PDA

View Full Version : Will PAcific Fighters allow aircraft to be inserted by modders



Destraex
10-17-2004, 12:13 AM
Just thinking that as PF is the last for this engine that maybe less control will be enforced over the source and ability for modders to keep life in this game.

I believe it still has potential to be the first compehensive sim that has all aircraft flyable. Its just ashame that the A/C will not all be put into BOB so that we can start where we left off.

As it is I am still need a definitive answer on whether PF will allow ALL FB A/C to be flown on Pacific maps, although this seems logical

609IAP_Recon
10-17-2004, 12:16 AM
Make a mod and send it to Oleg - it can get in if it's good.

See - in IL2, quality is a trademark.

And if you can do quality work, I'm sure Oleg will accept your mods.

Destraex
10-17-2004, 12:30 AM
I am not a modder, do not have the time or patience with the way real life is ATM.

MY point was that I am wondering what happens when this engine is abandoned by Olegs team. I suspect this will be perhaps one or two free patches after PAcific Fighters is released. Then we are on our own.

By that I mean the game will stagnate in its form at that time or it will allow freelance modding by the community.

If it stays locked a lot of great thrid party aircraft will be missed.

Fliger747
10-17-2004, 12:43 AM
To Czech out what is POSSIBLE in the freeware side, look at the Alpha Bleu Ciel F4U-7 and AU-1 Corsairs for FS9. I almost got banned for posting a screenie (been deleted) of this plane as one of the mods though it was from a pirate copy of PF.

I would like this series eventually open up to free spirit developers, which has kept CFS2 alive forever! Don't know that this will happen. It is their product and they do have to make decisions that keep them on the scene!

Be here soon!

clint-ruin
10-17-2004, 01:12 AM
Maybe look for this after BOB is out for a while. I'd dearly love it if Oleg could fork FB into its final PF patch, and then a seperate, mod-friendly executable [perhaps even source?] with some of their more sensitive code stripped out. I think Oleg drastically underestimates the patience of the modding community generally - there are some very smart guys out there. Just look at what's been done with SDOE, Freespace 2, Quake, etc, now that there has been a couple of years worth of modding done. Freespace 2 SCP and Tenebrae Quake are some of the most amazing work I've ever seen. And that's just some guys playing around in their spare time.

TooCool_12f
10-17-2004, 04:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> I think Oleg drastically underestimates the patience of the modding community generally <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I think you misunderstood oleg's goals...

He's not interested in making another lego. He made a simulation (or a game of you prefer) with a purpose, and modding it is against the initial purpose of the game. If your sole interest is modding, you have already several titles that let you do whatever you do. This one is for guys wanting to play a game where planes have their caracteristics as close to real thing as possible and where they know everybody's game behaves equally.

For most guys who play IL2/FB/AEP, opening the code would simply mess the whole game.

clint-ruin
10-17-2004, 04:30 AM
Did you miss the part where I said it would be good to be forked into open/SDK and closed/final PF patch versions at the end of development?

TooCool_12f
10-17-2004, 08:07 AM
er.. I did, sorry http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

clint-ruin
10-17-2004, 08:22 AM
No prob :>

That's not to say that opening up a game opens it to cheats - most of the more robust game engines/network models out there are actually the most opened up. People have this big fear of it being done a la the CFS series. You should take comfort in knowing that moddable games aren't all done along those lines - it takes a special kind of incompetence Microsoft and few others possess to screw it up as badly as they did.

Yellonet
10-17-2004, 08:27 AM
I hope they never release a modable IL-2/PF... that would be the end of it I think... just UFO's everywhere. It's best the way it is.

92SqnGCJimbo
10-17-2004, 08:54 AM
to be honest i dont think it shoud be open source... if it is yoll end up like cfs2 where all and sundrie end up with differetn plane sets etc... i do think it would be nice though if 1 person at 1c gave us his e-mail and when he got enuff stuff would post it on the site....

VW-IceFire
10-17-2004, 09:11 AM
I think the current system works quite well as long as there is continued support. Oleg's shown that he's got the will to do it...hopefully we show that we've got the will to support it through our wallets.

Opening the game up would be a problem for online. More possibility of cheating...and that is one of the reasons this game is so great. No serious cheating...things work out quite well.

csThor
10-17-2004, 09:35 AM
You obviously misunderstand what happens with "abandoned games". They might wander into the dust bin speaking of market and purchase, but don't think there are no parts of their code that find their way into the successor. I am quite sure that there are many things within the FB/PF codebase which will be brought over to BoB or used as fundament for improvements. Which also means that "Modders" might get a look at "how it's done" inside the code - something that will not happen as Maddox Games/1C/UBI want to protect their investments.

