PDA

View Full Version : Third party aircraft will be allowed in BoB - Oleg interview in PC Pilot.



Pages : [1] 2

major_setback
01-03-2007, 02:30 PM
Oleg was interviewd (2 pages) in the latest edition of PC Pilot. Most of what he said has been heard before, but I thought you'd all like to hear this:

OLEG questioned on SoW, BoB:

Q: "Can you tell us a little about the structure of the new sim"?

Oleg: "It will include all modes that we have seen in IL2 series, plus a few new ones, both for single and online play.
Within online gameplay we will once again place emphasis on preventing cheating. But because we will be allowing users to create their own aircraft, this will present new challenges. Online gameplay will remain under our strict control; third party models will be used within online gameplay in seperate modes, and there will also be modes that will only use our standard 'Oleg-approved' object set."


Also-

Oleg (Oleg is listing goals for the new sim...) : "To increase the expandability of the project. IL2 was one of the few flight sims that had built-in expandability. However users had to wait to see if we were to model their favorite aircraft. With BoB we plan to adress that issue. After release of the Battle of Britain, we plan to release free tools that willl allow third party developers to incorporate their own models of aircraft, objects and maps into our new sim system. However their will be restrictions on their use, especially online to prevent cheating. And if we see that some of the user-made models are up to our standards, we will offer the developer the opportunity to include their work in our standard object set, so they are available to everyone without restrictions. At least, this is the general idea. I can't tell yet if we can make it work, but we will certainly do everything we can to make it possible".

Time to start modelling!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

major_setback
01-03-2007, 02:30 PM
Oleg was interviewd (2 pages) in the latest edition of PC Pilot. Most of what he said has been heard before, but I thought you'd all like to hear this:

OLEG questioned on SoW, BoB:

Q: "Can you tell us a little about the structure of the new sim"?

Oleg: "It will include all modes that we have seen in IL2 series, plus a few new ones, both for single and online play.
Within online gameplay we will once again place emphasis on preventing cheating. But because we will be allowing users to create their own aircraft, this will present new challenges. Online gameplay will remain under our strict control; third party models will be used within online gameplay in seperate modes, and there will also be modes that will only use our standard 'Oleg-approved' object set."


Also-

Oleg (Oleg is listing goals for the new sim...) : "To increase the expandability of the project. IL2 was one of the few flight sims that had built-in expandability. However users had to wait to see if we were to model their favorite aircraft. With BoB we plan to adress that issue. After release of the Battle of Britain, we plan to release free tools that willl allow third party developers to incorporate their own models of aircraft, objects and maps into our new sim system. However their will be restrictions on their use, especially online to prevent cheating. And if we see that some of the user-made models are up to our standards, we will offer the developer the opportunity to include their work in our standard object set, so they are available to everyone without restrictions. At least, this is the general idea. I can't tell yet if we can make it work, but we will certainly do everything we can to make it possible".

Time to start modelling!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

UberDemon
01-03-2007, 02:42 PM
That is awesome.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Best Regards,
Demon/UberDemon
Get UQMG (UberQuick Mission Generator for PF/FB) for Free at www.uberdemon.com (http://www.uberdemon.com)

papotex
01-03-2007, 02:50 PM
wow, to be able to make an FM for some new model that everyone in the comunity can scrutinize and then, after EVERYONE agrees the FM is correct THEN it can be added in to the standard object set.

now thats an idea....

VMF-214_HaVoK
01-03-2007, 02:52 PM
Oleg has said this awhile back. Apparently things have not changed which is excellent. The possibilities are going to be endless and the fun! Oh man the fun we will have! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v604/vmfhavok/theBlackSheep.jpg

VMF-214 The Original Black Sheep Squadron of the IL-2 series are currently recruiting dedicated and mature pilots. Visit us at http://vmf214blacksheep.com/

F19_Ob
01-03-2007, 02:59 PM
open code can be fun, arcadeish but indeed fun to play a bit with values like in the old combat flightsimulater days.

Good that the online plane FM's will be locked so no one can ruin the game as with older opencode sims.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v382/f19_ob/ob_ver2.jpg

AWL_Spinner
01-03-2007, 03:29 PM
Wow.

Oleg is a hero.

There are such talented and dedicated people in this community it opens up some fantastic opportunities, and a two tier split is the only way to go to preserve online purity.

I just hope there enough cr@p plane fanatics to bring us some old crates and not just all the sexy hotrods.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Cheers, Spinner

<hr class="ev_code_hr" />
o Squads! Take a look at the ADW War (http://adwwar.com/en/#), it's fantastic!
o Spinner has been alive in ADW for a maximum of: 3hrs 38mins!

xTHRUDx
01-03-2007, 04:04 PM
yes, bring on the PBY. i'll trade it for any hotrod.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.gozr.net/iocl/images/screen/ThrudSIG.jpg

"Hate me now, thank me later"

major_setback
01-03-2007, 04:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by F19_Ob:
open code can be fun, arcadeish but indeed fun to play a bit with values like in the old combat flightsimulater days.

Good that the online plane FM's will be locked so no one can ruin the game as with older opencode sims. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Note that Oleg said that there will be an online mode that allows user-made aircraft:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">OLEG: Online gameplay will remain under our strict control; third party models will be used within online gameplay in seperate modes </div></BLOCKQUOTE><div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

AWL_Spinner
01-03-2007, 04:37 PM
Oh, and:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">to be able to make an FM for some new model that everyone in the comunity can scrutinize and then, after EVERYONE agrees the FM is correct THEN it can be added in to the standard object set. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The day everyone in THIS community agrees on ANY FM I'll eat my Track IR and Pedals.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Cheers, Spinner

<hr class="ev_code_hr" />
o Squads! Take a look at the ADW War (http://adwwar.com/en/#), it's fantastic!
o Spinner has been alive in ADW for a maximum of: 3hrs 38mins!

Taylortony
01-03-2007, 04:58 PM
IN A WORD OR TWO....... IT HAS TOO
Why? well it would be commercial suicide not too............

We might have the best all singing all dancing PC Flight Sim known to man, BUT WEEKS AFTER RELEASE it is being discounted.............

Even as 1946 rolled out the doors it was selling for a miserable ú17.99 in the UK


Microsoft Flight Simulator X: Deluxe Edition (PC) which has now been out a while is still retailing at ú53.99 on Amazon........

WHY????????????????Simple, it is user upgradable and as such still commands a top price, because buyers know that a year or two down the line this will still be as cutting art as it can be................. IL2 you were left hoping for scraps off the Maddox plate........ SORRY TO BE FRANK, BUT IT IS TRUE........ Aircraft that did not meet their standards or where copyright issues came in like the B29 were dropped for fear of litigation...........

Roll on the Squadrons of B29's and Lanc's in BOB and lets see Boeing and the likes throw their corporate legal might and go head to head with 2000 plus individual 13 year old achny riddled spotty Herberts with ú12.50 in the bank and a version of their own aircraft................

Wake up Corporate America IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN............ Imagine the negative press............


That is why it never happens in the FSim world and why this needs to have an open architecture to grow whilst retaining a semi decent retail value and allowing for expansion........... roll on the Spotty Herberts of this world http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif You rock http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


You are always going to get dross amongst the home developed aircraft, but you will also get pearls amongst the swine and companies hopefully like Just Flight that will fill those gaps in the market.....................

flox
01-03-2007, 05:08 PM
This is a pretty cool idea but will make things pretty difficult/ interesting.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------
"Blacker than the blackest black times infinity"

Feathered_IV
01-03-2007, 05:13 PM
Ah! I can see it now. A torrent of third party companies producing all manner aircraft, compatible with SoW and FSX. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

***********************************************

http://server2.uploadit.org/files/Feathered-sigpic.jpg

"Intelligent, normally observant and answered all questions freely. He was arrogant and proud to be a pilot. Fellow prisoners in hospital consider him mentally unstable."

ElAurens
01-03-2007, 05:23 PM
I'm OK with it as long as FMs are all Oleg approved.

We already have enough UFOs in '46.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/photos/ELsKi.jpg

"To explain the lure of speed you would have to explain human nature" - T.E. Lawrence

DuxCorvan
01-03-2007, 05:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by major_setback:
Time to start modelling! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Time to release model requisites, format, limits and guidelines.

Without that info, most models would be useless.

The-Pizza-Man
01-03-2007, 09:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
I'm OK with it as long as FMs are all Oleg approved.

We already have enough UFOs in '46. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

He's already said that hasn't he, anything in the "official" game has to get the Oleg seal of approval, I presume that includes flight models.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://users.tpg.com.au/rowdie/evasig.jpg

Friendly_flyer
01-04-2007, 01:33 AM
Whirlwind! Whirlwind! Whirlwind!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Fly friendly!

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37/Friendly_flyer/WhirlwindforBoB-II.jpg

Visit No 79 Squadron vRAF (http://www.gazzamataz.com/79vRAF/)

Petter B°ckman
Norway

carguy_
01-04-2007, 02:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by papotex:
wow, to be able to make an FM for some new model that everyone in the comunity can scrutinize and then, after EVERYONE agrees the FM is correct THEN it can be added in to the standard object set. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe only for not so famous aircraft.Such as Me109,Lavochik,Spitfire,Mustang,P47/38/40,FW190 the FM will NEVER be agreed upon.

I assume that Oleg means that IF this 3rd party model gets included,it gets Oleg Maddox FM(R).<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sigjzg23upgraded.jpg
Self-proclaimed dedicated Willywhiner since July 2002
: Badsight.:"increased manouverability for bf-109s was satire" :
Please bring back 3.01 dots!

FritzGryphon
01-04-2007, 02:59 AM
It's too bad the third party stuff wasn't limited to SP.

The online community is small enough as it is, without being fragmented between official and mod servers.

You'll have nutters with hacked FMs, claiming that they're more 'realistic', and refusing to play in official servers. Or garbage quality X-wing versus Tie Fighter mods. Perhaps even DBZ characters.

As a model testing and debugging tool, it would be great to fly or simply view your own models. I would have loved this when I was making models for PF.

But I think it's a step back if unfinished or sub-par material gets played en-masse, and starts competing with the official version.

It was this quality control and single-version compatibility that seperated IL-2 from the CFS series in the first place. To this day, most pay addons for CFS and FS are unfinished or poor quality. I'd hate to see the same happen in BoB, and hope some controls are in place to make mod versions limited to testing.

Capt.LoneRanger
01-04-2007, 03:08 AM
A flyable B17 after all? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

greets
Capt.LoneRanger

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v411/Arcadiac/Lone1copy.png

JG52Karaya-X
01-04-2007, 03:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
The online community is small enough as it is, without being fragmented between official and mod servers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

100% agree
We will see dozens of official and moded servers, and all have different mods/planes/objects installed meaning a disaster in terms of online compatibility

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You'll have nutters with hacked FMs, claiming that they're more 'realistic', and refusing to play in official servers. Or garbage quality X-wing versus Tie Fighter mods. Perhaps even DBZ characters.

But I think it's a step back if unfinished or sub-par material gets played en-masse, and starts competing with the official version. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, thats my fear too, that we will see hundreds of half-hearted 3rd party planes which have a poor (incorrect) 3dmodel/FM/DM. I rather have 5 high quality planes which get officially accepted into the close sim than 50 1-week-jobs...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It was this quality control and single-version compatibility that seperated IL-2 from the CFS series in the first place. To this day, most pay addons for CFS and FS are unfinished or poor quality. I'd hate to see the same happen in BoB, and hope some controls are in place to make mod versions limited to testing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again I agree 100%, I'd rather see Oleg and 1C continue their previous course with 3rd party material. There could be a relaxed course on introducing simple map objects (boxes, oil barrels, trenches, whatever, ...) and maps themselves but planes are what flight simmming is all about and quality should be the priority, not quantity!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v639/Karaya/Black_Devil.gif (http://www.geocities.com/jg52thebutcherbirds/index1.html)
The tiger leaves no smell and doesn't make a sound, but you know he is there.
There is something in the shadows - it's the tiger waiting for you.

mrsiCkstar
01-04-2007, 03:22 AM
I couldn't agree more with Fritz... I think the sim should be kept as closed as possible online... before you know it every other plane that you download will be without cockpit and you'll just fly around in wonderwoman view...

atleast there will be those non mod servers and modes and I'll definitely be there... having a bunch of people modelling planes the way they think they should fly just puts me off completely...

there was only ever one great add on aircraft I downloaded for FS9 and that was an F-14 that came with aircraft carriers you could land... but even that to me didn't feel realistic because as soon as I pulled some G's on it I got the airframe damaged message. And 2 seconds after I was off the Carrier's deck I broke the sound barrier :|<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.no.net/jonmarja/images/f4usig.jpg

arrow80
01-04-2007, 03:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
The online community is small enough as it is, without being fragmented between official and mod servers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

100% agree
We will see dozens of official and moded servers, and all have different mods/planes/objects installed meaning a disaster in terms of online compatibility

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You'll have nutters with hacked FMs, claiming that they're more 'realistic', and refusing to play in official servers. Or garbage quality X-wing versus Tie Fighter mods. Perhaps even DBZ characters.

But I think it's a step back if unfinished or sub-par material gets played en-masse, and starts competing with the official version. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, thats my fear too, that we will see hundreds of half-hearted 3rd party planes which have a poor (incorrect) 3dmodel/FM/DM. I rather have 5 high quality planes which get officially accepted into the close sim than 50 1-week-jobs...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It was this quality control and single-version compatibility that seperated IL-2 from the CFS series in the first place. To this day, most pay addons for CFS and FS are unfinished or poor quality. I'd hate to see the same happen in BoB, and hope some controls are in place to make mod versions limited to testing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again I agree 100%, I'd rather see Oleg and 1C continue their previous course with 3rd party material. There could be a relaxed course on introducing simple map objects (boxes, oil barrels, trenches, whatever, ...) and maps themselves but planes are what flight simmming is all about and quality should be the priority, not quantity! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
agree 100%

msalama
01-04-2007, 03:33 AM
Hey, there's nothing wrong w/ a two-tiered online gaming system w/ "core" or "ring 0" servers running only 1C-approved content, and "user-space" servers running community-created content. It's just more variety, which cannot be a bad thing!

So I reckon yuh good ole boyz jes' cryin' in yuh beers 'bout how the old broken lightbulb was sooo much better than the new one, eh http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hippies FTW!

JG52Karaya-X
01-04-2007, 03:41 AM
Well, if everything fails, we will still have FB http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v639/Karaya/Black_Devil.gif (http://www.geocities.com/jg52thebutcherbirds/index1.html)
The tiger leaves no smell and doesn't make a sound, but you know he is there.
There is something in the shadows - it's the tiger waiting for you.

msalama
01-04-2007, 03:43 AM
+ true dat Karaya too.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hippies FTW!

