confuse "open sim" with open source software. My theory is they copy (or pirate!) the "open source" slogan made popular by media interest in the Linux operating system.


jg52::
...because people base them on anecdotes and their personal idea of what the plane should be like...
Sounds like we have a Fear of Online players. Most flight sim aircraft modders including currently serving or retired military members base their work on available published data like Oleg, although Oleg may have additional private data available through purchase.

The few who want to "cheat" with FMs and DMs are...Online players.

JG52Karaya-X
08-23-2006, 06:34 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
jg52:
Sounds like we have a Fear of Online players. Most flight sim aircraft modders including currently serving or retired military members base their work on available published data like Oleg, although Oleg may have additional private data available through purchase.

The few who want to "cheat" with FMs and DMs are...Online players.

I dont know what you mean by fear of online players http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

If a 3rd party modeller bases his FM on official flight test data only then great!

But you know there ARE modellers out there who would swear that this or that planes is wrong because in combat report XY Pilot A clearly out performed the enemy in this or that category and assumes his plane is undermodelled because he cannot duplicate the same thing in IL2. That's what I meant

LEXX_Luthor
08-23-2006, 08:02 AM
JG52::
If a 3rd party modeller bases his FM on official flight test data only then great!
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

That's all we needed to hear. Thank You!

Indeed, most of the FB/PF players fighting each other on this webboard is fighting over Oleg's "Secret" sources of official data, and the multiple sources of alternative official data -- official unofficial data perhaps. Or unofficial official data. Some of Oleg's official data may be privately purchased from collectors, and if so, may have to remain Secret.

Pilot accounts are useful in modelling post-stall behavior. The Online community should be interested in this with all their webboard threads claiming they want "real life" Stalls and Spins.

But this same Online community demanded that Oleg ignore official flight test data by eliminating elevator trim from his flight models, to prevent -- naturally -- Online players cheating Online using elevator slider trim. Surprisingly, Oleg Maddox listened to the Online community, and disabled his own flight models for all players. It would have been "okay" and better business sense if Oleg had confined the crippled FMs to the small number of Online players only who were hurting from Online elevator slider trim cheating, but instead, all customers received the crippled but "cheat free" flight models.

VVaFFenPanZZeR
08-23-2006, 08:17 AM
If it is I will be modelling planes, and I will have a site set up for a Community. @ www.VV-Ops.com (http://www.VV-Ops.com)

I use Maya 6.5 Unlimited. It will be simple to model low poly planes for this sim. And theres already an abundance of skinners eh??

So if ur a skinner we should hook up.

TacticalYak3
08-24-2006, 12:47 PM
Well not sure the meaning folks are attaching to these terms. What I do hope is that the next series will be more user-friendly to third-party enhancements like campaign generators, dogfight scripting, and so many other programs enjoyed by the IL-2 community.

More tools for such work to enhance the core game would be most welcomed, especially if the Developer is not able/willing to release a more robust gaming experience.

Personally I am not as concerned about third-party planes, but would love to see third-party maps and stationary objects, but not including AAA and alike which could be misrepresented or unbalanced with the rest of the game.

But again if there were planes I would enjoy them if they are developed properly. Would like to see a certification process by Maddox Games, but I think this will not happen. I mean if someone wanted to share with the community plane X for free, not fair to expect Maddox Games to spend their time certifying it without being compensated. This would change free community-based content to paid addons. Which it looks like is the direction of gaming in general anyway.

Regards,
TS!

turbografx16
08-24-2006, 05:44 PM
Who cares whether someone downloads a mod with a plane that isnt real or is based on their ideas on what it should be like? If you dont like it then dont download it. Certainly no one should be forcing you. In MP only official planes could be allowed. That way it doesnt hurt anybody's game experience and people who do want to add their own content to their own offline games could.

I don't understand why so many people are afraid of 3rd party content. It will be just that, third party, if you dont want that plane/mission or whatever then dont download/use it. Simple as that. This would save us a lot of time in getting new planes out because they wouldnt have to be approved by Oleg. If I downloaded a plane model that I wasnt happy with for some reason, I'd just delete it, end of story. This really can be only beneficial. I dont see how it could be otherwise.

dhorkoff
08-25-2006, 01:34 PM
The issue with user created/modded planes is always about multiplayer. Since all the game physics are calculated on the client side computers, it'd be very hard for a server to verify that every client is using the same plane models.

When you pull the trigger on your joystick, YOUR PC tells the server whether you hit the plane you were aiming at, the server then simply relays this on to the poor noob's computer that he just got hit and is now short a wing or two.

Could you imagine how many hacks would instantly pollute the online waters if the door for multiplayer user mods were even openned a crack? I've never played it, but I believe that the CFS sims suffer from these fatal problems right now. Online CFS community is a joke.

I could see user mods being openned for single player only though. If you want to "cheat" yourself, who's right is it to stand in your way?

LEXX_Luthor
08-26-2006, 09:54 PM
It can be a problem for Newbies to the sim if they have to research on the boards and download half the internet to get all the mods. A central "official" place to download approved mods would be good, kinda like if UBI or Oleg supported the old open modding skin site il2skins.

Are they going to close the skin modding, because skins can be used to cheat Online? The most popular...the only...open modding available in this sim -- aircraft skinning -- generally can't be used Online without fear of cheating, or it could not at one time (has this changed?).