Obi_Kwiet
10-17-2004, 04:46 PM
I wouldn't mind if it became open source when BoB comes out. It might be interesting to see what the community could do. Umm, csThor... we have coppy right laws...

Bearcat99
10-17-2004, 05:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Destraex:
MY point was that I am wondering what happens when this engine is abandoned by Olegs team. I suspect this will be perhaps one or two free patches after PAcific Fighters is released. Then we are on our own.

By that I mean the game will stagnate in its form at that time or it will allow freelance modding by the community.

If it stays locked a lot of great thrid party aircraft will be missed. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cosidering the planeset already in it and the one that will be in it by the time it is all said and done what do you need? Most of the guys in here dont fly 80% of the planes now. They pick thier favorites and basically thats it. Think about it....even if you had 10 favorite planes in this sim, compared to what is actually IN the sim as flyable that 10 is a drop in the bucket. I hope this sim finishes like it started.. closed source, top notch, best in its class. There is nothing any modder can do to this sim except screw it all up. Besides.. who is to say that letting modders get hold of the code for FB wont make it easier to crack BoB... that wouldnt be a good thing IMHO. Im sure there will be some similarities.

clint-ruin
10-17-2004, 05:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
who is to say that letting modders get hold of the code for FB wont make it easier to crack BoB... that wouldnt be a good thing IMHO. Im sure there will be some similarities. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Um, no. This tends not to work. If you leave something proprietary out all alone, with noone to fix it, and someone -does- break its encryption and network model [which I assure you - someone will], then you are truly screwed.

There are also ways of releasing commercial games as open source that exclude any 'secret' or non-releaseable code. Doom and Freespace 2 both got put out like this, it's not hard, it's not new.

As I keep having to repeat - the Microsoft CFS way of being 'open' to modification is one of the most stupid ways such a thing can be done. Not everyone who releases their source screws the pooch as badly as they did.

SaQSoN
10-17-2004, 07:21 PM
From my experience, 80% of user made models for any open architecture game can be called "a complete ****".
Another 15% can be called "somwhat crappy".
Another 4% would stand for "not very good".
And about 1% would be an "almost satisfactory quality". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
All the above, if you are using Oleg's quality scale. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif And I, personally, totaly agree with him.
May be, all those bugs and glitches in those user-made models may not be noticable or important for casual players, but not for the developer team.
So, the IL2/PF line will never turn into an open architecture.

clint-ruin
10-17-2004, 07:35 PM
So in your opinion, something like say, Counterstrike, which went on to earn Valve and Sierra an absolutely astounding amount of money, and completely dominates the ranks of any non-card/poker game in terms of simultaneous internet players.. that's almost satisfactory? Is that what you're saying? Superfalcon's terrible too? Those strike fighters guys should give up?

I think some of you need to get the hell out of 1996 or whenever it was you last played some serious multi-person team mods. Let alone what can be done with access to the source.

If you have the hardware, why don't you take a look at Tenebrae Quake, and then come back and see if you think Quake done with what's basically a home-brew version of the Doom 3 engine is 'almost satisfactory'.

Aztek_Eagle
10-17-2004, 10:44 PM
I Have pray to god, that oleg nevers allow at will mods ingto the game, one of the things that drive me nuts about cfs series

clint-ruin
10-17-2004, 11:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aztek_Eagle:
I Have pray to god, that oleg nevers allow at will mods ingto the game, one of the things that drive me nuts about cfs series <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGGH!

Jettexas
10-18-2004, 08:25 AM
Think about it,
All the people with the free time, references, and software suite that are capable of producing a finished plane up the required standards ,for little or no money- are doing so. A mechanism exists for thier creations to become reality. We fly third party planes every single day.