WOLFMondo
01-04-2007, 04:02 AM
I trust 'ol Oleg to put in those planes that reach the required quality into SoW.

Personally i won't play on servers that aren't using an official release.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Cheers!!

AWL_Spinner
01-04-2007, 04:28 AM
Probably a bit early to be worrying about how this multi-tier model will look in operation, sounds like Oleg's still trying to figure it out himself.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Cheers, Spinner

<hr class="ev_code_hr" />
o Squads! Take a look at the ADW War (http://adwwar.com/en/#), it's fantastic!
o Spinner has been alive in ADW for a maximum of: 3hrs 38mins!

Airmail109
01-04-2007, 04:37 AM
whooohoooo olegs porked the battle of britain before its even released<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Megile : "Hey it's not technically spamming if its on different forums right?"

RCAF_Irish_403
01-04-2007, 04:57 AM
i nominate gibbage to do the B26 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Originally posted by marc_hawkins:
Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. A 108:0 kill ratio is insignificant next to the power of the Force

http://www.fas.org/main/home.jsp

major_setback
01-04-2007, 05:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
Ah! I can see it now. A torrent of third party companies producing all manner aircraft, compatible with SoW and FSX. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


That's a good point. Airplane Heaven, Shockwave etc. will probably be making their aircraft add-ons SoW compatible.

SoW's flight models will be able to be done more accurately than in FSX, so more people will want to fly in SoW, which can only be good for the community.

I can see General Aviation, aerobatic, and smaller pleasure aircraft being released for use in SoW. There is already one acrobatic aircraft planned for BoB!

Also developers will be able to make their own maps, so they will be able to release smaller 'scenario' sims eg. Flying Clubs sims, gliding sims, aerobatic tournaments, air racing, ferry services between islands etc. like you get now to a certain extent in the Microsoft series -

-Not to mention pilot training; everyone taking flying lessons would want to train with the best flight model available.

Microsoft look out!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

Goose.au
01-04-2007, 05:36 AM
Amazing news, this will bring so much to the game.
And in previous experiences I've had, 3rd party models are generally of very high standards, or people simply don't bother to download and install them.
So modellers are really forced to produce high quality products, and not shabby thrown together projects.

Lodovik
01-04-2007, 06:13 AM
The two-tiered system will be very interesting. The IL-2 series is quite suitable for making presentations for aviation museums. With support for user-made content it may unbeatable.
The system won't be without problems but the benefits will out-weight those.
If people want to create WWII planes with jetlike FMs and set up servers to fly them against other likeminded people, why not?
It's not my cup of tea for sure, but I'll still think about it for a mo'.

First,
THERE IS NOT A SINGLE TRUE AND ONLY WAY TO ENJOY SIMS!
Some like arcade, some are diehards for full real. Some fall in between. Even though I prefer full real, I sometimes find myself cranking the settings to X WIng mode and just blasting an armada of Me 323s out of the sky for (a different kind of) fun. Works great as a stress reliever, that http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

More possibilities and choices mean more people interested in SoW, which means more sales. More sales means more distributor and developer interest in flight sims = more and better sims! And that's what the sim community is after, isn't it?
Besides, I'm really, really looking forward to addons made by some people in here. There are some true and talented artists in this community, whose greatest works are still to come. I can hardly wait http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

&lt;&lt;The 20 mm cannons built by the tender hands of Komsomol girls' volunteer workers corps played their deadly masurkah.
Octobriana pulled her LA-7 up and away as another of the Rodinas' enemies fell screaming to his doom.&gt;&gt;

BaronUnderpants
01-04-2007, 06:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
The online community is small enough as it is, without being fragmented between official and mod servers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

100% agree
We will see dozens of official and moded servers, and all have different mods/planes/objects installed meaning a disaster in terms of online compatibility

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You'll have nutters with hacked FMs, claiming that they're more 'realistic', and refusing to play in official servers. Or garbage quality X-wing versus Tie Fighter mods. Perhaps even DBZ characters.

But I think it's a step back if unfinished or sub-par material gets played en-masse, and starts competing with the official version. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, thats my fear too, that we will see hundreds of half-hearted 3rd party planes which have a poor (incorrect) 3dmodel/FM/DM. I rather have 5 high quality planes which get officially accepted into the close sim than 50 1-week-jobs...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It was this quality control and single-version compatibility that seperated IL-2 from the CFS series in the first place. To this day, most pay addons for CFS and FS are unfinished or poor quality. I'd hate to see the same happen in BoB, and hope some controls are in place to make mod versions limited to testing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again I agree 100%, I'd rather see Oleg and 1C continue their previous course with 3rd party material. There could be a relaxed course on introducing simple map objects (boxes, oil barrels, trenches, whatever, ...) and maps themselves but planes are what flight simmming is all about and quality should be the priority, not quantity! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Agree 100%.

Its intresting, suddenly a lot of people seem to think that CFS and FX are popular combat sim examples to take after. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

"Online gameplay will remain under our strict control; third party models will be used within online gameplay in seperate modes, and there will also be modes that will only use our standard 'Oleg-approved' object set."

Sounds like a contradiction in terms to me? either u have STRICT controle or u dont?


Can smell CFS dissaster a mile away...a time when most people here will think back: "Ahhh, remember the day when whe got the Lerche, now thats a realistic FM if iv ever seen one"

The good o`ll days.

and honestly, it doesnt matter how many ac Oleg puts out ( its, what 200-300 differant types now? ) there will ALLWAYS be that "one" plane thats missing

major_setback
01-04-2007, 06:57 AM
I think part of the reason they are doing this is because they can't possibly turn out as many aircraft as we would want f÷ BoB/SoW with the increased amount of detail in externals/cockpits/FMs that is required for this sim. Oleg has said so recently, he needs the help now.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

major_setback
01-04-2007, 07:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Its intresting, suddenly a lot of people seem to think that CFS and FX are popular combat sim examples to take after. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Maybe, maybe not. But Oleg is no fool, it may be that he want's some of their market.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

stathem
01-04-2007, 07:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by major_setback:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
Ah! I can see it now. A torrent of third party companies producing all manner aircraft, compatible with SoW and FSX. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


That's a good point. Airplane Heaven, Shockwave etc. will probably be making their aircraft add-ons SoW compatible.

SoW's flight models will be able to be done more accurately than in FSX, so more people will want to fly in SoW, which can only be good for the community.

I can see General Aviation, aerobatic, and smaller pleasure aircraft being released for use in SoW. There is already one acrobatic aircraft planned for BoB!

Also developers will be able to make their own maps, so they will be able to release smaller 'scenario' sims eg. Flying Clubs sims, gliding sims, aerobatic tournaments, air racing, ferry services between islands etc. like you get now to a certain extent in the Microsoft series -

-Not to mention pilot training; everyone taking flying lessons would want to train with the best flight model available.

Microsoft look out! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think and hope you are right.

I went to the IFS convention at the NEC that Oleg was at. It was really noticeable that virtually the whole of the convention was dedicated to MS civvy flight siming. Oleg and Ilya were tucked away in a corner with, for hte most part, just a few ppl round. Truly a niche within a niche.

That was contrasted with the first few scenes on the BoB DVD - the Russian airshow where Oleg was mobbed out.

If he wants to conquer the world....

There must be a point where Combat flight sims have reached saturation in terms of new customers, and we'll all buy it pretty much regardless. If SoW is a high fidelty, true hardcore simulation - there's no reason why he couldn't and shouldn't try to caputure a lot of the civilian market too.

It's probably an easier way to capture more market share than trying to drag western teenagers away from their X-Boxses and Wiis. If some of us think it's heretical, remember that we NEED Oleg to be as successful as possible so he can give us - the niche within the niche - the best combat experience. I think that what ever happens, Oleg's first love will always be the guns only combat flight sim.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/griffnav/Gallery/MossiePRsig.jpg

WOLFMondo
01-04-2007, 08:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BaronUnderpants:

Can smell CFS dissaster a mile away...a time when most people here will think back: "Ahhh, remember the day when whe got the Lerche, now thats a realistic FM if iv ever seen one"
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats why he said only aircraft that meet the required standard will be implimented in offical releases. CFS I belive didn't do this or ever did that with third party models.

In reality its not much different than with IL2:FB. Third party modellers could send there models off to Oleg, he'd pay them if they met the required standard and then they would be put in the sim. The only difference now is people can make there own FM's up as well as the models.

I don't think we'll see a repeat of CFS online though since there will be official releases.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Cheers!!

EURO_Snoopy
01-04-2007, 10:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WOLFMondo:

only aircraft that meet the required standard will be implimented in offical releases. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Please somebody paste this in 6' high letters where all can see. Misconceptions are rife.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://airwarfare.com/AWX/Webpage%20Graphics/AWsig.jpg (http://www.airwarfare.com)

AW Forums (http://www.airwarfare.com/phpBB2/index.php) - Mission4Today (http://mission4today.com/index.php) - FAQ (http://airwarfare.com/mediawiki-1.4.5/index.php?title=FAQ_Introduction) - Installation Guide (http://airwarfare.com/mediawiki-1.4.5/index.php?title=9.1._Installation) - Patching (http://airwarfare.com/mediawiki-1.4.5/index.php?title=Patching) - Posting Etiquette (http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting.php)

UberDemon
01-04-2007, 10:36 AM
Technologically speaking everything that Oleg is saying they will do is possible. So let the people who know how to do it do it and don't worry about that which you have no control over.

In other words, let the programmers do the programming.

They are giving a solution for EVERYONE! what else could anyone want?

- Players who stay offline will be able to have two options:
1) Play only what Oleg & Co release and bless
2) Play with user created content and objects

- Players who play online will be able to have two options:
1) Play only what Oleg & Co release and bless (and everyone on these servers will be FORCED to have the same parameters)
2) Play with user created content and objects (and everyone in these servers will be FORCED to have the same parameters)<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Best Regards,
Demon/UberDemon
Get UQMG (UberQuick Mission Generator for PF/FB) for Free at www.uberdemon.com (http://www.uberdemon.com)

ElAurens
01-04-2007, 10:38 AM
If I can get an Oleg quality Emily, Mavis, Catalina, and Sutherland out of the deal fine.

If not, teh wrath of EL will be upon you!


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/photos/ELsKi.jpg

"To explain the lure of speed you would have to explain human nature" - T.E. Lawrence

Friendly_flyer
01-05-2007, 05:02 AM
I agree with Gibbage here, not wanting user input is insane! I very much hope I'll be able to fly his PBY, if only off-line.

Antoninus:
I think you'll find you can have the best of two worlds with Oleg?s system. Most servers will probably be for regular planes, and the best 3rd party models will be included and probably come out in patches, just line now.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Fly friendly!

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37/Friendly_flyer/WhirlwindforBoB-II.jpg

Visit No 79 Squadron vRAF (http://www.gazzamataz.com/79vRAF/)

Petter B°ckman
Norway

NAFP_supah
01-05-2007, 05:20 AM
Boys boys boys. Keep your cool. This is good news. Look at games like operation flashpoint and FS9. For flashpoint there was a plethora of addons in the beginning. Ranging from aircraft carriers to AA Batteries (I shiite you not). The user is the one who decides what he likes and what he doesnt like. Say I make a spitfire mk9, you download it only to discover it comes with 8 40mm bofors cannons, two jet engines and a coffee maker you wont be playing with it long. People arent idiots, the good stuff gets picked up and stays around and the bad stuff might get played with for a short while but it wont be staying around long. After a while in OFP the individual addon makers left and the teams and modifications stayed. Guys (and galls) like BAS and Fin Mod made some fantastic stuff which greatly enhanced the game and kept it alive 4 years after its original release. You will probably see the same here, FS9's openness in addon content has created a market around FS9. Perhaps in the future we will see the same around Oleg's latest product. It might even draw some of the guys from the FS9 scene to this game, I can only dream of the RealAir Spitfire in there, or the beautifull Bear Studios MiG-15 series. Looks like the future will be very interesting http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://supah.chaotic.nl/profiles/profile-sig.jpg (http://supah.chaotic.nl)

carguy_
01-05-2007, 07:09 AM
Saying that the community will police itself is like saying that the Police is entirely not needed nor it ever was.Why we can always linch the offender,right?

There has to be an overseer body or an overseer factor.

3rd part server lacks this body/factor.

We do not know if Oleg makes things the right way.But at least we all must play the very same game.


Without clear rules and overseeing the only thing exists is chaos.


All the best to all Thomas More`s of BoB out there http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sigjzg23upgraded.jpg
Self-proclaimed dedicated Willywhiner since July 2002
: Badsight.:"increased manouverability for bf-109s was satire" :
Please bring back 3.01 dots!

leitmotiv
01-05-2007, 07:23 AM
I think it will be a boon for the people who make super-high-quality models like Shockwave, and may turn them away from providing warplane models for FSX. We may have a clear split coming---Maddox for combat and Microsoft for civil. We will have all the obscure stuff we have wanted in IL-2, including loads of bombers. GREAT! As anybody who uses the high-quality models for FS9/X can tell, there are a great many excellent model makers out there, and their recent stuff blows IL-2 away entirely. Roll on BOB!

csThor
01-05-2007, 07:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I agree with Gibbage here, not wanting user input is insane! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't mind user input - after all some of the best aircraft models in this game were made by external developers.

But I would have prefered a system as practiced in the Il-2 line, just better coordinated and planned. IMO Maddox Games should have had the last word if an object makes it into the game based on how useful the aircraft/object is for gameplay, if it fits into the modelled timeframe and area and if it matches the quality requirements. This would mean the additions match the rest of the game (maps, planes, campaigns etc) and are not artificial additions without a real connection to what is modelled now. Imagine someone made a fabulous model of a P-51 D-5 while the game was still in the BoB stage. To offliners and historically interested players the P-51 would be useless as the environment to use it is just not there ...

Ultimately I would have liked this system better as it would allow for themed AddOn packs adding depth to the game for all users, not just Online Dogfighters, and might have given the modellers some financial reward for their work.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

______________________________
Ab heute heissen wir Meier!

http://home.arcor.de/csthor/bilder/ubi_sig.jpg

karost
01-05-2007, 07:29 AM
I have come back to play fs2004 because of Pilot In Command 737 and Wings of PowerII Add on.
and I have to install CFS3 for playing Fire Power Addon and flying a free Star Wars Sith Fighter Package http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://www.simviation.com/pageimages/sf_01.JPG
http://www.simviation.com/pageimages/eh_01.jpg

http://www.simviation.com
http://shockwaveproductions.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5879


many Good Addon Teams has create a good solutions to make a hard core simmers feel hot! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
that is good.