Skins on a Slider, as the popular slogan goes.

As a Newbie to combat flight sim modding myself (StrikeFighters series), I prefer Oleg handle the aircraft modding, because we all know that he is willing to endlessly add new aircraft to his sim, and they are all *roughly* consistent quality at the time of introduction -- not counting differing times of introduction, for example Old Fw-190 damage model from 4 years ago vs New Lurch damage model in the upcoming 1946 addon, where the newer airplane, or aircraft, benefits from more recent methods of grafix and damage modelling.

16::
I don't understand why so many people are afraid of 3rd party content.
They are not! You are confusing the silent "many" with a tiny number of Old Timer multiplayers who apparently had some bad experiences with what they call "UFO" 3rd Party aircraft mods in some of the Old Sims, the Sims of Reknown.

Interesting behavior observation. If you watch the Online community here, you see them trash Oleg over how wrong and incorrect his flight models are. If you mention "open" then the Online community will attack you for wanting incorrect flight models, and tell us that Oleg is the only source for correct flight models. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Why the contradiction? Unlike Microsoft, Oleg offers the small Online community a fixed "standard" flight model, right or wrong, for Online competitive "fun" dogfight shooting, at no charge. The flight models don't actually matter (nor does DM or weapons modding) as long as everybody has the same mod from Oleg. Everything in the sim must be open to sacrifice to preserve cheat-free Online play, including the sacrifice of the WW2 air combat simulation itself. The Online community wanting to keep elevator trim out of their WW2 aircraft flight models was the best example of this. Thus, the contradiction.

dorkoff::

I could see user mods being openned for single player only though. If you want to "cheat" yourself, who's right is it to stand in your way?
Another, very sad, example of contradictory behavior we see in the Online community. All purely Offline players are defined or accused as wanting to "cheat" by the Online community here, when the *actual* real life Online cheaters are...Online players -- hidden members of the Online community. This contradiction is probably because the Offline players feel they should have the freedom to "come out" and tell and share what they do, including asking for a more open sim, while the Online cheaters at this webboard (they do poast here right?) do not reveal themselves. Thus, the Offline players wanting open maps or airfield modding (or skin modding) are the only flight sim community members available to lash out against in anger and frustration.

csThor
08-26-2006, 10:31 PM
Personally I'd prefer to see no "modding" at all meaning that noone outside of Maddox Games has access ot the engine or parts of it. I'd prefer to see a similar attempt as done with Il2-Center long ago, but this time done right. The community has few 3D modelers who have succesfully brought a project through and with BoB the objects will be even more complicated.

IMO a place like the old Il2Center should bring people with various skils together - modelers, researchers, texture artists ... I don't think BoB projects (well done projects, that is) will be possible with just one modeller lonewolfing around. The planes are complicated in Il-2 and will be ten times complicated in BoB (due to the internal structures). Bottom line is - I think the 3rd Party involvement in the Il-2 line worked fine and shouldn't be changed ...

LEXX_Luthor
08-26-2006, 11:08 PM
csThor::
...but this time done right...
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif


Exactly!


Yes, BoB And Beyond should leave aircraft in Oleg's hands alone, but only because we all know that Oleg is good at making aircraft for the community, and making many of them. For everything else, including maps, the sim either opens, or it fails again.

VF2_Sarge
08-27-2006, 06:44 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

orkan_3d
08-27-2006, 07:06 PM
Hay, Sarge, wake up, your F6 looks like a pancake...

VF2_Sarge
08-27-2006, 07:28 PM
What...O..did I miss it? This BOB discussion is closed? Oh wait never mind.

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

orkan_3d
08-27-2006, 08:44 PM
Don`t vory, there will be much more BOB bla bla...

turbografx16
08-28-2006, 09:19 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
csThor:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">...but this time done right...
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif


Exactly!


Yes, BoB And Beyond should leave aircraft in Oleg's hands alone, but only because we all know that Oleg is good at making aircraft for the community, and making many of them. For everything else, including maps, the sim either opens, or it fails again. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Why?

LEXX_Luthor
08-29-2006, 12:30 AM
Why?

Ask the people who gave up using their purchase of FB/PF and lose desire for later addons, then lose interest in suggesting the sim to friends, and will think less of purchasing the sim for use as gifts. You will find the answer you are looking for.

Next Question?

turbografx16
08-29-2006, 06:54 AM
I'm sorry but thats ****. Other games have HUGE modding communities and yet remain EXTREMELY popular. Look at almost all HL/HL2 mods, look at Flight Simulator series. Look at 90% of games.

There is absolutely no reason not to include moddability on a SINGLE-PLAYER basis. Let people play with what they want and how they want. Just keep everything regulated for MP games and everyone should be happy.

In fact, your line of thinking seems completely reversed. Why would the ability to mod the game drive people away? If anything it would bring them to the game.

Example:

*Billy is browsing the web for combat flight sims*
"Aw shucks, BOB looks great...too bad I cant play as a shinden...oh wait! Whats this! Outstanding! A mod already exists to let me play as the aircraft I want ! *hurries off to ubi store with credit card*

Either way I'm going to buy BoB but this feature would make it an excellent game rather than just a good game.

Modding hurts no-one. Modding is not bad for a community, it is good for a community. Modding is SINGLE-PLAYER OFFLINE only. Online play is regulated to the game norms.