The fear of course is that opening up the code would inevitably open up the game to a lower echelon of modders, that lack the skills to offer a finished product and it would turn into "ooohh look what I stuck onto someone elses model",
Since you have stated twice that CFS did it wrong-and have cited examples of sucessfull mods from the FPS genre of games-perhaps you could tell us in detail what kind of mod exactly that this series is lacking? Or what, in your hypothetical open source game would be "moddable" and what wouldnt?Just curious.
We've already seen that the game can undergo a "theatre mod" sucessfully...perhaps this is what you meant?
Even so a complete theatre mod is probably beyond the scope of what the average joe and his buddies could pull off, even with an SDK and developers tools.That having been said,
I must admit a Med. Theatre and a WWI "mod" of the existing engine have been suggested and seem to have "legs" as far as being valid concepts....Concepts perhaps best left to professionals and gifted amateurs under thier supervision/tutelage.
The only opening I really see as having value in the context of the game as it now exists would be some sort of terrrain/map making tools.

As to open source with regard to the plane models and characteristics- No..Never.As we have seen with the CFS series public interest often outlives developer support, people may still be buying these games for a couple of years to come, even after "the last patch" and the release of the next title.. at what point in a product life cycle does the developer say
"Well , we're through with this title, we're gonna open the code,any one buying the title after date X will just have to deal with the mods" That hardly seems fair.

Its the thin end of the wedge..Pandoras Box..

X wing anyone? Try the "M$ Zone"


S!
Jettexas/
AKA: 96th_Redfish
War Officer
96th Consolidated Air Force
www.caf96th.com (http://www.caf96th.com)

clint-ruin
10-18-2004, 09:17 AM
The way CFS got it wrong? Total lack of interest from the developer in fixing exploits, lack of any 'pure' options worth using, no meaningful file checking, no meaningful encryption of the network data, no sanity checking for truly out of the ordinary behaviour from clients, p2p network model, the list goes on. If you can think of something you should do to secure an internet enabled program, they didn't do it - or did it so badly as to make it totally useless.

I have to wonder how many people have heard of this concept where total strangers are able to play the same mod over the internet with reasonable confidence that noone is cheating their bum off, or at least, not in any easily preventable way. It's only been around since what, 1996 or so? Maybe in another 8 years people will be more familiar with it. It's kind of important because pretty much any multiplayer game you can see on the shelves these days is based around the same old boring security concepts that have been keeping internet infrastructure alive for the last few decades. If you're so terribly afraid of open source, guys, please go and unplug your modem, in fact - go and uninstall your copy of 2K or XP, since MS ripped a great deal of its tcp/ip innards from horrible scary open-ish source BSD code. What makes this even more amusing is if you compare the horrid scary OpenBSD security record vs that of Windows 2000 systems on Bugtraq. I'll spoil it for you - Microsoft doesn't come off looking too good. If noone is able to fix a problem, and noone has any interest in fixing it, you're just going to be stuck with whatever people manage to do to PF once it's left alone.

What should be opened? File formats primarily, or at least allowing imported data to be run seperately or in conjunction with whats in the SFSs. I think they're on record as saying that their internal tools are pretty unfriendly, but that's not an insurmountable obstacle given the number of 3rd party editors that have been produced for commercial games. For Quake 1 alone there were around twenty third party editors - before you get into what's been done now the source is out. Operation Flashpoint modders put in a heroic effort to build their own tools. Freespace 2 has Fred2Open. Almost all of these were done with pretty minimal assistance from the original coders, barely any comments in the source [not even available to OFP builders], and bugger all documentation. Source is always good, but even an SDK can go a long long way in the right hands. Certainly if they intend to drop the Il2 line for commercial purposes there's no reason why they shouldn't pass it on to someone who'll do something useful with it.

What should be modded? Korea? The med? WW1? Battlefield-commandish RTSs using the Il2 engine? Tetris made using models of different weird russian planes instead of blocks? Take a look at what has been done before in other games, you have no idea what you'll get out. A lot of it will be ****, some of it will be very good, if they're lucky there will be one that goes on to earn its own shipping box and earns them millions of dollars. Not that they need that, or anything, right? :>

csThor
10-18-2004, 10:47 AM
Personally the only "modifications" I'd accept in a combat flight sim that is worth this title are:

a) graphical enhancements (say updated generic skins or scenery)
b) updated sound effects
c) modifications for the offline campaign

Other "mods" - which go further than mere cosmetics - cause an uneven playing field. I find the Maddox way of adding 3rd Partystuff quite fine. With one exception - 3rd Party Modellers have free choice and don't have to follow basic rules as historical relevance, usability within the limits of the game etc.