I think Oleg saw and learned that ways too.
so he can make SoW BOB for cover to common players in big market share.
and let a respect addon teams make a good solutions for a hard core simmmers with under
his direction and path.

also we have many respect organization to monitor a good thing for us. like

PC Pilot Magazine
Computer Pilot Magazine
PC Gamer Magazine
SimHQ
AVSIM
...etc..

This new years with good news make many of us smile. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
S!

NAFP_supah
01-05-2007, 08:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
Saying that the community will police itself is like saying that the Police is entirely not needed nor it ever was. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I could happily live without Sting, had he and the Police never recorded a single album my life would have been just as nice and full http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Seriously speaking, I have been through this cycle of a game being opened to third party input before in the OFP community. People had the same fear back then that you have now. It turned out that those fears were unfounded. Noone is forcing you to download, or more to keep playing with, stuff you dont like. I have some aircraft for FS9 which are complete pooches. Result? I don't fly them. I fly the ones I like. After a "Wild west" period of mod making the situation will stabilise and a few capable players will remain. Perhaps you might get something totally unexpected but very much fun out of it. For OFP it was a mod that added zombies to the game, I never thought I would enjoy something like that but once I tried it it was complete fun. Something light hearted in between more serious play.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://supah.chaotic.nl/profiles/profile-sig.jpg (http://supah.chaotic.nl)

Friendly_flyer
01-05-2007, 08:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by csThor:
Ultimately I would have liked this system better as it would allow for themed AddOn packs adding depth to the game for all users, not just Online Dogfighters, and might have given the modellers some financial reward for their work. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think this is what Oleg was thinking of when he said that planes "that meets his standard" will be incorporated in the general game.

Notice we have a sort of similar situation going on now. There has been added a lot of new planes to the sim, and some of them are more or less fantasy planes. You don't see them on the standard DF servers. When was the last time you saw a server with I-185 or the Comet?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Fly friendly!

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37/Friendly_flyer/WhirlwindforBoB-II.jpg

Visit No 79 Squadron vRAF (http://www.gazzamataz.com/79vRAF/)

Petter B°ckman
Norway

Agamemnon22
01-05-2007, 09:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Friendly_flyer:

Notice we have a sort of similar situation going on now. There has been added a lot of new planes to the sim, and some of them are more or less fantasy planes. You don't see them on the standard DF servers. When was the last time you saw a server with I-185 or the Comet? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Exactly.

Again, I find it surprising that people are against opening up the game to user-created content. There will still be the "Oleg-approved" servers! If you don't want to fly what might be unrealistic FM's, don't http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
The free market model does work, as proven by the way things are now!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------------------------
http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/agamemnon22/Pe2sig.jpg

csThor
01-05-2007, 09:40 AM
Because it will divide the community. Imagine the following:

You see a new static campaign you find interesting. You download it, look into the readme and find a load of "modded aircraft" you have to download from various sites. The quality of those is ... varying ... etc etc pp.

I've had this with EAW and this experience was the final nail for EAW's coffin. After that one I threw it off my HDD and into the "Rest in Peace, you Classics" corner of my cupboard.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

______________________________
Ab heute heissen wir Meier!

http://home.arcor.de/csthor/bilder/ubi_sig.jpg

Agamemnon22
01-05-2007, 09:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by csThor:
Because it will divide the community. Imagine the following:

You see a new static campaign you find interesting. You download it, look into the readme and find a load of "modded aircraft" you have to download from various sites. The quality of those is ... varying ... etc etc pp.

I've had this with EAW and this experience was the final nail for EAW's coffin. After that one I threw it off my HDD and into the "Rest in Peace, you Classics" corner of my cupboard. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


And what? You can still go back to the core "Oleg-approved" content, for online or offline... how is it dividing anything?
The planes you download won't replace anything, you'll just have different versions of whatever plane you downloaded.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------------------------
http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/agamemnon22/Pe2sig.jpg

BaronUnderpants
01-05-2007, 11:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agamemnon22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Friendly_flyer:

Notice we have a sort of similar situation going on now. There has been added a lot of new planes to the sim, and some of them are more or less fantasy planes. You don't see them on the standard DF servers. When was the last time you saw a server with I-185 or the Comet? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Exactly.

Again, I find it surprising that people are against opening up the game to user-created content. There will still be the "Oleg-approved" servers! If you don't want to fly what might be unrealistic FM's, don't http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
The free market model does work, as proven by the way things are now! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


It works? Is the orginal CFS2 servers zizzling with activity proof u mean? Or the massive amount of FSX servers to choose from online. Maby the newest FSX Spit addon that u and 3 others in western europe are the happy owners of? ( well, im blowing it up a bit, so shoot me http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif )


It supprises ME that a fair amount of people here doesnt seem to mind turning BoB into a complete half assed, "no 2 version alike", 4000 servers, 5 players each.....self destructing run of the mill MS product.


Offline, sure knock yourselfes out, but online....the day i see a 16 50.cal Mustang online with Maddox seal of approval, modded servers only or not, is the day BoB goes down the crapper, mark my words.

One god thing about it though, the FM/DM debates will be a thing of the past, "I made the modell, FM`s and DM`s, u dont like it...well, sod of"

No point in debating it really, time will tell, god oh mighty, time will tell. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Popey109
01-05-2007, 11:35 AM
You cant compair CFS2 and what BoB will be! CFS2 servers never supported anything but dogfight free for alls. Same as CFS3 even though you have to have match planes sets, it offers very little. Problem with MS CFS is anyone could monkey with YOUR flight model. Want a tie fighter? just DL some ones 100 hr's of work and trash his flight model for 16 .50's http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif But what if each modeler could make his flight model LOCKED?...Than share his work...Than get feedback about what people think. I think you'd see more people trying to creat the best, most realistic flight model they could, and not so many cheaters as you mite think http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BaronUnderpants
01-05-2007, 11:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Popey109:
You cant compair CFS2 and what BoB will be! CFS2 servers never supported anything but dogfight free for alls. Same as CFS3 even though you have to have match planes sets, it offers very little. Problem with MS CFS is anyone could monkey with YOUR flight model. Want a tie fighter? just DL some ones 100 hr's of work and trash his flight model for 16 .50's http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif But what if each modeler could make his flight model LOCKED?...Than share his work...Than get feedback about what people think. I think you'd see more people trying to creat the best, most realistic flight model they could, and not so many cheaters as you mite think http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, i have to many negative thoughts about this...if im proven wrong, no one would be happier.

carguy_
01-05-2007, 11:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BaronUnderpants:
No point in debating it really, time will tell, god oh mighty, time will tell. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Ofcourse,changing the way BoB goes in this aspect is not aim of this topic.

More like another attempt to understand why other ppl like BoB to share CFS`s fate. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

I can see OM reasons for this.MUCH less whining,MUCH less pleading,finally MUCH less work to do. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

I know we can`t make OM change it,it`s already settled.But I fail to understand why ppl agree to this sort of utopia.


NAFP_supah,
please tell me on what ground you base your assumption.OFP is a FPP that has thousands of players online,a community maybe 20times bigger than IL2.Numbers do matter,pal.
Currently we have ~3000 players in HL(max of 500 at once).With ubi.com and others that`d be 5000-7000.BoB IMO is not going to be much bigger since we all know how Ubi handles OM interest.

Now create say 60 versions of different servers and divide online community of players. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Sure,everyone flies what he likes.With the little detail of actually having trouble to fill ANY of them since there are so many[servers].

Community is too small.It understands that few most popular servers must stay online.We do not even know if the official server[s] will be there.Hypothetically,people go where they like flying thus influencing popularity of a server.

Keeping a general picture of Ubi forums,it is not crazy to assume that there is a strong possibility of standard servers being wiped out by player absence.
Thus,what ppl like and believe prevails over objectively,pilot tested official FM.

May I ask you how the f_ck do any of you know how a certain plane really flies/flew?

If I can`t be sure if any of you people included uberized/porked planes in a server,I cannot guess which one is even close to what Oleg`s planes provide.

So,for me the whole point of playing a combat flight simulation goes down the toilet.


Example?Certainly.

Online wars.

There were few of the biggest : VEF,VOW,CW and currently AW.

The common factor that made those wars popular was that majority of online war comunity decided to fly this particular war.
All of those wars were masters of its time.They were also the biggest whine fests one could ever imagine.If VVS did not whine,the LW did.
Finally,admins agreed to make balanced planesets and other conditions.
People never agreed that wars were balanced.Because of the whines,wars gradually stopped being historically accurate.
Whines never ended,yet people still flew those wars.

What is my point?
Popularity of servers hardly means they`re the best or historically accurate.


They`re not.People just flying them because others are flying them too.

One more fact is,that all of them dominated whole online wars community for a timeframe.One war at a time,all others were dead.

Currently we have EIF[dead],IL2WAR[clinical death],AW[full speed ahead],Brothers War[not even started],Virtual War[clinical death].

Current master is Airforce War.
However,it declines most of the realism or historical accuracy.It became a quick shootemup generic coop which has maps as the only historical feature.

I have hence stopped flying it for the sake of simulating as I do not have fun simulating WWII combat in missions that do not have anything in common with historical accuracy.Just shooting reds for the fun of it,waiting for the crowd to dump AW and return to IL2War/Brothers War which are faithful to HA.

I do not like this,I will not accept this kind of changes in OM online gaming but I guess the masses want it to be and MG agrees.

Sometime I think that real hardcore simmers is a dying breed.

Yes,in order for sims genre to flourish/survive, one must make sacrifices and resign from ideals that once were a common thing.

Count me out.I`m not wasting time on generic scenarios,FMs,DMs.
I just thought we were supposed to simulate flying real WWII warbirds. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Hardcore simmers do not accept those changes.



Geez,I`m getting old.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sigjzg23upgraded.jpg
Self-proclaimed dedicated Willywhiner since July 2002
: Badsight.:"increased manouverability for bf-109s was satire" :
Please bring back 3.01 dots!

Popey109
01-05-2007, 11:57 AM
I know what you and others are saying. First time I was passed by a zeek doing moc 2 in cfs2 I never flew online much after that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif But I do think most people want a fare game. and if given the tools to make it fare they will http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I just dont see some one spending the time it's going to take to creat a single aircraft for Bob wanting anything but the best\most reall flight model the game will support. For that kind of effert they should be given a tool to lock their work...the way Oleg doe's with FB http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

mrsiCkstar
01-05-2007, 12:29 PM
problem is how do they know what is real as far as FM goes? You see the amount of bickering and whining around these forums about many aircraft... and that's because everyone has a different idea of how that plane is supposed to fly. and I doubt that any of these people who would model planes for BoB have the recources necessary to get all the right info for a plane. It's just better to leave the FM's to people who have the resources to do them... ie. the developers. some of you have used FS9 as an example when you are making a case for user content... it's the worst example you could give... 90% of add on planes for the sim are pure ****. and a good bunch of them don't even come with cockpits. or if it did it was a lo-res photograph taken from googles image search and pasted on the 3D model as a texture with no gauges working... or if gauges were working they were from some cessna.

the only way this could work would be to limit the add on content to companies like shockwave who do add ons for MSFS professionally.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.no.net/jonmarja/images/f4usig.jpg

Agamemnon22
01-05-2007, 12:37 PM
Ok, again, I don't think you're reading what is posted.

There will be a locked-in common set of 1C-created content. This and only this content will be usable on servers running "Oleg-approved" content. This content will not be subject to any changes in FMs, DMs, M&Ms or anything else.

For those who want to experiment, there is the option of modifying their planes for use in either offline, or online "unlocked" servers.

If you want to fly unadulterated planes against other unadulterated planes, how does your life change if there exists somewhere on this earth a server with 16x50mm Mustangs? It doesn't!

And about dividing the community, this has been said about
1) Ace expansion
2) PF
3) PE-2 (and how)
4) 46

To everyone's apparent surprise, the community is still here.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------------------------
http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/agamemnon22/Pe2sig.jpg

Taylortony
01-05-2007, 12:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RCAF_Irish_403:
i nominate gibbage to do the B26 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yup and the Catalina.............. we are still looking fwd to that

Popey109
01-05-2007, 01:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mrsiCkstar:
problem is how do they know what is real as far as FM goes? You see the amount of bickering and whining around these forums about many aircraft... and that's because everyone has a different idea of how that plane is supposed to fly. and I doubt that any of these people who would model planes for BoB have the recources necessary to get all the right info for a plane. It's just better to leave the FM's to people who have the resources to do them... ie. the developers. some of you have used FS9 as an example when you are making a case for user content... it's the worst example you could give... 90% of add on planes for the sim are pure ****. and a good bunch of them don't even come with cockpits. or if it did it was a lo-res photograph taken from googles image search and pasted on the 3D model as a texture with no gauges working... or if gauges were working they were from some cessna.

the only way this could work would be to limit the add on content to companies like shockwave who do add ons for MSFS professionally. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>It's that bickering I'm counting on http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif I quike search of this or any FB forum will supply enough recources to make ones eye's bleed...some things will always be subject to interpatation...Others will not, and will be easy to check if correct or not...simply put...got track? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

karost
01-05-2007, 01:34 PM
IMHO...
if Microsoft Combat flight simulation learn their mistake from CFS3 and create CFS4(fx) engine with focus on online network and cheat protection and let many respect AddOn third party come to create additional offline/online pack with concern in FM , DM , history-contents
same like shockwave did for his work in ?Absolute realism? flight technology in the way
that Hardcore Simmers are looking for , that will let many respect public Dedicate Server has more alternate way to choose for run his server. and offline Hardcore Simmers also like to
buy and support.

the International - Hard core simmers community may has a small group but big enought to make contribute to their favor public Dedicate Server for a long run.

soon we will see a best AddOn Pack will be stand and earn their respect and money.

S!

Airmail109
01-05-2007, 02:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
This thread has me rather suprised. Not that Oleg is thinking about allowing 3rd party aircraft, but that people dont want it! Are you guys CRAZY? Let me make a few points.

Point #1. There are a LOT of great 3rd party aircraft for CFS3 and FS2004. I know, since I make them http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif One of the biggest factors in IL2 that you DONT have X aircraft or Y bomber is Oleg has limited resources. Modeling was only a fraction of what it takes to get an aircraft into IL2. So even if X or Y was built, it would still take OLEG and his crue a lot of time and money to put it in. Oleg has limited time and money, so he had to choose what was kept, and unfortunatly not everything made it. B-29 is a good example of that. PBY Catalina is another. If there was 3rd party tools, there would be more aircraft in the game. Its that simple.

#2. Remember. When I made a model, it took Oleg's team to finish it. That means they had to stop the jobs they were doing to implament a new aircraft. A lot of people here know that IL2 is not a perfect sim. We all spend the great bulk of our time nit-picking it. The less time Oleg spends implamenting the Ta-183 or whatever into the sim, the more time he has to fine-tune the sim and address problems so we all would have less to nit-pick.