LEBillfish
08-29-2006, 07:03 AM
This subject has been so debated it is not even funny........Never, have I ever seen where Oleg stated "BoB would be opened up to 4th party modelers/average joes"......Never.

What he did "mention" was that the IL2-PF series would be offered for continued 3rd party development. Meaning, responsible groups already involved in the creation of work for it now.....Not Tom, ****, & Harry.

Now you all can state how it would only be used offline, could be made to only be used offline, and that Oleg refuses to alter planes based on official data.........ALL OF THAT is wrong.

If it can be implemented into the sim by a player that means the sim can be altered. If a player opens up a server with an unofficial aspect, then that server will quite simply go nuts with mods/hacks/cheats as it cannot devote the time PLUS ALL WOULD GRIPE ABOUT THE INTRUSIVENESS to check over every file in IL2/PF.......

That leads into if it can be implemented by anyone, then eventually someone will figure out a way to sneak in these hacks to locked official product servers......

Lastly, changes have been made to every aspect of any plane based on substantiated evidence as often as time allowed...........Trouble is there is only so much time in a day, half the gripes are not backed up, and most of all since PF 3.0's release Maddox games has not made penny one on any work done........You getting that? Over a year of SIGNIFICANT amounts of work and additions at their expense.

If you can't see the potential for abuse of open source (sore's), then you either are being naive, do not realize bad always comes with good, or have malicious intentions of your own.

The moment IL2/PF becomes Air-Quake, then you can complain about "the community splitting" as so many like to do as "simmers" will leave and hand the game off to the X-Box crowd.

TgD Thunderbolt56
08-29-2006, 07:15 AM
Open source = teh bad for flight sims...IMO.

LEXX_Luthor
08-29-2006, 07:30 AM
turbo, slow down and study more closely what other people write on the board. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Oleg should consider most everything to be possibly opened to modding -- the things that Oleg's and his (at times) hostile "insider" Team has proven time and again to have no desire to do properly -- Full Size MAPS, Air War simulation effects (Smoke/Fire, and clouds, etc...). Unlike the more "open" sim developers who actually depend on independent 3rd Party modders to create an extensive plane-set, Oleg is willing and able to mod almost all the Flyable aircraft his customers could want, and make all sides Flyable, not just the "good guys." The customers don't need independent 3rd Party aircraft modding for Oleg's sims.

Turbo, please don't think of "modding" as aircraft only. Lowengrin's independent 3rd Party dynamic campaign generator mod is the best example of how open modding can keep customers from losing interest in Oleg's products. The crippled stock overcast grafix that came with TEH LOMACS superjetfighter "hud" sim had to be replaced with independent 3rd Party overcast in a brilliant example of how customers want Air War simulation far beyond perfect-detail Competition Flight Modelling and Civilian-Pilot oriented Systems Modelling that most customers have no interested in (this is something The Developers can learn when they decide to pay attention to their business).

Turbo::
Modding hurts no-one.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

There are a LARGE number of current and retired military service members who enjoy independent 3rd Party modding for combat flight sims. Its stunning to see the attacks and insults against these flight sim enthusiasts on this webboard, when the Online Cheaters poasting here (they do poast here, right?) laugh at the community display of anger and frustration directed against innocent people.

turbografx16
08-29-2006, 11:00 AM
Ok...I've calmed down. But I still dont understand how it would be so destructive to the game/community. Take for example counter-strike. Now, I dont even like the game but I can see it has the largest playerbase in the world. It is also fully moddable. The two are linked.

Yes, allowing players to mod the sim does open up some new avenues for exploitation in Single player or possibly on servers allowing custom content but again, no-one is forcing you to play on that server. Go to an official one in that case. No game will ever be free of exploits. Even as it is we have the flap exploit. The fact is if the server administrator only allows official content, the game will only ever be the way Oleg intended it to be. This involves no "intrusive check" of your files, it would just only load the official files.

If you dont see this just look at 90% of games today. Most allow the user to change or add things at their own discretion. Does this harm the community or the playerbase? VALVe and EA beg to differ.

The only reason I can see not to allow modding is if you rely on making your money through expansion packs featuring new content. However, the vaste majority of Olegs content releases to date have been free.

If someone mods their copy of the game so they can be uber-leet haxxor super pilot in his mach 10 billion cyber jet, I couldnt care less. I dont play on his copy of the game. When he tries to play online he will be back in the days of the piston engine with the rest of us.

"
If it can be implemented into the sim by a player that means the sim can be altered."

correct...and?

"If a player opens up a server with an unofficial aspect, then that server will quite simply go nuts with mods/hacks/cheats"

possible. solution = dont play on custom servers

"PLUS ALL WOULD GRIPE ABOUT THE INTRUSIVENESS to check over every file in IL2/PF......."

That doesnt happen. Have a folder containing mods seperate from the game files. Server will only load game files. If you attempt to by pass this by having a modified aircraft in the game files that doesnt match the server = no entry. This is similiar to having a different version of the game.

"That leads into if it can be implemented by anyone, then eventually someone will figure out a way to sneak in these hacks to locked official product servers......"

Two different things. Yes, hacks can be "snuck" into any server regardless of the version or the game itself. It happens everywhere. But the content is normally checked by the server. No un-allowed custom content can enter.