SaQSoN
10-18-2004, 12:58 PM
clint-ruin, I've seen enough of user-made 3d-models, both for the IL-2 and for the other games, including some of those, you mentioned.
I wouldn't want to hurt feelings of the modellers, but... Everything I saw, suites very well into that quality scale, I mentioned in my first post.
I could go even further, and tell, that about 70% of models made by so called PROFESSIONAL game-dev teams are nearly "complete junk". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Including some very notorious titles, like, say, the "Battlefield" series or "Operation Flashpoint", or even the "DOOM III". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

clint-ruin
10-18-2004, 01:08 PM
Wow, you must be great at this stuff. Could you post us some pictures of your realtime 3d work here? Must be excellent from the sounds of things. Which dev team do you work for?

SaQSoN
10-18-2004, 01:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Wow, you must be great at this stuff. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, I am. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Could you post us some pictures of your realtime 3d work here? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I can't. I am not allowed to. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Which dev team do you work for?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Guess. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

clint-ruin
10-18-2004, 01:50 PM
I'm actually guessing you work for a game company on fruitloop planet, having said that Doom 3s modelling work sucks.

SaQSoN
10-18-2004, 06:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>having said that Doom 3s modelling work sucks. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, I'd say the whole game sucks. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
But for their artistic concept, their modelling in most cases is qood enough.
Although, their level of modelling and texturing is way beyond one, required for the IL-2. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Bearcat99
10-18-2004, 07:48 PM
Since it will never happen this whole debat is moot. Oleg wouldnt in a million years open up this sim to be butchered by some 3rd party hack..

clint-ruin
10-19-2004, 12:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Since it will never happen this whole debat is moot. Oleg wouldnt in a million years open up this sim to be butchered by some 3rd party hack.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

THATS RITE BEERCAT - THEN PASIFIC FITERS WOULD TURN INTO CFS WITCH SUXX !!!11!!

Freycinet
10-19-2004, 03:20 AM
Guys, Saqson has made some very high quality models for the Il-2 series, so I see no need to question his credentials, he knows probably 100% more about modelling than non-modellers do.

As for comparing flight sim mods to FPS mods: it's just not the same: for fps'es you can do basically what you want, for flight sims you have to do historical research and get it EXACTLY right, otherwise what reality are you "simulating"? - It's a whole different ballpark.

I think the "closed source - closed planes"-model has worked wonders in opening up realistic flight simming to the masses. I for one am not intersted in following an obscure scene of modders, choosing which mod to go for and then play with those few other people on specific servers.

A community as huge as the Il-2-Fb-AEP-PF community is a huge bonus for game play and game development. Just think of all the peripheral programas that have sprung up around Il-2 just because the community is so big: Hyperlobby, Il-2-mat, Dgen, online wars, the forums. All this exists because we have a level playing field, and only ONE, so that everybody meet and can relate to the same experience.

This is absolutely essential if we need flight simming to come out of the "special interests" section, and go mainstream.

And finally, there is a thriving Il-2 modeller community over at netwings. If models are of top-notch qualiy they'll be included by Maddox.

Fennec_P
10-19-2004, 03:42 AM
The IL2 engine should stay locked tight if you have any interest in playing this game online.

The CFS series was rendered useless for multiplayer by its modable nature. Models, textures, FMs can be changed at will.

LOMAC has the exact same problem. You have people swapping out models, hacking loadouts, textures, terrain, and ultimately making serious multiplay impossible. If you wanted to, you could make the ground purple, the sky white, and replace all the enemy aircraft with the Kuz' so they're easier to see. Cockpit view not to your taste? Just make the textures invisible. Its only a matter of time until other things get hacked, as all the core files are just sitting there.

I don't ever want to see the inside of a SFS file, never mind adding my own planes or vehicles.

With 1C willing to impliment your models, and provide their own free addons as well, there is no reason for the game to ever be user modable.

When they do stop providing updates for the IL-2 engine, it will hardly matter. There will be far better games to play.

clint-ruin
10-19-2004, 03:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Freycinet:
Guys, Saqson has made some very high quality models for the Il-2 series, so I see no need to question his credentials, he knows probably 100% more about modelling than non-modellers do.

As for comparing flight sim mods to FPS mods: it's just not the same: for fps'es you can do basically what you want, for flight sims you have to do historical research and get it EXACTLY right, otherwise what reality are you "simulating"? - It's a whole different ballpark. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What do you think a mod is? A new plane? A new renderer? A new theatre? A complete revamp of the concept of the game? A completely different game based on the same guts?