#3. You guys are ALL scared of a re-play of CFS2 and its infamous cheater aircraft. To put it simply, downloadable contant was a new concept in games. MS was ignorant of the remifications of having such a feature, or at least having such a feacher without controles. Checks and balances. Thats why Oleg plans on having a core set of aircraft for every day servers. Everyone will have the same aircraft. BUT 3rd party aircraft should NOT be banned from servers. Why? Simple. In CFS2, anyone could bring any aircraft they wanted. In BoB, the server will have a list of acceptable aircraft. Most likley you will need these in order to play. Again, everyone will be flying the same aircraft. If the server has an uber P-51 with 16 .50 cal's on it, that means EVERYONE has it. Not just the cheater! If you dont want to fly in a server with that aircraft, dont. There will be no way someone can bring in an aircraft that the server wont allow.

There are a lot of people that are paranoid about this feature. Some are just reasons, but the reasons all have fixes now that dev's like Oleg know how to work online content.

FS2004 has a massive list of flyable aircraft people can enjoy for free. None of them combat though. I would love to see and be able to add important aircraft into the game without having to wait for Olegs team to do it. Let them work on the important things, like making sure the P-38 stalls properly or that gas tanks burn properly on the Betty bomber.

Im hoping that Oleg does release 3rd party tools and I can put in aircraft myself. If he does, I will make models for BoB. Im hoping my 1st project will be to finish the PBY Catalina. They DID fly in BoB and I have a massive ammount of work and money invested in it. Think of it. Flyable float plane, torpedo bomber, and level bomber all in 1 package http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Without the tools, no PBY.

So yes. 3rd party aircraft will be a good idea, and no. There will be no X-wings. People who think that will happen are harboring old fears from under-developed software years ago. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No really there will be x-wings, im going to model a deathstar map....ill model in an R2 which screams all the time - which will be translated into english on an in cockpit MFD, for example....Screeeach BEEEPP BEEEEP BURP will translate to "You ****ing moron, theres a tie on your six.....my god i could fly this thing better than you newbie"<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Megile : "Hey it's not technically spamming if its on different forums right?"

carguy_
01-05-2007, 02:56 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sigjzg23upgraded.jpg
Self-proclaimed dedicated Willywhiner since July 2002
: Badsight.:"increased manouverability for bf-109s was satire" :
Please bring back 3.01 dots!

Gibbage1
01-05-2007, 03:09 PM
People are still stuck on the concept of CFS2 were you can bring any aircraft into any server. That was stupid, and Oleg is not that stupid. Get CFS2 cheating out of your heads! The server will select WHAT aircraft to fly, and everyone will have the same aircraft.

Lets say BoB is released, and someone makes a good F4F and A6M2 flyable. Then the server can use those two aircraft to make a Zeek vs Wildcat server. Everyone will need to download those two aircraft, and everyone will use the same FM, DM and all that. There is no way you can make your own jet powered titanium plated Zero and bring it in unless that server has that same aircraft, and then EVERYONE has it.

Get your mind out of CFS2. The devs learned there lesson on that. Having additional aircraft from 3rd party's will expant the community by attracting more people, not split it. Its already split rather bad online with 4.04, 4.05, 4.07, and 4.071 servers. This way it wont matter. It will be core servers, or mod servers, and the two can share user base, unlike the current setup.

If someone makes an X-wing, dont join that server if X-wing is in the list of aircraft. DUH!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

ElAurens
01-05-2007, 03:56 PM
If anyone thinks that user made aircraft or FMs won't reflect the bias if that modder's pet aircraft or political affiliation, then I have a clock to sell you, cheap....

http://www.esa.int/images/LondonBigBen,1.jpg

And I'll even throw in a year's free maintenance.

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

As much as I would like to have a bunch of planes that we normally might not get, I'd still rather have a solid, long term flight sim and community. We will have neither under a scheme like has been proposed.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/photos/ELsKi.jpg

"To explain the lure of speed you would have to explain human nature" - T.E. Lawrence

Friendly_flyer
01-05-2007, 04:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
If anyone thinks that user made aircraft or FMs won't reflect the bias if that modder's pet aircraft or political affiliation, then I have a clock to sell you, cheap....
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Off corse it will, but that won't matter (see Gibbages very well worded explanation above).<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Fly friendly!

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37/Friendly_flyer/WhirlwindforBoB-II.jpg

Visit No 79 Squadron vRAF (http://www.gazzamataz.com/79vRAF/)

Petter B°ckman
Norway

ElAurens
01-05-2007, 04:35 PM
I hope you are correct.

Frankly I think this will lead to the total fracture of the online side of the sim. We don't have enough servers and pilots as it is. How will having all these different and probably under populated servers help anyone, except those immature enough to need UFO FMs?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/photos/ELsKi.jpg

"To explain the lure of speed you would have to explain human nature" - T.E. Lawrence

Popey109
01-05-2007, 05:27 PM
Birds of a feather http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif The kidies will have thier play ground...while the reall men will fly "full reall". Not much deffrent than what we have now really...Not much deffrent than say,...kicking some arshat who thinks shooting his team mates on the runway is fun. Or some one who's abusive, or cant take being shot down. Like minded people will find like minded servers to fly on. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Gibbage1
01-05-2007, 06:22 PM
If I let too much biest into my FM, no servers will fly it. Its that easy. Again, the community will police my actions.

Like I said, modeler biest is already present in game as it is. At least now there will be accountability since it will have a name on it.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

csThor
01-05-2007, 11:03 PM
Belive that if you like, Gib, but I see "the community" as a mob where the sane and savvy are a tiny minority compared to the "Me-r0xx0rs-y0u-pwned!" masses.

Sorry - I can't and will not understand how people can actually believe user mods for a combat flight sim are a good thing. History and experience tell me that's a sure way to doom. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

______________________________
Ab heute heissen wir Meier!

http://home.arcor.de/csthor/bilder/ubi_sig.jpg

Agamemnon22
01-05-2007, 11:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by csThor:
Belive that if you like, Gib, but I see "the community" as a mob where the sane and savvy are a tiny minority compared to the "Me-r0xx0rs-y0u-pwned!" masses.

Sorry - I can't and will not understand how people can actually believe user mods for a combat flight sim are a good thing. History and experience tell me that's a sure way to doom. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you think about it, history and experience tell us that the system falls apart whenever the rules (read: FM's, DM's, etc) are defined by the client. This is not only the case with CFS2, but also Counter Strike, C&C and most other online games where cheating has become rampant.

History also shows us that games where the rules are defined by the server instead, have no such problems with cheating, for example the Battlefield series.

BoB appears to plan to follow the latter model.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------------------------
http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/agamemnon22/Pe2sig.jpg

csThor
01-05-2007, 11:49 PM
Two examples of games with "the latter case":

Panzer Elite - online playing was killed by the fragmentation introduced with the first user modifications
European Air War - the sim was killed for me by user mods leading to FM wars (literally) and a fragmentation of downloads (I remember a campaign which was thoroughly researched and designed, but you had to download a load of aircraft separately from various sites.)

It's not so much a technical problem but a problem of the mindset. When you look at this board here you'll see a load of self-declared experts who certainly seem to know how plane XYZ flew and why plane ABC is porked. Campaigns, missions and servers are still made/maintained by people and if "people" have fundamentally different beliefs on FM/DM issues they will seek to implement "their" beliefs if they get the chance. I simply believe the simulation community as a whole is not mature enough to be given the tools to modify/create planes without the use of an "unbiased" entity (in our case: Maddox Games) which does the technical implementation.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

______________________________
Ab heute heissen wir Meier!

http://home.arcor.de/csthor/bilder/ubi_sig.jpg

Gibbage1
01-06-2007, 01:12 AM
Are you guys REALLY this freakin blind? The irony of what your saying BLOWS MY MIND!!!!!!

#1. This game is ALREADY ruled by the mindless mobs. Read any massive thread thats whining about this that or the other before a patch, and look at whats in the patch. The FM, DM and everything about this game right now is dictated by the loudest group.

#2. The mob mentality is what will keep people in check. If I made an uber P-38, not only will the mob of ravinous Luftwhiners descent appon me in HORDS of complaint E-mails and tirants on forums, but the word would get out and the servers wont allow my aircraft on.

Think about it! With how close you people disect aircraft, even from someone people respect most, anything out of line will be picked out and proudly displayed, and put on trial for war crimes around here!!!!!! There is NO WAY I could get away with ANYTHING with you guys! Its that simple. You guys keep making these weak and flacid excuses, but the simple fact is, I could NOT get away with ANYTHING.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

karost
01-06-2007, 01:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It's not so much a technical problem but a problem of the mindset. When you look at this board here you'll see a load of self-declared experts who certainly seem to know how plane XYZ flew and why plane ABC is porked. Campaigns, missions and servers are still made/maintained by people and if "people" have fundamentally different beliefs on FM/DM issues they will seek to implement "their" beliefs if they get the chance. I simply believe the simulation community as a whole is not mature enough to be given the tools to modify/create planes without the use of an "unbiased" entity (in our case: Maddox Games) which does the technical implementation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yes,seem that is a true of problem

IMHO...
Next generation online has learn and change
that's why oleg have to block this problem

All dedicate server will be the center control
of all FM/DM planes set/Mission/cheat protection
and client only send/reseive the control data and generate display.

just add some selection between standard plane and custom plane list, if that server allowed to
play include custom plane (mode)

custom planes can not duplication a plan's name from standard plane they have to create a new name like bf-109G10-UFO1 so all clients will
see details set for each custome plane, then
a public dedicate server guys have a many job to management by keep many good(respect) custom plane in the list and remove a bad one

-: edit ----
then we will have three group of a dedicate server one for standard set (official) only and next for realistic that hard core simmers like and other for arcade-ufo-star.war that fuuny players like http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif same like we have now in HL
-: edit ---
but this way a top list of popular custom planes will kick Oleg-eye and soon Oleg/teams will include this plane in a new/next standard plane

but if some server like to keep many bad custom planes inside they can do, but how many people will come to join soon that server will die.

S!

csThor
01-06-2007, 01:25 AM
Gib - you're just overoptimistic. If you please one group the other folks will cry, if you please them group A will cry.

As AWL_Spinner put it so eloquently:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The day everyone in THIS community agrees on ANY FM I'll eat my Track IR and Pedals. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Open your eyes, Gib. There is no community policing as there is no real "community" at all. The russian folks want to draw Oleg ot their crates, the US folks to theirs, the Brits to theirs, us Jerries to ours, the French to theirs etc etc pp. That's normal and was to be expected and it's bad enough that Maddox Games tried to pacify some of the loudest whiners once or twice.
Bottom line is: We are already a fractured bunch of folks. There's the russian community, the french, the italian, the german, the japanese, the chinese etc etc pp ... All these different groups have little contact with the other apart from online wars or flying online per se. What keeps us together is the level playground provided by Maddox Games as single deciding entity. Give that up and the fracturing will be even more visible - even though I hope there are enough folks who would use only the official stuff.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

______________________________
Ab heute heissen wir Meier!

http://home.arcor.de/csthor/bilder/ubi_sig.jpg

karost
01-06-2007, 02:27 AM
now IL2 become a popular international product.

if SoW egine allowed the third party can create a new Scenery same like fs2004,FX , by create some feature same like google map, and can import current weater set. so we will see a china,japan,korea,midway mission ...etc

later Oleg/Teams can collect a good one and take advantage for a next Addon set.

S!

csThor
01-06-2007, 02:55 AM
What you fail to realize, karost, is that Oleg has clearly stated that the really big maps will be reserved for Maddox Games and only "small online maps" (whatever that means) will be possible for external developers. You can't do a Korean War AddOn when you have to patch the landscape together from smallish maps ...<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

______________________________
Ab heute heissen wir Meier!

http://home.arcor.de/csthor/bilder/ubi_sig.jpg

mrsiCkstar
01-06-2007, 03:04 AM
Ghost Recon (the first and best) is another game that was very supportive of user made mods... the servers just decided which mods were active... problem is, the mods people made didn't make the game more realistic or enhanced it in any way. The mods were arcade: guns had unrealistic range and zoom capabilities, people could take more hits, low quality maps etc... also I never saw any community policing itself there either, and in the end I can rarely find a server that people play without any mods active.

at the moment we have groups that whine about their planes etc... but we're still flying the same planeset so we are still united by that, if everybody gets to make their own planes the way they think they should fly, and the way they think the enemy planes should fly, all these groups will separate and then we'll have numerous small groups flying in servers where their planes reign supreme etc... it will separate the community even more. You guys said it yourselves, it's already separated enough by 4.04m, 05m, 07m and 071m so what would be the difference right? cut this community in half and separate the 2 sides into factions... there you have it.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.no.net/jonmarja/images/f4usig.jpg

striker-85
01-06-2007, 03:43 AM
Wow, I am shocked at how people fail to see the great benefits that can be had by allowing 3rd parties to model planes.

It's not like they are required... If you don't want those planes then just don't enable them at the server. If you only want planes from Maddox then play on servers that allow only Maddox approved planes.

But don't cry just because you see others playing on servers that have planes with acceptable FM/DM from 3rd patries. What acceptable? Well if people are playing it then it's acceptable. No one is going to want to play on a server where one paticuar side has an ubber plane and so servers like that would just die or languish. Servers that have realistic FM/DM planes and balanced planesets will succeed.

When BOB comes out I don't want to wait 3 years for a PTO plane set or be told I won't ever have a flyable Avenger because the manufacturer might sue, or a Kate, or a Ki-21. I'd love to have the ability to use and model planes that are not available from Maddox.

And if you don't like the custom planes or the fact they are not from Maddox, then guess what, you don't have to play on that server. If the community truely agrees with you then they will all be on Maddox only servers so no loss.

karost
01-06-2007, 04:57 AM
One good thing I like to see is a training custom planes which allow online 2 pilots joint in same plane with "realistic FM (wwii)" ... this is very good thing for community.

carguy_
01-06-2007, 05:01 AM
There you have it.

Folks just want their planes so it is an imperative.They will model their planes because they can.

They will make them uber because they can.

They will fracture the community because of their childish attitudes of endless lack of satisfaction and wanting more.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Wow, I am shocked at how people fail to see the great benefits that can be had by allowing 3rd parties to model planes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why I`m OTOH not so suprirsed with the typical shortsightness,naivness and most of all STUPIDITY of some folks.

Gibbage showed many times that his aim is anything but making the game realistic/historically accurate.