"
If you can't see the potential for abuse of open source (sore's), then you either are being naive, do not realize bad always comes with good, or have malicious intentions of your own"

Now hold it there buddy!

Isnt custom content what has held the Red Baron II/3D community together long past its sell by date? Not to mention it has given us Over Flanders Fields for CS3 to mention only two example in the sim world.

Also, how am I being naieve? I'm firmly seated in reality when it comes to games. You give me a list of the top 20 games by user base and I assure you most of them can be modded.

The reason I mentioned Counter-strike is because a friend of mine runs a clan competition server. They allow abo****ely no custom content on their servers. There are no file checks or intrusive scans of any sort. If your game files dont match the servers, you dont get in. That simple.

LEBillfish
08-29-2006, 11:39 AM
Oh, ok, now I understand, sorry, wasn't sure before..........Let me re-respond.

No........

initjust
08-29-2006, 12:16 PM
It's a curious thing.

Raise an issue with a given ac and you will be expected to provide reams of data and cite 'official' documents detailing how the aforementioned ac should really behave in flight.

Then, if 'official' documents are cited the reaction from many is, "well, that's a biased report or a report slanted so as not to demoralize those who either fly or fly against the ac in question".

Aircraft data sources/tables are several and sometimes appear to be a bit conflicting.

Being critical of an ac in IL2/FB/AEP/PF is generally not accepted by the vocal minority of this community UNLESS you can produce several volumes of substantiating documentation and even then said documentaiton is generally viewed as suspect since it may appear to be conflicting with some other 'official' report/document, or, Oleg's own FM/DM.

Now a question. Why are ac, and their FMs/DMs, produced by Oleg without the same required volumes of substantiating documentation so acceptable?

We are told that Oleg has access to 'secret', 'private' stacks of docs that enable him, and him alone, to make the 'correct' flight model for WWII era ac and that he will not divulge his sources for fear of another having access to the same information.

It just seems to me that in order to have a really open and honest evaluation of FMs/DMs, regardless of who made them or where they were made, the information used to produce the FMs/DMs needs to be known and available for comparison against the rest of the "official" information.

There are very competent aircraft designers in the world besides Oleg. The only difference may be that these others don't have access to Oleg's 'secret', 'private' stash of flight testing/performance documentation.

But, then again, if no one has seen this 'secret', 'private' stash how can anyone know if it is real or any more accurate than any of the publically available stuff that is demanded here when an Oleg FM/DM is questioned?

turbografx16
08-29-2006, 12:17 PM
Originally posted by LEBillfish:
Oh, ok, now I understand, sorry, wasn't sure before..........Let me re-respond.

No........

"No" in a very concise adult kind of "no, it will not be open source." way or "no" as in an immature "no, f**** you." kind of way?

BaldieJr
08-29-2006, 12:37 PM
Say "No!" to open sores!

TacticalYak3
08-29-2006, 12:45 PM
It was an interesting discussion. Enjoyed Lexx's thoughts and fully agree that there are a number of components to the IL-2 experience that hopefully will be more accessible to the community. Maps take so much time but are such an important part of the flying experience, especially for campaigns. DCG was mentioned. Indeed, can't count how many times its creator has wished he could do X but either too difficult or impossible.

Anyway, stated I prefer the planes to have a consistency by having Maddox Games do them. Understand not everyone agrees. That's cool mate. But why start attacking fellow gamers? Why are you guys arguing over something none of us has any control over anyway? Would you really end a discussion in RL in this manner? I mean really, really?

UBIZoo animals on the loose! When do we raise the standards of conversation around here so more of the IL-2 community can engage in some interesting and relaxed conversation? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

TS!

turbografx16
08-29-2006, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by TacticalYak3:
It was an interesting discussion. Enjoyed Lexx's thoughts and fully agree that there are a number of components to the IL-2 experience that hopefully will be more accessible to the community. Maps take so much time but are such an important part of the flying experience, especially for campaigns. DCG was mentioned. Indeed, can't count how many times its creator has wished he could do X but either too difficult or impossible.

Anyway, stated I prefer the planes to have a consistency by having Maddox Games do them. Understand not everyone agrees. That's cool mate. But why start attacking fellow gamers? Why are you guys arguing over something none of us has any control over anyway? Would you really end a discussion in RL in this manner? I mean really, really?

UBIZoo animals on the loose! When do we raise the standards of conversation around here so more of the IL-2 community can engage in some interesting and relaxed conversation? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

TS!

Well said. I apologise for any hurt feelings/insuls=ts.

LEXX_Luthor
08-29-2006, 02:31 PM
Yak-3::
[Lowengrin's] DCG was mentioned. Indeed, can't count how many times its creator has wished he could do X but either too difficult or impossible.
Lowengrin is an example of an independent 3rd Party modder working outside the Imperial Court, with no "official" Court support but for his/her own personal enthusiasm for immersive Air War simulation and the desire to share with others.

A spectre is haunting the WW2 combat flight sim market. The possibility of a massive Olegarchy taking control and ruling over the WW2 combat flight sim world is breathtaking. Oleg is the Emperor, and later his sons and daughters, but they can't run the Empire alone. They need an army of people running the Empire outside the court in the Provences, willing to work with enthusiasm, and many of these people are current or retired military service members willing to mod (full size!) Maps, airfields, grafix effects, endless list. If the Emperor puts his trust in nothing but a small number of insular, deceptive, and almost "greedy" Imperial Court aides who never leave the comfort of the Palace, the Empire will fall from lost faithe among subjects and the Empire will slowly rot and decay.