You really don't think that anyone would go about implementing just the top 50 game issues [not balance issues] people complain about in ORR? Maddox Games are only going to do so much with this, they only have so much time, so many resources. Apparently changing "never" to "maybe, if someone wants to do it, and people want to play it" is some sort of dire, grave threat to the genre. I had no idea. Better make those Strike Fighters guys stop quick smart, you might not have much time! Run, Forest, run!

Do you really think Maddox will go back and patch PF after they've gone out of business or moved on to BOB once someone does manage to break the doors in?

Clearly we have some sort of failure to communicate if people are running around thinking that people are somehow loading up their Counterstrike gear in Team Fortress just because you can mod Half Life. Let me say this in as few words as I can:

No.


And actually, you bet I'd like to contrast whatever work Saqson has done elsewhere with that in other games. I say elsewhere because, you know, as hard as it is to make a single, static model with at most a couple of points of articulation, that is about 0.00000000000000001% of the work required to make even the simplest highly animated FPS model that has to not look ridiculous performing the actions it needs to do in the game. Sorry. I appreciate the third party guys work as much as anyone, but seriously, let's not even invite the comparison, it's one FB loses badly.

Freycinet
10-19-2004, 04:04 AM
I would have replied, but sorry, your agressive tone just makes me not want to waste more time in this thread. If you can't discuss in a civil manner, then you're not talking with me.

The Dauntless is by Saqson BTW.

Last word is for you, bye-bye:

WOLFMondo
10-19-2004, 04:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Yellonet:
I hope they never release a modable IL-2/PF... that would be the end of it I think... just UFO's everywhere. It's best the way it is. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats why I don't think its a good idea to let people code there own FM's and DM's. Some of the CFS2 planes are ridiculous and seemed based on myth and legend rather than fact.

SaQSoN
10-19-2004, 05:01 AM
And, BTW, besides all this "historical accuracy" and "model quality" issues there is one more. This time it is technical.
Bear in mind, that initially this game was not developed as open-ended. This means, the procidure of porting an aircraft and programming it's animation, flight dynamics and damage model is much more coplex, then what you can find in, say, the CFS or FS series. To do all this things, you not only need to be good with 3d-modelling, but, also you should be a good programmer. In the 1C office it takes efforts of several differnt people (designers and programmers) to get one single plane into the game.
Next, what software will you use to create mods? 3DS Max? Will you pay several thousand bucks for it? Or, will you use pirated version?
Then, will be your mods leagal?
Will it be legal for 1C to release their proprietary plugins and tools for 3DS Max and programming environment, required for model portation and programming for the game?
So, kid, before you start crying about open-ended architecture, take all this issues in mind.
And by now,clint-ruin, better go to school. Even, if you have graduited from it log ago. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

FF_Trozaka
10-19-2004, 05:05 AM
Thank god PF is not open to modding like that! I think Oleg does a great job of incorporating 3rd party mods in this sim. There are some beautiful contributions in game.
You didn't really just compare CFS series and Strike Fighters to the IL2 series, did you?

S!

clint-ruin
10-19-2004, 06:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SaQSoN:
And, BTW, besides all this "historical accuracy" and "model quality" issues there is one more. This time it is technical.
Bear in mind, that initially this game was not developed as open-ended. This means, the procidure of porting an aircraft and programming it's animation, flight dynamics and damage model is much more coplex, then what you can find in, say, the CFS or FS series. To do all this things, you not only need to be good with 3d-modelling, but, also you should be a good programmer. In the 1C office it takes efforts of several differnt people (designers and programmers) to get one single plane into the game. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's almost like I didn't spend a very long paragraph listing just a tiny number of the ways in which mod teams have been able to get around bizarre formats and lack of documentation to build their own editors. Usually better than the shipping ones, if applicable, too.

I never said it was easy. In fact the exact opposite. Just that as hard as it is, there are people with enough talent to overcome just about any technical hurdle, if the door is open to start with.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Next, what software will you use to create mods? 3DS Max? Will you pay several thousand bucks for it? Or, will you use pirated version?
Then, will be your mods leagal? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

a) this only applies to new models being introduced, rather than data or other edits

b) countless mods have had people use suspect software, and as far as I know, nothing high profile has ever been busted for it. By far the biggest worry any mod team has is getting 'Foxed' .. which aircraft manufacturer do you think is going to sue someone for making Luft 46 planes? In any case, actually proving the use of pirated software in a models creation - when the final data in game bears little relation to the raw export data - is something I wish whichever mystical legal team sues the best of luck with. Worst you're looking at is a C&D letter.