Whether you like it or not,the online community is still somewhat united because they are forced to fly the very same planes.Give them a finger,they take a whole hand BECAUSE THEY CAN.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">#1. This game is ALREADY ruled by the mindless mobs. Read any massive thread thats whining about this that or the other before a patch, and look at whats in the patch. The FM, DM and everything about this game right now is dictated by the loudest group. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand that you`re making the situation look worse than it is.It suits your ramblings.
No,the fact is that Oleg Maddox and MG overseer everything.The loudest group is Yanks.Although their influence is minimal.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">#2. The mob mentality is what will keep people in check. If I made an uber P-38, not only will the mob of ravinous Luftwhiners descent appon me in HORDS of complaint E-mails and tirants on forums, but the word would get out and the servers wont allow my aircraft on. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The mob mentality will draw the masses into the server that suits them the most.For this reason,the official servers lose priority and players to fly.

Pony lovers will have their servers,ravinous LW whiners will have their 3.0AtA servers too.
At best,those two groups can find a middle ground server and fly there.Although there is no telling if that server is the official MG server.Again,we have no idea if FMs,DMs are realistic there.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sigjzg23upgraded.jpg
Self-proclaimed dedicated Willywhiner since July 2002
: Badsight.:"increased manouverability for bf-109s was satire" :
Please bring back 3.01 dots!

jasonbirder
01-06-2007, 05:18 AM
While there are no doubts there are issues that allowing 3rd party modding raises...
There are also many benefits too...
Don't forget it is primarily competitive online players who are most worried about allowing it...either because they fear that allowing modded aircraft will put their favoured ride at a disadvantage or because they fear that it will lead to underpopulated servers and a fragmentation of the "show up and play" online crowd...
Both valid fears if your only concern is mainaining a healthy and happy population of dogfight servers on Hyperlobby...
But look at the game from a broader perspective and those fears fade into the background...
Online players make up a tiny minority of Il2 players...and 3rd party modding is not going to effect even those online players who fly primarily squadron based (or similar type) events as version/allowable mods etc will all be agreed on before hand.
Offline it will bring nothing but advantages...hopefully new maps, new theatres, new terrains...new ground objects and new planes...
Look at the tremendously positive impact the modding community had on games like Falcon 4 and Janes F/A 18 to see the benefits an active community can have on a game...
I'd rather our community was likened to the community that plays those games rather than being told we're similar to a bunch of online FPS numpties that play doom or quake or counterstrike...

Popey109
01-06-2007, 07:10 AM
Self-proclaimed dedicated Willywhiner since July 2002
: Badsight.:"increased manouverability for bf-109s was satire" :
Please bring back 3.01 dots!...Posts: 3302 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Agamemnon22
01-06-2007, 10:46 AM
I don't really think its fair to bring in fragmentation by country into this discussion, there are obvious other barriers like language, time zones, ping, etc.

Let's also not bring up Gibbage's or anyone else's character. Gibbage had information that showed some aspect of the sim was wrong, he acted on that information. Nobody's making stuff up here. You can't get away with that in this community (which, incidentally, is exactly the point Gibbage is making).

To those against the whole 3rd party modding idea, do you at least accept the benefits it would have for offline? Do you accept that without it the BoB flyable plane-set, AS WELL as the AI plane-set will be rather limited compared to what we have today? Do you accept that this will make the game rather limited at first? After all we'll only have early war British and
German plans. Do you further realize that if MG has to do the work as they do now, we will wait like a year per additional plane, because of the increased detail and development effort?
Do you now accept that without 3rd party modding for offline we will not reach the level of diversity we have now for decades? That we may not see Russian or Japanese or Italian or, never mind that, any late-war planes for several years? I don't know about you I think that won't just fragment the community, it'll take a cleaver to it, and some people will just leave.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------------------------
http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/agamemnon22/Pe2sig.jpg

DuxCorvan
01-06-2007, 11:02 AM
(Not to mention that 3rd party *free* work with-no-face, may free MG from any copyright responsibilities, allowing us to have US planes in the game -which we may not be able to have any other way) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

heywooood
01-06-2007, 11:19 AM
all kidding and whatnot aside....

What happens when Third Party mods introduce "upgraded" planes that Oleg has already provided?..

IE: Olegs Spitfire MkI is good...but mine is less biased and closer to real - everyone (Brits) have tried it offline and want Oleg to 'certify' it for online. Not only do they want it - but they have flooded the email and the forums with demands for it....Now what?

Same for Luftwaffe planes...

Can you hear it?

I hope Oleg will stipulate that all planes included by 1c are final and are closed to outside modification (not that they won't be modified by 1c)...otherwise I think he will be very sorry about this new idea for his sim.

As far as adding objects etc....there should be no such controversy that I can see.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/afewofTheFew-1.jpg

A few of The Few

Agamemnon22
01-06-2007, 11:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by heywooood:
all kidding and whatnot aside....

What happens when Third Party mods introduce "upgraded" planes that Oleg has already provided?..

IE: Olegs Spitfire MkI is good...but mine is less biased and closer to real - everyone (Brits) have tried it offline and want Oleg to 'certify' it for online. Not only do they want it - but they have flooded the email and the forums with demands for it....Now what?

Same for Luftwaffe planes...

Can you hear it?

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, at that point, we actually have status quo. If you're saying make it all up to Oleg for online, then the loudest side wins, unless Oleg really puts his foot down.

But the question as far as online is whether servers should be allowed to exist, that don't use Oleg's approved planeset. Some would argue that that would kill the game.. right?

If we can keep this civil this is a very necessary discussion, and I bet you Oleg or someone from MG is reading it.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------------------------
http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/agamemnon22/Pe2sig.jpg

heywooood
01-06-2007, 12:02 PM
as you say - but if all the third party work is done and their plane exists for use offline that part of the community claims is better than the 1c plane that was part of the sim initially....and the other part of the community says no way - that third party plane is just a bogus attempt to slip some uberness past 1c and then you have the questions as to what tests to run and what specs it must meet WRT weapons and flight model and damage models and how arbitrary all that is...

Whereas now - sure you have bickering and questions about 1c and their methods and specs and the veracity of their work - but you know the score.

No third party planes can be introduced to the sim atall - not for offline or online - unless Oleg and 1c pass it and incorporate it.

If this new course is undertaken all I'm saying is - let third party mods work on planes that 1c has not already claimed or done themselves - make those off limits, so there can be no open war between the community and the developer in this way.

Once you have a finished plane - call it a challenger - for use offline that the community can see and use for themselves, you have too much ammunition for arguement and discord (and don't we already have enough of that) is all I'm saying.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/afewofTheFew-1.jpg

A few of The Few

karost
01-06-2007, 03:00 PM
that is good point for you
but that will be limit and distroy an opportunity for community members ....

IMHO...
for example "IF" shockwave(or other group) make custom planes like BF-109E3/4 and Spitfire MkIA which have a difference FM style from SoW standard planes and many people had conclude that :
standard planes from SoW are good for a common players
and this custom planes are good for hard core simmers .

so what we gona do ? ... we have many way to due with ...
like... keep a good custom planes running on hard core dadicate server ( no need to include in a standard set ) so a members who like this planes set will come to join and let a common players enjoy thier fun in a standard dadicate server.

by nature... a common players don't want to face with a hard core players on the same server. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

and what about offline fun ? if we have a good custom planes runing for us. well ... un imagination http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

if I am a ubi marketing guys I'll very happy about this idea too.


S!

Popey109
01-06-2007, 03:45 PM
If someone can make thier case, document it, and Oleg says yes. Than it aint much defrent than what we have now...is it? Day after day someone dont like this, or want that and always in the end they have to prove it and Oleg has to ok it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif If someone makes a better Spit (3d model!!...I dont see that happening http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif ) flight model than he\they have to prove it's correct, he\they have to prove it to Oleg! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

UberDemon
01-06-2007, 10:29 PM
Whoa! You are gone for a few days and the whole world falls appart! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Relating to the first reply to my post about how Oleg is giving everyone what they want, the biggest point is not really the result... the result comes with the design, and the design is made by programmers. So in the end what I meant to say was, let the programmers do their thing... I am sure that they have had PLENTY of feedback from this "more than ready to give their opinion on how the world should be" crowd. It would be interesting to see how many people here have actual flight combat hours on their logs... cos it sure feels like a lot of people around here do.

Anyway, Gibbage gets it. I get it. Oleg, there are many people here who get it; so from the bottom of my heart, thanks for giving this dream of yours your all, and give a thanks to your modellers and programmers from me.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Best Regards,
Demon/UberDemon
Get UQMG (UberQuick Mission Generator for PF/FB) for Free at www.uberdemon.com (http://www.uberdemon.com)

Xiolablu3
01-07-2007, 01:49 AM
I am going to fly the officical servers only.

I would never trust someone I didnt know to model their favourite aircraft.

Imagine

Kurfursts Bf109 flight model,
Gibbages P38 flight model,
Josfs FW190 flight model,
HayateAce's P51 model


All these would be modelled so optimistically that they will be like UFOs.

I hope most of the community flies Olegs official flight model and planes.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"I despise what you say; I will defend to the death your right to say it."
-Voltaire

msalama
01-07-2007, 02:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I hope most of the community flies Olegs official flight model and planes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I for one most likely will, at least at first. Nothing against community-created planes, however, provided that the 2 DO NOT EVER MIX. And this can be arranged as we know...

So what exactly is the big problem here?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hippies FTW!

GR142-Pipper
01-07-2007, 03:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agamemnon22:
To those against the whole 3rd party modding idea, do you at least accept the benefits it would have for offline?.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes, it would have significant benefits for both the on-line as well as the off-line player communities.

However, there is one practical reason for allowing 3d party modelling....support. It ought to be patently obvious to all the folks that have been around here for a while that the plane models simply aren't supportable. Corrections to important aircraft take forever to implement and many much needed changes likely never will see the light of day. 3rd party modeling will at least permit the opportunity for more people to examine and participate in making the flight models as realistic as possible. Given the wide diversity of aircraft that will become available, I honestly don't see any other practical way to support this type of environment using other than 3rd party involvement. Overall, I think it will be a good thing.

GR142-Pipper

csThor
01-07-2007, 04:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Oleg, there are many people here who get it; so from the bottom of my heart, thanks for giving this dream of yours your all, and give a thanks to your modellers and programmers from me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, you may get it. The question is what exactly you will get. And more importantly - Will you will still praise it at this point? I somehow doubt it ... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

______________________________
Ab heute heissen wir Meier!

http://home.arcor.de/csthor/bilder/ubi_sig.jpg

AWL_Spinner
01-07-2007, 04:29 AM
Well I think given the rabid response to the merest possibility of user created FMs, and I can see the argument there tbh, I just hope this ends up as a set of tools for modellers to provide static objects, or aircraft/ships/trains using stock flight/movement models (for mission building immersion or fun "fly the B17" type servers only) and leaves the game's core FM code locked up tight as a duck's backside.

If any great aircraft 3D models turn up, then Oleg 'n co could do the FM and incorporate them in a patch (much as we have now, but with the added interest of being able to "fly" them first in the engine, albeit on a limited basis).

My tuppence.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Cheers, Spinner

<hr class="ev_code_hr" />
o Squads! Take a look at the ADW War (http://adwwar.com/en/#), it's fantastic!
o Spinner has been alive in ADW for a maximum of: 3hrs 38mins!

ElAurens
01-07-2007, 11:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I am going to fly the officical servers only.

I would never trust someone I didnt know to model their favourite aircraft.

Imagine

Kurfursts Bf109 flight model,
Gibbages P38 flight model,
Josfs FW190 flight model,
HayateAce's P51 model


All these would be modelled so optimistically that they will be like UFOs.

I hope most of the community flies Olegs official flight model and planes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

To quote Tagert, "I agree 100%"

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/photos/ELsKi.jpg

"To explain the lure of speed you would have to explain human nature" - T.E. Lawrence

major_setback
01-08-2007, 08:14 AM
I forgot to put in this bit from the interview:

Q:...when do you hope to release Sow BoB?

Oleg: When it's ready, but no later than Christmas 2007.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

Capt.England
01-08-2007, 12:39 PM
Look. IT'S NOT OUT OR FINISHED YET!?!

Why moan about something that none of us have seen or played? If you don't like BoB then just go and make your own flight sim.

IMHO, Stick to your ideas Mr Oleg Maddox. I for one look forward to modeling the planes that NEVER get modeled (Lots and Lots of cr@p British planes await modeling). http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Why do joysticks break when you need them the most?

arrow80
01-08-2007, 01:14 PM
I hope that Oleg will rethink the concept of user added content to BOB. I've spent lot of time modding games I had as EAW or SF/P1 and in the end it seemed I am doing just more modding than actually playing. Thousands different incompatible mods, different FMs, always something that didn't work right and I had many version of the game installed. Another bad example would be Silent Hunter 3, where again 1000 mods exist, some are incompatible, some create unpredictable errors that modders cannot see. I also remember Falcon 4.0 and mod wars and don't want that to happen to BoB. I like in Il2 that everything works out of the box or through official patches and don't have to fiddle with doubtable planes and their FMs and test them if I like them and if I will fly them. Just my two cents. I agree on everything that CsThor wrote here.

WholeHawg
01-08-2007, 01:32 PM
Wow there are a lot of chicken little types out there.

Dont worry folks, 3rd party modeling wont kill this sim, it will only make it better. Look at games like Falcon 4, European Air War and even Operation Flashpoint. These games would have all died years ago if it weren't for 3 party modders.

Just relax the sky is still up there.

bazzaah2
01-08-2007, 01:35 PM
I think it could be great - FS9 and loads of other games have benefitted from 3rd party work: personally I'd would love it if Shockwave and RealAir could lend their talents to BOB.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_05.gif

Crashing online as :FI:SpinyNorman

Normally Spiny Norman was wont to be about
twelve feet from snout to tail, but when Dinsdale was depressed Norman could be
anything up to eight hundred yards long.

Gibbage1
01-08-2007, 03:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Imagine

Kurfursts Bf109 flight model,
Gibbages P38 flight model,
Josfs FW190 flight model,
HayateAce's P51 model


All these would be modelled so optimistically that they will be like UFOs.

I hope most of the community flies Olegs official flight model and planes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is why I say the community will police itself. If we uber-out our models, nobody will fly it! Cant you get that through your thick skull? Whats the point of me modeling some uber P-38 if nobody fly's it but me?

Dont kid yourself. Some of us are more interested in an accurate simulation of history then glorifing our fave ride.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

jarink
01-08-2007, 03:17 PM
So far, the only reasonable objection raised was by Heywood

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">What happens when Third Party mods introduce "upgraded" planes that Oleg has already provided?.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That might be kind of sticky, especially if the 3rd party planes had a better 3D model. I know 1C has a good and well deserved rep for dmanding high quality models, but face the facts: there are several a/c currently in IL-2 with errors or severe texture warping/mirroring. A lot of those kinds of problems would be easy to fix, except 1C does not allow it in IL-2.