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

orkan_3d
08-29-2006, 06:02 PM
They need an army of people running the Empire outside the court in the Provences, willing to work with enthusiasm, and many of these people are current or retired military service members willing to mod (full size!) Maps, airfields, grafix effects, endless list.
And those people need to use VERY NON OPEN SOURCE programs like 3dsmax, Photoshop, etc. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

csThor
08-30-2006, 02:33 AM
fabricated by Lexx:
Oleg should consider most everything to be possibly opened to modding -- the things that Oleg's and his (at times) hostile "insider" Team has proven time and again to have no desire to do properly -- Full Size MAPS, Air War simulation effects (Smoke/Fire, and clouds, etc...).

Are you done spilling your load of hot air? Good - maybe we can return to a serious discussion between adults. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Maps are a much more complicated affair than you obviously think. Ask Ian or Jurinko or yogy about the grey hair the've got after working on Murmansk, Kurland, Italy Online, Slovakia etc ... I know a little about it and I remember some things Ian said about the procedures and the tool - none of which can be repeated here.
And don't get me started on the choice of maps. It is unfortunate for the PTO fans that there is noone making PTO maps, but in Europe the choices are certainly limited by decisions made by Ubi and 1C - Maddox Games:

a) No map of the English Channel and Northern France (beyond what is available in the Normandy maps)
b) No historical maps of the MTO at all

So what we have is still the Eastern Front and that is where the historical maps will be situated (Kiev with "46 AddOn", perhaps Bessarabia).

The other stuff you mentioned (clouds, smoke etc) is firmly in Maddox Games's hands and they're 100% on BoB. No miracle here. I mean do we even have a remote idea of what fiddling with such things mean? Look at SimHQ where AcesHigh2 asked for a seemingly simple addition to the aircraft markings (three files for national insignia instead of 2), but according to Oleg this would mean a complete reqork of the online part as the markings have some role in there, too ...

I still think that a coordinated effort of the various community ressources (researchers, modellers, texture artists etc) with Maddox Games checking and importing the objects into the engine is the better idea than some open ports. This way we'll have the same quality throughout the process and - if the people in charge are sane enough to understand it - perhaps the chance to introduce some order and historical relevance into object additions instead of "KeWl R00xx00rz!" objects with limited gameplay value.

My (offline only) 0,02 " ...

LEXX_Luthor
08-30-2006, 05:43 AM
Maps are a much more complicated affair than you obviously think. Ask Ian or Jurinko or yogy...
Contradiction

Forget FB/PF which is dead in the market. Oleg said maps will be open to independent 3rd Party modding in BoB And Beyond, but only for tiny Online Dogfight maps which the customers are not interested in. This limit to map modding will not aide in sustaining customer interest in the future sim. Oleg will provide some form of map making tool, so we base any discussion on that before we repeat the traditional "insider" claim of the old FB/PF maps being too hard to create.

By definition, interested 3rd Parties can take all these Air War simulation grafix effects (Smoke, clouds) far beyond the interest the developer has in them, any developer, in every flight sim to date. You mention coordinated effort of modellers and artists, but if the Artist wishes to create, for one very small example, visible aircraft Dots and aircraft LODS for Offline play and Oleg ignores the modding addition or refuses to make a similar mod himself, the future sim will again lose customer support and lose sustained sales, as this sim has.


No miracle here. I mean do we even have a remote idea of what fiddling with such things mean?
Yes, it means hard work. Go to the StrikeFighters boards to see what people are doing. Paying customers are looking for deeper Air War simulation content which Oleg and Team have ignored. Many people interested in flight sim modding are current or retired military service members who are interested in expanding the gameplay value of Oleg's sim and share with a potentially growing number of future customers. And you (so far) only come to this board as an "insider" and insult flight sim enthusiasts as "KeWl R00xx00rz!" If you want to talk to this webboard and community, then you come here to talk, not insult people. Thank You. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

TacticalYak3
08-30-2006, 07:04 AM
Good show of character turbografx16! For what its worth I do understand what you are saying. During my time with the Silent Hunter III community I saw some rather impressive third-party work that really (IMO) enhanced that game.

With regards to the continuing discussion specific to maps, I don't think anyone here is suggesting such work is easy. On the contrary. What is being said is that this component of the IL-2 experience takes a very long time to produce. I would also point to the labours of folks like Ian et al as proof.

What I'm saying, without necessarily aligning myself with anyone else in this thread, is that the next engine needs even stronger third-party support. Yes it must be carefully done, and no I personally don't advocate a completely open system either (though some here may or that€s another point of view).

Seriously, as much as Maddox can be praised for with the IL-2 series, as a community where would we really be without all the free third-party stuff? With no DCG or third-party campaigns many would no longer be flying as much if at all. Just how long would have folks been playing in Dogfight servers without third-party scripting programs like Greatergreen's contribution. Then there is all the third-party support to operate online wars.

