PDA

View Full Version : the next generation ultimate game....



aukieboy
10-17-2005, 06:14 AM
We all play Il2/PF... and a lot of us in here may also play battlefield 1942... completely different but good game, now:

What if all the good features of both games would be combined in one single comprehensive and most electrifying game/sim...
The FM, hugh maps & MBuilder and the beautiful models of Il2/PF, plus:
The characters and the possibility to grasp the controls of many vehicles and aircraft, guns and mounts of battlefield 1942.

Imagine you could play as a CVE based FM-2 fighterpilot or choose to man the starboard 20mm AA mount of the CVE and protect the ship from enemy fighters... control the vessel itself or be the LSO. Take your binoculars and spot enemy ships...
Go down to the hangar deck and help to fight fires with your shipmates. It would not only be a game about flying but about the life aboard a Carrier.

This sounds so great, but:
Will this ever materialize in a single Game?
If i had all the money i would develop a game like this right away, meanwhile:
I'll keep dreaming.

Auk

aukieboy
10-17-2005, 06:14 AM
We all play Il2/PF... and a lot of us in here may also play battlefield 1942... completely different but good game, now:

What if all the good features of both games would be combined in one single comprehensive and most electrifying game/sim...
The FM, hugh maps & MBuilder and the beautiful models of Il2/PF, plus:
The characters and the possibility to grasp the controls of many vehicles and aircraft, guns and mounts of battlefield 1942.

Imagine you could play as a CVE based FM-2 fighterpilot or choose to man the starboard 20mm AA mount of the CVE and protect the ship from enemy fighters... control the vessel itself or be the LSO. Take your binoculars and spot enemy ships...
Go down to the hangar deck and help to fight fires with your shipmates. It would not only be a game about flying but about the life aboard a Carrier.

This sounds so great, but:
Will this ever materialize in a single Game?
If i had all the money i would develop a game like this right away, meanwhile:
I'll keep dreaming.

Auk

Sharpe26
10-17-2005, 06:17 AM
I think ww2online is trying to be what you're looking for.

nakamura_kenji
10-17-2005, 06:19 AM
(il-2+aep+pf/lockon depend what era play)+ enemy engage heli series(apache havoc ect) + a good tank sim + operation flashpoint = dream ^_^

in far off future maybe see cost produce such game detail be huge plus lot people like arcade not sim p_q make less like

hopefully ofp2(bis next genration game)be good step that direction like ofp was

aukieboy
10-17-2005, 06:21 AM
Yeah i know but the flightmodel is not like IL2/PF... you know that's what i mean:
No complex engine management and so forth and so on... No dificult landing... briefly: not realistic like Il2/PF. Of course the rest is good about Battlefield 1942 (online)

nakamura_kenji
10-17-2005, 06:22 AM
battlefield like tom and jerry violence like cartoon v_v fun but no what call realistic

TooCooL34
10-17-2005, 06:31 AM
No thank you, I don't want to hear endless "Do I need a joystick to fly fighters?" cries from fps kids. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

TgD Thunderbolt56
10-17-2005, 07:16 AM
sounds laggy to me...

Xiolablu3
10-17-2005, 08:01 AM
II never liked the engine on BF1942, the guns never felt klike you were actully firing guns. Unlike Call Of Duty where you very much felt like you were firing.

I prefer COD with the united offensive addon online in the domination mode (much like BF1942s capture the territory/flag mode) This addon added weapons,tanks and jeeps and didnt try to do too much.

Granted there were no aircraft but what it did it did very, very well.

I have often thought about that 'dream game' where you can do anything, fly planes, play infantry and drive tanks. The technology is just not there yet. Give it 5 or 6 years.

I have not tried WW2 online but I think this is what it is working towards. Its a massive undertaking tho, how would they fund it? A monthly fee? Cos a single 29.99 payment for the game probably wouldnt recoup the costs in making such an ambitious game as things are at the moment.

nakamura_kenji
10-17-2005, 08:09 AM
it mounthly fee think

Archangel2980
10-17-2005, 08:21 AM
I gave up on WWII online, I couldn't stand the FM. What I like about what Oleg did was create the feeling and allusion of flying.

TacticalYak3
10-17-2005, 08:31 AM
The concept of what the original poster mentions is why the Battlefield series is so popular. While we could argue, and rightly so, the poor implementation of each component, what makes it enjoyable is that there's air, ground and even sea components all playable in the game.