I won't even debate about FMs; so much about the FMs is subjective and open to debate it's a waste of time. I agree with those that say if a plane's FM is enough out of whack to be noticeable, the people running the servers won't allow that plane.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

My PF movies:Aluminum Eagle (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Aluminum_Eagle/OneVisionLg.zip), Fire and Rain (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Fire_and_Rain/Fire_and_Rain.zip) Snowbirds (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Snowbirds/Snowbirds.zip) and Crew 22 (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Crew_22/Crew22.zip)

http://home.grics.net/jrink/signature.jpg

major_setback
01-08-2007, 03:50 PM
I like to think positive.
One of the positive things is that you could have loads of "krap" planes to use either online or offline. It wouldn't matter all too much about performance either. I could live with having a Sunderland that flew like an Emily.
I would prefer to have these planes - even as AI - to enrich my BoB/SoW environment, than to have to do without them:

Hallifax
Hampden
Battle
Bolingbroke
Manchester
Sunderland
Miles Magister
Airspeed Oxford
Beaufort
Roc
Skua
etc.

Also - How many planes will the development time have time to make? Maybe we just get the handful of flyables that come with BoB, and have to make do with those until the next version of SoW comes - which might itself only have a handful more.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

Xiolablu3
01-08-2007, 03:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Imagine

Kurfursts Bf109 flight model,
Gibbages P38 flight model,
Josfs FW190 flight model,
HayateAce's P51 model


All these would be modelled so optimistically that they will be like UFOs.

I hope most of the community flies Olegs official flight model and planes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is why I say the community will police itself. If we uber-out our models, nobody will fly it! Cant you get that through your thick skull? Whats the point of me modeling some uber P-38 if nobody fly's it but me?

Dont kid yourself. Some of us are more interested in an accurate simulation of history then glorifing our fave ride. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I hope so mate, its just I have seen some of your posts in the past complaining about IL2 P38's and P47's, and that made me wonder. The point is that you will make a model for example that the USA guys think is correct, but the rest of the world doesnt, same with the LW guys creating German planes which a FEW of them think are correct, so they fly that model, ****ging off yours. Therefore we end up with a Luftwaffe flight model, A USAAF flight model, A RAF flight model etc, each where their own planes are modelled very optimistically and they also fly the undermodelled 'enemy' planes just to reinforce how good their own planes are. Leading to many different communities.

Everyone is biased to some extent, so I didnt mean to single you guys out especially, but you were the best examples I could think of at the time. Pls dont take it as an insult, it was meant to make a point. (I love your 3d work)

Maybe if we all fly the official flight model and submit planes we want included for Oleg/1C's opinion.

I still think it will be better if we all fly the official model online. I am pretty sure all of the people I usually fly with will keep flying the official model.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"I despise what you say; I will defend to the death your right to say it."
-Voltaire

BillyTheKid_22
01-08-2007, 04:10 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://members.cox.net/bkid/pacificfighters/p39.jpg

.................................................. ..............

"All I got was a bellyful of English Channel."

OberUberWurst
01-08-2007, 04:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Dont kid yourself. Some of us are more interested in an accurate simulation of history then glorifing our fave ride. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif Be sure.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

------------------------

Supra Societatem Nemo | MCMLXIV

DuxCorvan
01-08-2007, 04:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I am going to fly the officical servers only.

I would never trust someone I didnt know to model their favourite aircraft.

Imagine

Kurfursts Bf109 flight model,
Gibbages P38 flight model,
Josfs FW190 flight model,
HayateAce's P51 model


All these would be modelled so optimistically that they will be like UFOs.

I hope most of the community flies Olegs official flight model and planes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I think only the prima donnas of aviation history -which arouse so many passions- would receive that UFO treatment, and precisely those are the planes that official devs are most likely to do first.

Besides, they would be -as Gib says- 'closely watched', and it would be very hard to pass a famous UFO to the community without jumping the alarm.

But how about cr*p 'forgotten' planes? Only 3rd party would make them, and nobody's interested in making them if not really interested in historical accuracy. They could hardly attract conscient passionate bias (who would want an UFO Heinkel He 51?), and that's heaven's open both for 3rd party teams and offline scenario gamers.

I still dream about a Spanish Civil War air sim... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

faustnik
01-08-2007, 05:11 PM
If there is an official set and then separate "user created sets", I don't see a problem. If you don't like the particular set, find another, or stick with the official set. I'd love to see a "map download" system like RO.

Personally, even as offline only, I'm looking forward to some user created planes, including Gibbages P-38F. In fact, after he finishes that, I will hound him for an Fw190A4 and P-51A to go with it. Then he can make an Africa map, and then...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustJumboSig.jpg
VFS (http://www.virtualfightersquadrons.com/)
Focke-Wulf 190 Consortium (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewforum&f=8)
The Lockheed Syndicate (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewforum&f=18)
Hawker Haven (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewforum&f=19)
CWOS FB Forum More cheese, less whine (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewforum&f=7)
Magnum PCSupport our support guys! (http://www.magnum-pc.com/)

BillyTheKid_22
01-08-2007, 05:16 PM
UFO!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://members.cox.net/bkid/pacificfighters/p39.jpg

.................................................. ..............

"All I got was a bellyful of English Channel."

Gibbage1
01-08-2007, 07:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I hope so mate, its just I have seen some of your posts in the past complaining about IL2 P38's and P47's, and that made me wonder. The point is that you will make a model for example that the USA guys think is correct, but the rest of the world doesnt, same with the LW guys creating German planes which a FEW of them think are correct, so they fly that model, ****ging off yours. Therefore we end up with a Luftwaffe flight model, A USAAF flight model, A RAF flight model etc, each where their own planes are modelled very optimistically and they also fly the undermodelled 'enemy' planes just to reinforce how good their own planes are. Leading to many different communities.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree in a way, but my point is that this ALREADY exist's. 3rd party add-ons wont split the communities since it already is. So how can you use that as a negitive?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Everyone is biased to some extent, so I didnt mean to single you guys out especially, but you were the best examples I could think of at the time. Pls dont take it as an insult, it was meant to make a point. (I love your 3d work)
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree. But the extend of people's bias is a factor. For me, if I have 3 differant top speed listings, I will go with the middle. Maybe someone like Kurfurst will go with the top performance listing he can find on the web. But thats were the community will come into play. Checks and balances. If me or Kurfy starts to lean one way or the other, the oposing side will call us on it. Its the US's job to make sure the Lufties stuff stays fair, and the other way around it. You never let the fox guard the hen coop. Thats the way it is now. We all keep an eye on Olegs stuff, and call him on it when we see something out of line. There will be NO differance in how things are handled except maybe things will get corrected faster since it wont need some big patch to implament the changes. It would hopefully be just a few quick changes to an FM file and boom, instant correction. But I will tell you this. If someone with a 109 in there sig makes a thread that he "feels" the P-38 turns too fast or some BS like that, he BETTER come with more supporting data then his personal feelings. Some will go for Kurfy's 109. You will need to make you case, be sure!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Maybe if we all fly the official flight model and submit planes we want included for Oleg/1C's opinion.

I still think it will be better if we all fly the official model online. I am pretty sure all of the people I usually fly with will keep flying the official model. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oleg said that if the 3rd party does a good job and he agree's with it, he will make it part of the official model set. So best of both worlds.

I still think that opening the game too 3rd party models and add-on's will create a boom for the community, not a bust. Having a core set of certified models is a way to keep both sides happy. The Purist's and the modders. I dont see the negitive. Most people cite 2 things. #1, cheating. #2, splitting the community. Well there are always cheaters and ways to deal with them with developer support, and the community is about as split as can be. So I dont see any negitives. The sky WONT fall.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

UberDemon
01-08-2007, 11:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by csThor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Oleg, there are many people here who get it; so from the bottom of my heart, thanks for giving this dream of yours your all, and give a thanks to your modellers and programmers from me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, you may get it. The question is what exactly you will get. And more importantly - Will you will still praise it at this point? I somehow doubt it ... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, not really, that is not at all where I was trying to say. What I get, is what Oleg's vision and approach is... meaning I understand the path he is taking; I feel many people are not getting it; I still think he is making the best approach allowing both user content, as well as a tightly controlled environment... chose the one you want.

From the past few years I have been in this community, yes, I feel I will still praise it. I have not yet been disappointed at his releases, which is very different than other video games and simulators I have experienced.

If you feel you will not praise it, it is really your right; but even a hint I would not praise, is quite a presumption. I can't predict the future, but I doubt it I will be changing my mind to a "burn Maddox" mentality any time soon.

OK, so I don't have MG151/20 gondolas on my Bf-109F-4, or the 12.7mm armed I-153... but those are minor whines I can't help. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Best Regards,
Demon/UberDemon
Get UQMG (UberQuick Mission Generator for PF/FB) for Free at www.uberdemon.com (http://www.uberdemon.com)

LEXX_Luthor
01-08-2007, 11:28 PM
I don't think fully independent 3rd Party aircraft modding is needed in Oleg's sims, but its great news anyways that he is planning it. What is really needed is full scale map making -- unlike aircraft, the combat flight sim community has proven that they can make better and more popular maps than the sim developers can. The sim developers naturally focus on aircraft. Not so the customers (which should be a message for the developers). 3rd Party maps tend to be more accurate, more usefull for either historical or "what if" gameplay, and more historically accurate regarding WW2 situations.

Score Card -- 4 to zero -- in favour of... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

In favour -- Gibbage -- created P-38 model and others for the combat flight sim community:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I still think that opening the game too [gibbage, you still have artistic spelling] 3rd party models and add-on's will create a boom for the community, not a bust. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In favour -- Agamemnon22 -- creator of Pe-2 model for the combat flight sim community:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Do you now accept that without 3rd party modding for offline we will not reach the level of diversity we have now for decades? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In favour -- faustnik -- the original Fw Fan:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If there is an official set and then separate "user created sets", I don't see a problem. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In favour -- UberDemon -- one of the 3rd Party utility and mod makers who saved this sim for Oleg and the combat flight sim community:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Anyway, Gibbage gets it. I get it. <span class="ev_code_yellow">Oleg, there are many people here who get it; so from the bottom of my heart, thanks for giving this dream of yours your all, and give a thanks to your modellers and programmers from me.</span>


Best Regards,
Demon/UberDemon
Get UQMG (UberQuick Mission Generator for PF/FB) for Free at www.uberdemon.com (http://www.uberdemon.com) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I know some currently serving and retired military members who mod aircraft for combat flight sims. The insults made by some in this thread against these people by accusing them of wanting to "cheat" online still amazes me. Good call gibbage about hostile computer gamers who still think they are playing CFS2 and getting cheated online by Microsoft in Oleg's sims.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 12:04 AM
Lois_Lane::<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">more usefull </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Now that's artistic spelling.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

major_setback
01-09-2007, 04:07 AM
I don't think people realise how many VERY GOOD aircraft builders there are out there, they are at the moment making aircraft for FS2004/FSX because that is their only alternative.

An example of this: In every issue of PC Plot they include a number of user made aircraft (on the free CD). The last issue had 14 free aircraft. Most of these will be of middle quality, but in every issue the PC Pilot team review one user-made aircraft that is just as high in quality as commercial add-on aircraft. (There were also 4 different airports modelled in the last issue!). I am talking about 3D cockpits, engine cowls opening etc.(example - the Hawker Hunter trainer with working drop tanks and deployable braking chute).

The following are just some of the aircraft that have featured in the magazine recently (and this is just a small selection of all the third party aircraft that are being made!):

Grumman Tigercat
Wellington
Betty
Mustang
Twin Mustang
King Cobra
Sunderland
Sea Hurricane
SpitfireIX
Kingfisher



Also-
Short Sandringham
Albatross DIII
Spad VII
Skyhawk
Gnat
BAE Hawk
F18

The people making these aircraft will now turn their attention to BoB/SoW. Don't we want that?

When it comes to commercial add-ons: A Tiger Moth has just been released for FS2004/FSX, it costs about 20 pounds (UK). Also, Wings of Power WWII Fighters costs 20 punds - so there is a market for models of older aircraft. If they can be made to work in SoW then that means more sales for Maddox. This has got to be good.

Why is Sturmovik 1946 not available in the US? Retailers should be fighting for the right to market it, but no one cares less. It's too small a market. It has to get bigger. attracting the MS crowd is the way foreward, Maddox have to move that way.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 06:22 AM
majorsetback::<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I don't think people realise how many VERY GOOD aircraft builders there are out there, they are at the moment making aircraft for FS2004/FSX because that is their only alternative. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
There are of varying quality, as is natural. One thing I liked about Oleg's old system is that everything was equally detailed or equally good, or equally bad (your choice) but it was all consistent. But then, Oleg was willing and able to make lots of aircraft and so was not as dependent on 3rd Party aircraft modders.

I think that's where csThor has a itching rash in this thread. The customer can be buried in an avalanche of mods, having to download half the internet, spending so much of a lifetime finding -- and then fixing some poorly modded planes -- but the old EAW had lots of fans who downloaded the old mods, and had the time to spend doing it. But that's not what is being talked about here. Indeed, Oleg's willingness to include "Oleg Approved" (I love that!) 3rd Party aicraft mods on future DVDs is a major step forward for open sims.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

BaronUnderpants
01-09-2007, 07:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I know some currently serving and retired military members who mod aircraft for combat flight sims. The insults made by some in this thread against these people by accusing them of wanting to "cheat" online still amazes me. Good call gibbage about hostile computer gamers who still think they are playing CFS2 and getting cheated online by Microsoft in Oleg's sims. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats definetly NOT what the con side is trying to say. Seems like the pro side deliberatly trying to ignore what con side is ACTUALLY sayin.

Trying to convince the con side its a good thing by using FSX, EAW and CFS as examples of smashing succeses???

Surtenly wont win me over...not in a milion years.

Points have been made that got me thinking...thoose above aint it.

WOLFMondo
01-09-2007, 07:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Oleg said that if the 3rd party does a good job and he agree's with it, he will make it part of the official model set. So best of both worlds.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think Oleg will take the models and make his own FM's for them. Just a hunch.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Cheers!!

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 07:41 AM
fascinating...

BaronUnderpants:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I know some currently serving and retired military members who mod aircraft for combat flight sims. The insults made by some in this thread against these people by accusing them of wanting to "cheat" online still amazes me. Good call gibbage about hostile computer gamers who still think they are playing CFS2 and getting cheated online by Microsoft in Oleg's sims. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thats definetly NOT what the con side is trying to say. Seems like the pro side deliberatly trying to ignore what con side is ACTUALLY sayin.