I could spend considerable time here listing a number of folks who have contributed significantly to the IL-2 experience without receiving any financial support or even recognition, and often without any assistance from Maddox Games. And, that's not placing blame on the developer, but merely suggesting that if there is more opportunity given by the developer in the future, and yes in the appropriate areas of the game (and maps are certainly one of them for me at least), this would only enhance the experience for the benefit of all.

In closing I trust Oleg appreciates the free contributions others have made to IL-2, and understands that while his company has developed IL-2 (and soon BOB), it like any game becomes something public upon release to its fans, some of who possess the talents to make continuing contributions to the game.

Regards,
TS!

csThor
08-30-2006, 11:37 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Forget FB/PF which is dead in the market. Oleg said maps will be open to independent 3rd Party modding in BoB And Beyond, but only for tiny Online Dogfight maps which the customers are not interested in. This limit to map modding will not aide in sustaining customer interest in the future sim. Oleg will provide some form of map making tool, so we base any discussion on that before we repeat the traditional "insider" claim of the old FB/PF maps being too hard to create.

It's a business decision made by Maddox Games and Ubisoft. They do have plans for further installations of the BoB engine so are you really surprised that they don't want other groups working on such maps? I agree, though, that the tiny DF maps are simply a waste of time.


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
You mention coordinated effort of modellers and artists, but if the Artist wishes to create, for one very small example, visible aircraft Dots and aircraft LODS for Offline play and Oleg ignores the modding addition or refuses to make a similar mod himself, the future sim will again lose customer support and lose sustained sales, as this sim has.

To me such modifications are always a thing of personal interpretion and so in a very basic sense ego related. I have seen enough babbles in these so-called "generous" modder communities to know that a lot of people would still see modding as their own way of making things the way they think they should be ...
LOD and dots are a question of aircraft/object models so to change them you'll probably need the object models ... Given the complexity of the models we've seen so far I have serious doubts that this would lead to anything but a load of problems.


Yes, it means hard work. Go to the StrikeFighters boards to see what people are doing. Paying customers are looking for deeper Air War simulation content which Oleg and Team have ignored. Many people interested in flight sim modding are current or retired military service members who are interested in expanding the gameplay value of Oleg's sim and share with a potentially growing number of future customers. And you (so far) only come to this board as an "insider" and insult flight sim enthusiasts as "KeWl R00xx00rz!" If you want to talk to this webboard and community, then you come here to talk, not insult people. Thank You. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

You were the first to insult, so I merely responded the same way. There's nothing "imperial" about the "inner core". There are few people who are allowed to make new maps (Ian, Jurinko, Luthier/SaQSon and yogy) - I'm not among them, but help(ed) with research and historical data.

You see the modders at Strike Fighters (or in general) as some kind of modern FlightSim Robin Hoods? Gimme a break! Strike Fighters (or M$ CF$) was left open because the developer knew he would neither come up with later content that is worth the typing space here nor with a complete sim to start with ... Even other seemingly "open" engines like the Targetware engine is in the end tightly controlled by a single entity (the developers) so that certain core features cannot be altered "just because I read it was so". Why Maddox Games does not make the effort to set up a working coordination platform for the willing participants is probably a question of workload and manpower at the moment ... But on the other hand they made it clear a long time ago that a closed code without too many chances for "modding" is one of their core philosophies and will remain that way. And they've got my support for it.

carguy_
08-30-2006, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by LEBillfish:
Oh, ok, now I understand, sorry, wasn't sure before..........Let me re-respond.

No........


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif


Thanks for expressing for most of simmers` views on this topic.We`ve had many discussions about it through the years.Oleg pretty much shares the view.

LEXX_Luthor
08-31-2006, 10:05 PM
Yes! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

csThor::
You see the modders at Strike Fighters (or in general) as some kind of modern FlightSim Robin Hoods? Gimme a break!
I do think of our own Lowengrin, a modder for StrikeFighters and FB/PF, as a FlightSim Robin Hood. SF has its own issues, and is not as "open" as we think -- Lowengrin can't make a dynamic campaign generator for StrikeFighters -- the SF campaigns system is closed, locked down tight, or Lowengrin would have made his own independent dynamic campaign generator long ago, but instead can only make editors that work with the stock SF campaign engine.

csThor::
You were the first to insult, so I merely responded the same way. There's nothing "imperial" about the "inner core". There are few people who are allowed to make new maps (Ian, Jurinko, Luthier/SaQSon and yogy) - I'm not among them, but help(ed) with research and historical data.
In my analogy I actually was thinking mostly of you and your unwillingess to *talk* to us honestly when we offered ideas on how to simplify PF maps. We since have found that at least one of those ideas was used -- probably independently -- in the Kurland map, but was poorly implemented as there are NO airfields outside the Simplified(tm) inner map area, and so was unusable unless the Pacific Fighters' Test Runways were used.

Yes, my example of aircraft LODs is a mistake, as that steps on Oleg keeping the aircraft modding closed, as it should be. Dots are another issue. The problem is Oleg offered custom Dot options that allowed FB/PF Dots to match each user's monitor resolution in Patch 3.01, but took them away in one of most bizzare blunders for customer relations (we can talk about business decisions below). You once mentioned that Oleg was getting bad advice from the wrong people, and that he (hopefully) is or will get better advice in the future.

I consider the mp_dotrange and how it worked in Patch 3.01 as a small modding tool offered by the developer for community modding of FB/PF Dots.