c) it's not like conversion from Lightwave, 3dsPE, or anything else you could name is some insurmountable hurdle. The reason 1c wants them in a format is because their internal tools depend on certain data formats. If those tools have to be written from scratch, or rewritten, how is this a problem?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Will it be legal for 1C to release their proprietary plugins and tools for 3DS Max and programming environment, required for model portation and programming for the game? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In short, who cares? It's not like they're strictly required, or that they are the One True Way of importing a model That Could Ever Be Done In History.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>So, kid, before you start crying about open-ended architecture, take all this issues in mind.
And by now,clint-ruin, better go to school. Even, if you have graduited from it log ago. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So we won't be seeing the rest of your portfolio? That's a shame. I was expecting it to be pretty good to allow you your due pissing rights over these guys (http://www.idsoftware.com/business/team/) but it looks like we don't get to pick it apart.

SaQSoN
10-19-2004, 07:30 AM
Boy, is this disscussion useless?
clint-ruin, being so ignorant, as you are, might be harmfull for you.
I wouldn't discuss anything on this topic anymore, particulary with you.
You do not hear anyone, but yourself, you don't know anything about the subject you're talking about, you live in an imaginery world, where everything is possible and easy.
In short words: grow up, kid.

Chuck_Older
10-19-2004, 07:37 AM
All the folks who worry about UFOs buzzing around if Fb went open source are thinking about online play, and online play only.

It is my firm beleif that many players active in the community do not consider offline play at all, and that's bad, because the offliners have a small voice in comparison to onliners.

DOn't overlook the (not inconsiderable) offline community when considering questions like this one

clint-ruin
10-19-2004, 08:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SaQSoN:
Boy, is this disscussion useless?
clint-ruin, being so ignorant, as you are, might be harmfull for you.
I wouldn't discuss anything on this topic anymore, particulary with you.
You do not hear anyone, but yourself, you don't know anything about the subject you're talking about, you live in an imaginery world, where everything is possible and easy.
In short words: grow up, kid. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uh,

So basically, you're convinced that you are better than any existing mod team, or commercial modeller with published work, your portfolio consists one one static plane that professional modellers had to help you with, and shoehorn into a working game, you insist that internal tools need to be released and used when the entire history of modding indicates the exact opposite, and you claim that I think this is easy, when the message you replied to contains:

I never said it was easy. In fact the exact opposite. Just that as hard as it is, there are people with enough talent to overcome just about any technical hurdle, if the door is open to start with.

What exactly -did- you interpret that to mean?

FF_Trozaka
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>You didn't really just compare CFS series and Strike Fighters to the IL2 series, did you? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Where's your outrage at Maddox Games netcode and cheat-checking being compared to that of MS CFS? I can't help but notice you don't seem to have any. Why is that?

What's your problem with opening up the ranks to even more planes, game concepts, scenarios, etc, exactly?

Chuck_Older:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>my firm beleif that many players active in the community do not consider offline play at all, and that's bad, because the offliners have a small voice in comparison to onliners.

DOn't overlook the (not inconsiderable) offline community when considering questions like this one <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed - a lot of the more annoying problems - ones that 1c/Maddox don't have as much time for - are ones that have been with us from the very start in Il2 1.0 and have been annoying the offline players ever since.

SaQSoN
10-19-2004, 09:00 AM
Sorry. You're not only ignorant. You just plane stupid. I don't do mods at all. I do games themselfs.
As for my portfolio - it is not of your concern. I can only tell, that it cosists of much more, than "one one static plane". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

clint-ruin
10-19-2004, 09:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SaQSoN:
Sorry. You're not only ignorant. You just plane stupid. _I don't do mods at all. I do games themselfs._ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Where did I say anything about you doing mods? Settle down, read what you're replying to.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
As for my portfolio - it is not of your concern. I can only tell, that it cosists of much more, than "one one static plane". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mmm, I can tell you're proud of it by the way you've been pumping out examples of your work nonstop here. Surely you wouldn't tell us..

I could go even further, and tell, that about 70% of models made by so called PROFESSIONAL game-dev teams are nearly "complete junk".
Including some very notorious titles, like, say, the "Battlefield" series or "Operation Flashpoint", or even the "DOOM III".

.. without having some awfully good work up your sleeve. So I ask - what have you done? So far we have the Dauntless in PF listed - what else?