Trying to convince the con side its a good thing by using FSX, EAW and CFS as examples of smashing succeses???
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
For many in the combat flight sim community, these were enjoyable sims. I personally never tried them, after all, I already have Microsoft Windows. But many did enjoy them at the time.

Again, we see a good call from gibbage about hostile or bitter computer gamers and their fear of the combat flight sim community.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

mrsiCkstar
01-09-2007, 07:54 AM
way to put words into people's mouths! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.no.net/jonmarja/images/f4usig.jpg

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 07:59 AM
The combat flight sim community has moved beyond computer gamer "mouths" ie... has moved beyond the fraudulent and hostile webboard accusations.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 08:07 AM
Apparently, TargetWare offers open modding, by definition almost, but each server enforces, or will enforce when (...if) the sim goes payware, what mods are used by players, and thus offers cheat protection inside a larger open environment. Although others here may know more about TargetWare than I do, and how it works, or how it will work. I'd kinda think that any payware sim will HAVE to have cheat protections.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

AKA_TAGERT
01-09-2007, 08:19 AM
An agreed upon set of 3rd party addons?

That will never work! CFS has proved that time and again!

Heck.. *we* can not even agree upon which version of IL2 to run! Look at HL these days.. You go 4.04 4.05 and 4.07 servers all up and running and splitting the already small community. Having 3rd party add-ons would have the same effect!

The only way it will work is how Oleg did it. Submit the add-ons and allow Oleg to have the final say as to how it flys.

Note this is with regards to online play! What anyone does offline is fine.. if you want to have a P51 with the FM of a F15 fine! What ever floats you boat!

But if Oleg allows *us* to decide what FM is used online it will be the death of this sim.. Just like it was the death of all the CFS stuff.

Long story short, when it comes to online flight sims it can not be a democracy! It has to be a one voice dictator! All we can do is hope and pray that he is a fare one!

In that if one group is allowed to go off and fly *thier* FM version of this and that online it will result in a hundred different servers with one or two players instead of one server with a couple of hundred players.

Even if there is an Oleg agreed upon set of 3rd party addons, allowing anyone to fly *thier* un-aproved 3rd party addon online will kill the sim. So, the only way for the online sim to live as long as IL2 has is to NOT ALLOW any 3rd party addones to be flown online until they have recived the seal of aproval by someone like Oleg.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

csThor
01-09-2007, 08:39 AM
Targetware offers modding ... but you can't compare it to what is planned for BoB. In TW there are development teams which are implementing the new stuff and those teams have some kind of "business relationship" (as far I understand some comments in their boards) with Targetware itself. It's not a "free-for-all" ******** but a tightly-controlled approach. While everyone and his dog can make comments, produce models and present data it's the team which introduces the objects. The fact that this system works so far is simply a factor of community size - which is tiny compared to the Il-2 community (I have Target:Tobruk on my HDD and have an eye on development). Additionally this small community is more mature than the majority here and is aiming at realism. For a release like BoB, which is aimed at a much wider audience, I cannot see these factors working. A high number of players just means a high number of self-appointed experts, gotta-win-scorewh0res and the likes. The people trying to go for realism are a small minority and have been screamed down by the louder masses and will be screamed down again. Don't delude yourself by thinking a community will police itself. That's an illusion.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

______________________________
Ab heute heissen wir Meier!

http://home.arcor.de/csthor/bilder/ubi_sig.jpg

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 08:40 AM
Tagert:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">n that if one group is allowed to go off and fly *thier* FM version of this and that online it will result in a hundred different servers with one or two players instead of one server with a couple of hundred players. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's assuming Online play remains stagnated with very few players of today, as rnzoli poasted has happened to this sim. Tagert, the "limited" simmer/server idea reminds one of biologist Paul Ehrlich and the World Bank's biologists writing in Scientific American magazine -- doom and gloom.


If Oleg can learn the importance of air war simulation, he can attract and keep far more customers playing his sims, and these players will quickly fill to overflow as many servers as come online. I'm a cornucopia kind of guy with respect to combat flight sim potential, like say, Julian Simon was with natural resources and population.

Speaking of economics, somebody poasted a brilliant theoretical analysis of the server issue. Assuming some or even most BoB servers are favouring "ufo" cheat flight models, the players of the side flying the ufo models will have few opponents on that server, no matter which side is biased for. Thus, everybody will gravitate to the servers using the Oleg Approved models. I'll have to find this poast, as it is a wonderful idea.

I'd also remind us, Microsoft dropped its combat flight sims, while Oleg does no such thing. Here is the other big bouncing ball that we always forget. CFS series was never liked by Microsoft which tried to kill its own product and CFSn programmers. Oleg (hopefully) has simming as his primary interest.

Tagert:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But if Oleg allows *us* to decide what FM is used online it will be the death of this sim.. Just like it was the death of all the CFS stuff. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 08:54 AM
Found it...and by none other than Pe-2 modder Agamemnon22.

Agamemnon22 (page 3):: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yeah but actually the "standard" version will be a nice middle-ground for everyone. <span class="ev_code_yellow">It's quite ingenious</span>, because given the whining the goes on here from every side, if ever a server comes up called "MUSTANG PWNZ ALL", no one will go there and fly Axis. Instead they might make a "109G6 UBER ALLES" server. But no one will go there to play Allied. Therefore, a lot of people get very bored of having noone to shoot and go to the "standard" servers, thus accepting Oleg's version of their favorite ride, whatever that may be. You see what I mean? The forces at work in this community will actually keep the game from getting out of hand all by themselves.
Clever innit? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes indeed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

I'd add that the "forces" in this community may not be enough, as csThor might say. But, Oleg will always be supporting his Online product, unlike the Microsoft CFSn products, which Microsoft totally abandoned to the community and left them unsupported. Oleg does not go round abandoning combat flight sims, at least not yet.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

BM357_Sniper
01-09-2007, 08:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
It's too bad the third party stuff wasn't limited to SP.

The online community is small enough as it is, without being fragmented between official and mod servers.

You'll have nutters with hacked FMs, claiming that they're more 'realistic', and refusing to play in official servers. Or garbage quality X-wing versus Tie Fighter mods. Perhaps even DBZ characters.

As a model testing and debugging tool, it would be great to fly or simply view your own models. I would have loved this when I was making models for PF.

But I think it's a step back if unfinished or sub-par material gets played en-masse, and starts competing with the official version.

It was this quality control and single-version compatibility that seperated IL-2 from the CFS series in the first place. To this day, most pay addons for CFS and FS are unfinished or poor quality. I'd hate to see the same happen in BoB, and hope some controls are in place to make mod versions limited to testing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a279/lifeguardhall/bm357_logok.jpg
"It's funny that all these guys with engineering degrees rely so much on their charts and graphs to fly. When they get in the plane, they are lucky to fly straight and level. Get a real pilot in there, one that flies by the seat of their pants and he will make it do things that the 'brains' are still denying."

AKA_TAGERT
01-09-2007, 08:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
That's assuming Online play remains stagnated with very few players of today, as rnzoli poasted has happened to this sim. Tagert, the "limited" simmer/server idea reminds one of biologist Paul Ehrlich and the World Bank's biologists writing in Scientific American magazine -- doom and gloom. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
An assumption not based on some beard scratches take of one the world but based on 15+ years of experience flying online. My first online sim was Air warrior Online. Black wire frame aircraft with hit bubbles the size of Montana 9600 baud modem on the Genie network for a mere $12/hr. Based on that experience I can say this, the flight sim community is probably the smallest of all online gaming, and will probably always be that way. The problem is most people play games to get away from reality, thus being a star ship caption who kills cats flying space craft is NOT looked at as being bad. Where as we flight simmers what the fantasy too, but with realism. Those two things are at odds and keep the community small.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
If Oleg can learn the importance of air war simulation, he can attract and keep far more customers playing his sims, and these players will quickly fill to overflow as many servers as come online. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
They said the same thing about Falcon 3.0 ten years ago! Problem is many but mostly economic.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I'm a cornucopia kind of guy with respect to combat flight sim potential, like say, Julian Simon was with natural resources and population. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ill take your word for it! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Speaking of economics, somebody poasted a brilliant analysis of. Assuming some servers are favouring "ufo" cheat flight models, the players of the side flying the ufo models will have few opponents on that server, no matter which side is biased for. Thus, everybody will gravitate to the Oleg Approved servers. I'll have to find this poast, as it is a wonderful idea. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nah, because it will open the idea of having a modified plane. It does not even have to be modified, just the thought of the potential is enough to kill a sim. All it takes is one smacktard to accuse someone of cheating and it is game over! When in fact it was not a cheat at all just some smacktard that does not know how to fly and was bested. That is why there has to be a strict rule on what can be flown online. Any doubt will be he death of the sim.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I'd also remind us, Microsoft dropped its combat flight sims, while Oleg does no such thing. Here is the other big bouncing ball that we always forget. CFS series was never liked by Microsoft which tried to kill its own product and CFSn programmers. Oleg (hopefully) has simming as his primary interest. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Dropped or good reason. The stink of cheating killed CFS3 before it was even released.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 09:06 AM
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">LEXX:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I'd also remind us, Microsoft dropped its combat flight sims, while Oleg does no such thing. Here is the other big bouncing ball that we always forget. CFS series was never liked by Microsoft which tried to kill its own product and CFSn programmers. Oleg (hopefully) has simming as his primary interest. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tagert:: Dropped for good reason. The stink of cheating killed CFS3 before it was even released. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm surprised *you* are not seeing how 1C/Oleg's interest in supporting his sim is completley different from Microsoft abandoning its combat flight sims.

CFSn "cheating" may have killed the CFSn Online play only, but never killed Offline play, which is the only play that matters in a business sense, unless the sim is Pay-To-Play. I think Oleg is figuring this out. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif Aussom!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Agamemnon22
01-09-2007, 10:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:


I'm surprised *you* are not seeing how 1C/Oleg's interest in supporting his sim is completley different from Microsoft abandoning its combat flight sims.

CFSn "cheating" may have killed the CFSn Online play only, but never killed Offline play, which is the only play that matters in a business sense, unless the sim is Pay-To-Play. I think Oleg is figuring this out. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif Aussom! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Exactly! To Microsoft, the FS series is chump change. It's nice if it makes money, but if not they can always cut it and move on to other things.

To Oleg, on the other hand, his sims are his lifeline. He's NOT going to let this thing die! If things go awry for whatever reason, you better believe that MG is going to be on the front lines figuring out a solution.

Furthermore, development costs for BoB are going to be high, very high by the time it releases. Oleg needs to open up the platform to external development to boost popularity, or risk going down, because this (IL-2) community, such as it is, may not be enough to support a project of such complexity.

So the point is, the game needs to be opened up, if purely for business reasons. If things go crazy, which I seriously doubt but lets be pessimistic, MG will be right there figuring out a fix. This is much better than in FS or EAW, where the worst case was total abandonment by the devs.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------------------------
http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/agamemnon22/Pe2sig.jpg

Gibbage1
01-09-2007, 12:13 PM
One thing people need to know is that in order to make a quality aircraft for BoB, it will need a rather big team! 5-10 people minimum! Gone are the days when a 1 man crew like me could make 1 aircraft!!! So there will be a few dedicated teams who can put out top quality aircraft. In that team there will be checks and balances. Also the team will get a bad rep if they do put out cheat-aircraft.

The reason why cheating was so bad in the CFS series was lack of developer support. The team made a game, fixed whatever bugs were in it, and left it for dead. They turned a blind eye twards cheaters because it would cost them money to fix. On the otherhand, we have Oleg who stands behind his product and has fixed every known cheat! Cheating exist's in IL2, but its not left to linger and fester. Cheating was NEVER addressed in the CFS series. THAT WONT HAPPEN WITH OLEG! Stop fearing cheating based on CFS! Oleg cares, MS dont.

There are a lot of add-on's for CFS and FS2004 that are far and beyond anything possible in IL2. Since Oleg stopped accepting 3rd party models, I have been working in FS2004 and its amazing how far you can take things! Just take a look at my P-38 in FS2004 vs my P-38 in IL2!!!

http://www.skyunlimited.net/p38.htm

http://www.skyunlimited.net/p38_images/p38_3.jpg

THATS the sort of quality you can get from 3rd party modelers. And that was done with a 3-4 man team.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

csThor
01-09-2007, 12:36 PM
Model quality is just a part of the equation. The model itself is "rather easy" as it is based on facts noone can dispute. A P-38 J-25 has a certain wingspan and length, a Fw 190 A-3 has such things, too. I don't think anyone doubts there are great modellers out there. And I doubt anyone would argue about dimensions unless something was very wrong.

But the other parts - especially the FM - is a field where only one thing is definite: there will never be a FM everyone agrees to. Secondly - and that is my major gripe with the planned system as well as the current system - I doubt developers will cooperate and release themed AddOn packs containing everything necessary for simulating a certain aspect - aircraft, ground objects, ships, campaigns etc. I have no use for individual aircraft released separately. I have no use for a Fw 190 D-9 or P-51D-20 or Spitfire XIV when the basic game is still at the BoB stage! Given the limited size of maps I doubt there will be such themed packs whereas potentially interesting areas (Med, East etc) are reserved for Maddox Games. So this 3rd Party stuff is basically just for online DF servers - and this means fragmentation of the player base (into "modders" and "purists").<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

______________________________
Ab heute heissen wir Meier!

http://home.arcor.de/csthor/bilder/ubi_sig.jpg

BaronUnderpants
01-09-2007, 12:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">LEXX:: [QUOTE]I'd also remind us, Microsoft dropped its combat flight sims, while Oleg does no such thing. Here is the other big bouncing ball that we always forget. CFS series was never liked by Microsoft which tried to kill its own product and CFSn programmers. Oleg (hopefully) has simming as his primary interest. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tagert:: Dropped for good reason. The stink of cheating killed CFS3 before it was even released. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm surprised *you* are not seeing how 1C/Oleg's interest in supporting his sim is completley different from Microsoft abandoning its combat flight sims.
QUOTE]
________________________________________________


Well, i cant help but think in the back of my head that the reason Oleg is even concidering opening up BoB to 3:rd party modding is for that exact reason....so he can move on to other projects, ai. "abandon" it.

In one way i can understand why, the sheere numbers of ac`s put in IL2 is amazing to me, the time they must have spent, vertually for free is still something i cant put togheter.

The only way 3:rd party modding would work ONLINE in my oppinion is if Oleg provided the core for all ac, namely FM and DM.

FM and DM for ac`s mind u...if a tank on the ground doesnt fall appart as it should really doesnt concern me...it is after all a flightsim, and dogy DM`s on ground objects is something i could live with....if i had to.

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 12:49 PM
csThor:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Given the limited size of maps </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, that's the problem. Oleg said the map BoB+ modding tool will be crippled to restrict map mods to "small" maps ... I assume tiny Online dogfight gaming maps, thus crippling the 3rd Party community and the 95% of the paying customers -- Offline play customers.