ElAurens
08-31-2006, 11:01 PM
Has everyone forgotten how Oleg got burned the first time by all those who reserved certain models and then never came through with the finished product?

This is reason enough IMHO to limit who can make models, and what they can be.

This isn't a social experiment, it's a business, and the "manufacturer" needs to be able to control "production" to keep quality and profitability at acceptable levels.

In the end it's as simple as that.

LEXX_Luthor
08-31-2006, 11:10 PM
ElAurens, Oleg will NOT open aircraft for modding. Why are you talking about aircraft modding when we are talking about modding maps, smoke, clouds, airfields, ship skins, Dots, sky colours, correct stars for navigation, etc...? Do you want to mod aircraft? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Oleg has proven willing and able to mod most every airplane we want, and even aircraft that are not airplanes. Oleg's got the aircraft all sewn up man.

Thanks, I just remembered about your BoB Pay-To-Play Poll thread. Time to bump that up, just a bit.

ElAurens
09-01-2006, 05:23 AM
I know that Lexx, but deep in their haxor hearts that is what is driving most of the n00b posters in this type of thread.

There are too many players out there who feel the FMs are wrong...

Be sure.

-HH-Quazi
09-01-2006, 05:53 AM
Originally posted by ElAurens:
I know that Lexx, but deep in their haxor hearts that is what is driving most of the n00b posters in this type of thread.

There are too many players out there who feel the FMs are wrong...

Be sure.

Yea, this is true. This is what is hilarious to myself. As if they would know what a specific WWII fighter ac should "feel" like when flying in it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Ridiculous imo. But nonetheless, the way it is. Those that want to change the FM of any particular ac to fly the way they "feel" it should, should consider flying Uncle Bill's CFS series instead of a FM that they find to hard to master and keep getting their arses handed to them in. I am not saying what we have is perfect, but, I believe I will trust the data Oleg and company has gathered along with the 40 some odd "real-life" WWII fighter jock pilots that he had testing our virtual ac before I would trust how myself, or anyone else for that matter, thinks a particular WWII fighter ac should "feel" like when flying it. And what is hilarious about my last statement? That some here would argue they would know better than the data and the real-life WWII fighter jocks would know about how a particular ac should fly in the virtual skies of IL-2 FB.

LEXX_Luthor
09-01-2006, 06:45 AM
ElAurens::
I know that Lexx, but...
Excellent. Now stop posting like an Online cheater, and start condeming the Online cheaters instead of making insultins against the flight sim community.

Do tell us about how the community has more interest in making some things better than the developer has interest in, like smoke, clouds, airfields, etc...

Oleg has interest in making airplanes. Everybody knows that. Tell more about that.

Online cheaters try to hide things, so stop trying to hide things from the community.

carguy_
09-01-2006, 08:04 AM
Those threads are funny.Quite amusing reading ppl telling "give us open source,we will never touch the FM,we swear.We`re not even interested in FM".

I guess we should just trust them. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

LEBillfish
09-01-2006, 09:27 AM
We all know this won't happen (thankfully) though maybe one day "objects" and the like will be able to be submitted to Maddox games for inclusion........So, what is it exactly anyone wanting to argue the point for open sourcing is hoping to accomplish in this and many other threads, knowing all the gripes, threats, accusations & slurs do nothing to convince the powers at be as they have been there?

What's the point?..........as the revolution has no steam.

VVaFFenPanZZeR
09-01-2006, 10:32 AM
I think it could be done. if u screen the players coming into ur server.

I play another online game called America's Army, and I have a community that plays custom maps I create using the UnReaLeD, and I screen all the players who want to be a member of my community, for past violations, if they have 1 they dont get in. I dont mind a 3rd party anti-cheat software scanning my rig (such as Punkbuster)as I have nothing to hide. But i would love to beable to mod or create maps and planes for this sim, I think it would be awesome.

Even if u only let pilots u know join ur servers or campaigns or what not.

LEXX_Luthor
09-01-2006, 05:15 PM
BillFish::
So, what is it exactly anyone wanting to argue the point for open sourcing is hoping to accomplish in this and many other threads, knowing all the gripes, threats, accusations & slurs do nothing to convince the powers at be as they have been there?
My guess is they copy and paste the popular "open source" slogan into their webboard poasting boxes, having seen the slogan pumped up by the computer and gaming media over the Linux operating system -- true open source software -- unlike any major flight sim ever made. Open sims are never open source software. Even StrikeFighters is more closed than FB/PF in some respects, the best example perhaps are Dynamic Campaign Generators. Lowengrin can't make an SF-DCG mod for the StrikeFighters' community for this reason, but can only make editors that work with the stock locked down DCG. In my opinioin, the closed nature of the campaign hurts StrikeFighters sales in the long run, as Lowengrin can mod up a good campaign generator that customers enjoy beyond the developer's own campaign system.

For those new to the concept of open sim modding, heres a FAQ on Lowengrin's 3rd Party IL2-DCG campaign mod

~> http://www.lowengrin.com/content.php?article.19


And no -- nobody needs "open source" for a more open sim.

Eagle1_Division
09-05-2006, 07:32 PM
I didn't take the time to read all of the posts but I think they should at least make IL-2 and PF moddable and just make the SERVERS locked up instead of the game to avoid cheating, its almost kinda sad the planes we will never fly...
(Unless I can get the game to work online for once!!!)