It is presently difficult to imagine a single studio publishing a game with the modelling of the air component to the degree of IL-2 series for the aircraft, but imagine a game that had the ability to join with other games for a grand online experience! Sort of like bringing the communities of IL-2, Silent Hunter and say Call of Duty together for massive missions. Two weeks for sure. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Viking-S
10-17-2005, 10:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">We all play Il2/PF... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No we don€t!
I use or €œfly€ a flight simulator. I know some like to use the IL2 series as the CS in the sky but not me.

neural_dream
10-17-2005, 11:08 AM
I don't like the concept of ww2online that you are describing aukie. What i would love though would be a game like the one we have, but with everything being human-controller when online.
E.g. the subs, the boats, the tanks, the soldiers, etc.
A great first start would be a merged Silent Hunter III - Pacific Fighters game. Imagine a Zekes vs Wildcats scenario where human-controller sub is sneaking close to the Japanese carrier and sinks it with the pilots trying to takeoff. It would bring a whole new level of strategy, and would add an additional task to allocate, recon.

Kuna15
10-17-2005, 11:20 AM
Some attempts are made in order to made "complete ww2 sim", air, sea, ground, but of course for finished realistic product (in a FB or Operation Flashpoint way) we are going to wait a little longer.

aukieboy
10-18-2005, 03:10 AM
Hee, the example i mentioned (battlefield 1942)is just only an example. The only thing important is that everything should be indeed human controlled as you said... so we can experience the complete seabattle e.g. defensive gunnery subs etc etc But that is more or less the concept of BF 1942
You are right: PF should be the basis for all the rest!!

aukieboy
10-18-2005, 03:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Archangel2980:
I gave up on WWII online, I couldn't stand the FM. What I like about what Oleg did was create the feeling and allusion of flying. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


**** right, IL2/PF... that's what flying is all about... and now for the next challenge.
If he can create this, he can do more http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

FritzGryphon
10-18-2005, 03:26 AM
All the games that have tried to model multiple platforms have failed to model any one platform well. A case of 'jack of all trades, master of none'.

Even if it were possible within time and staff constraints to make a realistic plane, tank, boat, infantry sim, it would still be hampered by performance issues.

Every genre has specific performance requirements. FPS games need small, extremely detailed maps, and balance this with short draw distance. Airplane sims need huge maps and a very far draw distance. If you try to incorporate both with one engine, you get poor results like seen in WWII:OL. When a soldier, the terrain looks flat and dull. When a plane, you can only see 3km until the clipping fog.

Then there's practical considerations. An aircraft can fly further in 5 minutes than an infantryman can walk in 5 hours. Of the 20 or so hours I played WWII:OL, I spent most of it walking, or pushing a flak gun. Or, riding in a truck, only to have it warp over a lake and vanish, leaving me to swim for the next 5 minutes. The rest of the time spent being killed by things I couldn't even retaliate against. Most people wouldn't even bother to fight at all, they would just respawn every time they were at a disadvantage.

I don't thing we'll ever see a 'fun' game that incorporates all of these things. It's hard enough to make a fun flight sim, or a fun FPS, or a fun tank game, without trying to manage all 3 at once.

Greater gains could be had by doing something more conservative. Say, by having human-controlled flak guns in BoB. It'd be like a bomber gunner position, but static, and the answer to vulching. The models for the flak would already exist, and no new code would be required (save maybe for having seperate spawn points at airfields for AA). That in itself would be a kickass addition, and the flight sim aspect would not suffer because of it.

aukieboy
10-18-2005, 04:49 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
All the games that have tried to model multiple platforms have failed to model any one platform well. A case of 'jack of all trades, master of none'.

and so it is very well possible to incorporate static gunner positions (etc)on the carriers as it is a single moving ship...
For me personally:
I don't need a sim that deals with both land and naval aspects. I'm talking about a carriersim and within that perspective a lot more is possible... gunner positions, walking across the flightdeck/hangardeck and manoeuver the vessel for example.
Yeah i'm a carrierfreak and it would be great to experience the whole picture.
With PF as a basis it would be a mastersim.

Auk

Xiolablu3
10-18-2005, 05:04 AM
There is a good looking game called 'Battlestations Midway' which looks fantastic in the previews I have seen.

I htink it covers the midway battles and you control big groups of planes and can jump into the cokpit of any plane in the squadron.

Google it and take a look at the site, that will tell you more, looks **** good.

Of course any game which tries to do it all will be watered down and not really be a sim, but I suppose the Battlefield games are closest to what you have described.
Maybe in the future companies will be able to 'combine' games like you say, that would be cool. They would need to use the same engine from the start tho.