Bearcat99
09-08-2006, 09:17 AM
This is DejaVu all over again again.. I beieve thisd is the 3rd Open source thread in here..... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

LEXX_Luthor
09-09-2006, 02:11 AM
No, nearmiss in his/her OpenBob thread asked about "open" and did not copy/paste the open source slogan into the thread title. These "open source" slogans are very embarassing to modders of open sims, as we know how open sims work, and they are never open source.

Remember the hostile insults against Oleg in, for example, the Classic Fw-190 Revi Threads. I poasted to the modder of the CR.42 (Veltro? I forgot) to Police his own support, as they were embarassing the issue with very sloppy insults, much like politicians often must control their own radical supporters or get embarassed. Well Bear, at least I follow my own advice (surprising even me), and I don't tolerate "open source" slogans from flight sim Quacks making poasts that demand cfs developers releace their computer code.

Xiolablu3
09-11-2006, 08:52 AM
NOOOOOO!!!!


We dont want lots of different flight models and hacks for each plane.

One flight model, one sim.

Open source would mean easy to hack/cheat.

ElAurens
09-11-2006, 10:51 AM
Be careful, Lexx will call you a cheater...

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

Te_Vigo
09-13-2006, 09:07 AM
or a hurt by CFS2 online cheater foam at the mouth.


Ahhhhh...when the arguments fail, the insults start. eh Lexx?


NOOoooo to FM/ DM modding of any kind air or ground.

Ya wanna fix things Lexx? Get it together and present it to the developers...badger them directly, cause I think you're fighting a losing argument (your's and circular) here.

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

LEXX_Luthor
09-13-2006, 07:02 PM
Vigo::
or a hurt by CFS2 online cheater foam at the mouth.
Excuse me, but you know that referred to the people coming here to demand that Oleg give away his computer code, for free. Do you support that? No you don't, and neither do I.


Vigo::
NOOoooo to FM/ DM modding of any kind air or ground.
Agreed. Oleg has proven willing and able to model large numbers of aircraft and ground combat vehicle almost without limit. We don't need independent 3rd Party aircraft modding. However, everything else should be opened for modding -- clouds, airfields, full size maps, etc... I'm not sure yet about opening ground combat vehicles and ships -- that may be helpful, as real enthusiasts can do a good job at this when the flight sim developers are not interested, and ground vehicle/ship modding should be nothing as difficult as flight modelling and damage moddeling for aircraft. Oleg has stated his dis-interest in Dynamic Campaigns, which includes Online War, and "correct" ground combat between vehicles is important for the outcome of dynamic campaigns. Oleg favours hand made missions for static campaigns where the ground combat has no effect on the hand made missions a player goes through. mmm I dunno.

LEXX_Luthor
09-13-2006, 07:16 PM
ElAurens::
Be careful, Lexx will call you a cheater...
ElAurens, if you are as concerned about Online cheaters as you claim in your posts, you need to start condemming the people who cheat Online and not the ideas of Offline players who ask for a more immersive Air War simulation through (non-aircraft http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif) modding for their combat flight sim.

Friendly Tip -- ElAurens, when you feel ready, you can find the Online Cheaters playing Online, as they are all Online players, every one of them.

Te_Vigo
09-14-2006, 06:07 AM
Like it was offered Lexx; get a program (lightwave perhaps?) redraw your clouds, the way you like them and draw up anything else ya wanna feel that you should ,for whatever reason) and present it to the developers.

...but please stop hassling for FM/ DM of any kind, for whatever reason to be available for modding/ fixing, you really are embarrassing yerself.

"Excuse me, but you know that referred to the people coming here to demand that Oleg give away his computer code, for free. Do you support that? No you don't, and neither do I.'

~~~`

"...I'm not sure yet about opening ground combat vehicles and ships -- that may be helpful,..."
-Lexx

You say this and in the same breath suggest/ demand/ put up scanty reasons for the release of such for ground objects?
On other thread, you said they were lousy and needed fixing?????


Now I'm sure that if you could do a better job than the developers, bearing in mind they've obviously gone the way they have to appear credible across a wide range of different machines and not just for one machine, I'm sure they would include it, if they felt it justified to do so......

Then maybe there would be some pratts could come along that would b*tch about your clouds, or whatever. (art being art and all)
ATM... I feel the clouds are fine as they are and from the limited screens I've seen they look fine in BoB.

Large maps??
Doing large maps, as in this engine, would have to have code altered to make a draw distance, otherwise all objects placed on that map would be in the mix...would they not?
A large map without any objects/ details ... what's the point, the benefit in that?

Now let's look at the opening header title....here some are...already whinging and b*tching about something that hasn't even been publically released yet.
ya gettin' in early or what Lexx? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

LEXX_Luthor
09-14-2006, 11:03 PM
Vigo::
..but please stop hassling for FM/ DM of any kind, for whatever reason to be available for modding/ fixing, you really are embarrassing yerself.
You know from previous posts that I think FM/DM are best kept in Oleg's hands, as he is interested in always adding new aircraft, and ground vehicles for that matter. We can discuss the rest of your post if you wish, after we are certain that you understand why aircraft FM/DM should remain closed.

Te_Vigo
09-15-2006, 10:30 AM
tsk, tsk....I've never seen the tactic of trying to turn things around before Lexx....


Please go on