But, we never thought Oleg would allow open aircraft modding, and *surprise* here he is doing so. Who knows, he may change his mind and allow open full size map modding when he figures out the artificial crippling of the map modding tool makes no business sense in attracting and maintaining customer interest in his sims.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 12:55 PM
Very interesting thought. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

BaronUnderpants:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Well, i cant help but think in the back of my head that the reason Oleg is even concidering opening up BoB to 3:rd party modding is for that exact reason....so he can move on to other projects, ai. "abandon" it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oleg has said he wants to make a Media Content Creation Tool out of BoB, for Hollywood and the USA Dogfight Channel.

But Oleg is also working on very advanced and new combat flight sim features that don't fit your theory...AI that can't see in the dark, changing weather, dynamic skin and accumulated battle damage, etc... That says to me that Oleg is still interested in combat flight sim development and support for the customers.

In fact, I'd love if Oleg is opening up aircraft and other models to community modding so he CAN focus more on creating/programming for the customers an immersive air warfare simulation environment far beyond the traditional "flight sim" 3D models and flight models. But, this should imply opening up full size map modding too. We shall see. Thanks for making me think this. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 01:32 PM
Thanks Aggy22 and Gibbage. Spot On.

Agamemnon22:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">To Microsoft, the FS series is chump change. It's nice if it makes money, but if not they can always cut it and move on to other things.

<span class="ev_code_yellow">To Oleg, on the other hand, his sims are his lifeline.</span> He's NOT going to let this thing die! If things go awry for whatever reason, you better believe that MG is going to be on the front lines figuring out a solution.

Furthermore, development costs for BoB are going to be high, very high by the time it releases. Oleg needs to open up the platform to external development to boost popularity, or risk going down, because this (IL-2) community, such as it is, may not be enough to support a project of such complexity.

So the point is, the game needs to be opened up, if purely for business reasons. If things go crazy, which I seriously doubt but lets be pessimistic, MG will be right there figuring out a fix. This is much better than in FS or EAW, where the worst case was total abandonment by the devs. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gibbage:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">One thing people need to know is that in order to make a quality aircraft for BoB, it will need a rather big team!....Also the team will get a bad rep if they do put out cheat-aircraft.
:
:
The reason why cheating was so bad in the CFS series was lack of developer support. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Correct. Oleg will not allow any potential for fraudulent use of flight/damage/weapon modelling to cripple Online play, while allowing 3rd Party modelling to broaden the attraction for Offline players in his sims, thus funding Online play development without a need to go Pay-To-Play.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

jarink
01-09-2007, 02:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by csThor:
Secondly - and that is my major gripe with the planned system as well as the current system - I doubt developers will cooperate and release themed AddOn packs containing everything necessary for simulating a certain aspect - aircraft, ground objects, ships, campaigns etc. I have no use for individual aircraft released separately. I have no use for a Fw 190 D-9 or P-51D-20 or Spitfire XIV when the basic game is still at the BoB stage! Given the limited size of maps I doubt there will be such themed packs whereas potentially interesting areas (Med, East etc) are reserved for Maddox Games. So this 3rd Party stuff is basically just for online DF servers - and this means fragmentation of the player base (into "modders" and "purists"). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would not be surprised at all if the first 3rd party planes released would allow '41, '42, '43 and early '44 Channel fights. All you'd need would be a few marks of Spitfire, Bf-109F and Gs, FW-190As, P-38s, -47s, and -51s. Throw in a few light/medium bombers and you'd virtually have a complete expansion.

The 'groundwork' so to speak (maps, ground objects, etc.) would already be in place from BoB.

<span class="ev_code_yellow">I think too many people are overstating the importance of online flying.</span>
As stated above, until and unless MG starts "pay-to-play", they will not make any money off of online gaming. Offline is where the dough is at. Sure, online flying increases the appeal for some (many?) players, but I doubt the must-fly-online-or-die crowd is in the majority here.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

My PF movies:Aluminum Eagle (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Aluminum_Eagle/OneVisionLg.zip), Fire and Rain (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Fire_and_Rain/Fire_and_Rain.zip) Snowbirds (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Snowbirds/Snowbirds.zip) and Crew 22 (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Crew_22/Crew22.zip)

http://home.grics.net/jrink/signature.jpg

Rudeljaeger
01-09-2007, 02:25 PM
I dont get it why so many people complain about "third party aircrafts"...

Ok, imagine I model a kind of X-Wing for SoW, then nobody will fly it! Uber-Planes will be ignored, and there are also the "official" Servers with only the original planes.

Popey109
01-09-2007, 03:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by csThor:
Secondly - and that is my major gripe with the planned system as well as the current system - I doubt developers will cooperate and release themed AddOn packs containing everything necessary for simulating a certain aspect - aircraft, ground objects, ships, campaigns etc. I have no use for individual aircraft released separately. I have no use for a Fw 190 D-9 or P-51D-20 or Spitfire XIV when the basic game is still at the BoB stage! Given the limited size of maps I doubt there will be such themed packs whereas potentially interesting areas (Med, East etc) are reserved for Maddox Games. So this 3rd Party stuff is basically just for online DF servers - and this means fragmentation of the player base (into "modders" and "purists"). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would not be surprised at all if the first 3rd party planes released would allow '41, '42, '43 and early '44 Channel fights. All you'd need would be a few marks of Spitfire, Bf-109F and Gs, FW-190As, P-38s, -47s, and -51s. Throw in a few light/medium bombers and you'd virtually have a complete expansion.

The 'groundwork' so to speak (maps, ground objects, etc.) would already be in place from BoB.

<span class="ev_code_yellow">I think too many people are overstating the importance of online flying.</span>
As stated above, until and unless MG starts "pay-to-play", they will not make any money off of online gaming. Offline is where the dough is at. Sure, online flying increases the appeal for some (many?) players, but I doubt the must-fly-online-or-die crowd is in the majority here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

B17... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif 128 players http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

AKA_TAGERT
01-09-2007, 03:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I'm surprised *you* are not seeing how 1C/Oleg's interest in supporting his sim is completley different from Microsoft abandoning its combat flight sims. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
What I said has nothing to do with a willingness or non-willingness to support a sim.

My point is simple..

If 3rd party add-ons with thier own FM and DM settings are allowed to be used online it will kill the sim.

The CFS series proved that several times.

The two main reasons are

1) The online community is not big enough to support 25 different servers with 25 versions of a P51 flying around.

2) The idea that someone can tweak the FM or DM will give some validity to the smacktards that claime someone is cheating.. Even if there is no way to use an un-approved 3rd party add-on the idea of someone *maybe* being able to tweak things will be there and kill the sim.

On that note take IL2 today.. 99% of what people call cheating has nothing to do with cheating and more to do with thier lack of skills. Heck the print screen bug has been fixxed since version 2.0 yet there are still smacktards that accused people of using print screen to induce warps to cheat!! Imagine how bad it would be if some smacktard saw something they could not explain.. It could be thier cr@p ISP or that they just suck but it wont stop them from accusing someone of cheating. Problem is there are alot of smacktards and a few rumors like that get floating around and the sim will die.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
CFSn "cheating" may have killed the CFSn Online play only, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not may, did. The sad part is most were not cheating.. but just the idea of it was enough to kill it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
but never killed Offline play, which is the only play that matters in a business sense, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
1995 business sense, but not 2007 business sense. Most if not all new games have to have online capabilitys to even be sold. MSFX is different.. in that it actually is more than a game and is used for general flight training. And by general flight training I don't mean flying.. I mean all the other stuff that goes along with flying! Navigation, talking to the tower, setting radio channels, etc. Stuff that most combat flight sims dont bother with because that is not the focus of a combat flight sim. You will need those extra PC resorces to simulate bullets flying through the air or AI that is trying to out smart you. Someday in the future we will have a combat flight sim that is as detailed as MSFX but for now we will have to be content with good combat and the things needed to simulated good combat.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
unless the sim is Pay-To-Play. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
A whole different story

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I think Oleg is figuring this out. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif Aussom! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not because he needs offline to sell! Only because the ability to add your own offline will sell more!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

major_setback
01-09-2007, 03:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Oleg needs to open up the platform to external development to boost popularity, or risk going down, because this (IL-2) community, such as it is, may not be enough to support a project of such complexity. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/B17sig11LowResPlane2.jpg (http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Editthisnov06a003k1800xLaterimprove.jpg)

Gibbage1
01-09-2007, 04:26 PM
Your so short sighted Tag. This is why.

Yes, the current community cant support 25 differant servers, but an expanded community will. 3rd party additions will expend the community. How much community do you think only 4 flyables in 1 theatre of war will attract? Not everyone is interested in BoB.

There WONT be 25 differant P-51's since it takes too much to make 1. There will be 1 P-51 that will be accepted by the community. Since it will be accepted by the community, it will in most of everyone's collection. If not, they can download it before joining the server. For instance you want to fly on Warclouds. Warclouds will have a list of aircraft in the game, and or links to download them. Who would NOT install extra aircraft? The moment a free P-51 is released, it will be downloaded by the masses anyways.

Also think of it this way. Oleg cant be suid for something he did NOT make. Like a Grumman F8F or SBD http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif It would be a damn shame to not have those in the game. A little food for thought.

So calm down chicken little. Oleg is NOT MS.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

AKA_TAGERT
01-09-2007, 06:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Your so short sighted Tag. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I wish that was true.. I would love to be proven wrong.. but my statment is based on 15+ years of <span class="ev_code_yellow">ONLINE</span> flight sim experance.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
This is why. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
And this is why NOT.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Yes, the current community cant support 25 differant servers, but an expanded community will. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
If expanded.. Folks like you have been saying that for 15 years now. Yet out of all the online gaming going on right now the flight sim numbers are the smallest! Same is true of the sales! As you pointed out, all the work that is going to go into the future 3D modeling is going to take alot of work! A team even! Thus due to the small comunity there may be some that never even take up the challenge in that they wont be able to recoop the cost let alone a profit! Or is this the part where you tell us all that you are now retired and drive an itilan sports car from your MS P38 addon? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
3rd party additions will expend the community. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Sometimes.. depends how they are handled. Take OFP for example.. tons upon tons of 3rd party addons.. but they were managed so poorly with no control what so ever that they actully became a negative not a positive.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
How much community do you think only 4 flyables in 1 theatre of war will attract? Not everyone is interested in BoB. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I am not here to argue Oleg's choice on producing BoB with limited aircraft count.. That is an entirly different subject. Personally I think BoB was a teriable idea! Been done to death and done recently!

As for my point, it is simple, allow 3rd party addons, that can be used ONLINE, with no central point of control over the FM or DM and the sim will die!

Well die is a strong term.. Take EAW for example.. IMHO a DEAD sim.. but there are still people playing it.. So sure there will be some playing it.. So instead of saying DIE I should say this.. It will not be as popular or live as long as IL2 has.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
There WONT be 25 differant P-51's since it takes too much to make 1. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Maybe maybe not. It all depends on how open things are. But based on CFS experance you would be wrong!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
There will be 1 P-51 that will be accepted by the community. Since it will be accepted by the community, it will in most of everyone's collection. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
LOL! Do you really belive that?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
If not, they can download it before joining the server. For instance you want to fly on Warclouds. Warclouds will have a list of aircraft in the game, and or links to download them. Who would NOT install extra aircraft? The moment a free P-51 is released, it will be downloaded by the masses anyways. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Sounds great on paper.. but it never seems to work out as one plans

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Also think of it this way. Oleg cant be suid for something he did NOT make. Like a Grumman F8F or SBD http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif It would be a damn shame to not have those in the game. A little food for thought. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
He could be if he put his stamp of aproval on it, FM and DM wise, and that is what it would take to not kill the sim! A centeral aproved point for the FM and DM issues. Anything less than that would result in multi servers with multi version.. with death of the sim soon to follow

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
So calm down chicken little. Oleg is NOT MS. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not upset at all Nancy! Just telling you what I have seen over the past 15+ years in <span class="ev_code_yellow">ONLINE</span> flight simming. I hope I am wrong.. but your not the first one to say what you said.. There are plenty of wishful thinkers like your self that have proved otherwise. Long story short.. no one can predict the future.. but based on the recnet past.. You be wrong! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

major_setback
01-09-2007, 06:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">How much community do you think only 4 flyables in 1 theatre of war will attract? Not everyone is interested in BoB. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A story: A few months back I asked about Shockwave's Battle of Britain at a game shop. The young (spotty) assistant had never even heard of the Battle of Britain! It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/B17sig11LowResPlane2.jpg (http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Editthisnov06a003k1800xLaterimprove.jpg)

ElAurens
01-09-2007, 06:57 PM
We are dinosaurs Setback. No matter how the sim ends up, it will still just be a small group of us who care about it.

History is dead.

So sad.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

_____________________________

http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/554/elskiubikb4.jpg

"To explain the lure of speed you would have to explain human nature" - T.E. Lawrence

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 07:47 PM
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">LEXX::<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">but never killed Offline play, which is the only play that matters in a business sense, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
1995 business sense, but not 2007 business sense. Most if not all new games have to have online capabilitys to even be sold. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nope. Not if 90% of the paying customers are playing Offline only, although this is a Pink Elephant that you wish to avoid discussing with the community. You are talking the failed 2000 - 2006 "business sense" which was not sense but a rather presumptous fad where the sim developers hoped Free Online Play could save their bacon, allowing them to avoid developing an immersive air war simulation for the customers.

Nope. Online cheating never killed CFS2 or CFS3, as the majority of customers are, and were, Offline players. And, the product is still being sold on the shelves, although much of that is due to Microsoft's artificially heavy presence on the game store shelves.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

AKA_TAGERT
01-09-2007, 07:54 PM
if and yes cheating killed CFS<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 07:58 PM
Nope. Online cheating never killed CFS, but it may have killed the tiny and irrelevant Online "free" gameplay in CFS.

What killed CFSn as a potential quality product was lack of developer support.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

UberDemon
01-09-2007, 08:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Nope. Online cheating never killed CFS, but it may have killed the tiny and irrelevant Online "free" gameplay in CFS.

What killed CFSn as a potential quality product was lack of developer support. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, I agree... and I bought all CFSs and a few addons.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Best Regards,
Demon/UberDemon
Get UQMG (UberQuick Mission Generator for PF/FB) for Free at www.uberdemon.com (http://www.uberdemon.com)

karost
01-09-2007, 09:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Nope. Online cheating never killed CFS, but it may have killed the tiny and irrelevant Online "free" gameplay in CFS.

What killed CFSn as a potential quality product was lack of developer support. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I agree too
Online cheating has a solution ... just walk away from a guy and let him stay along.

but quality of product and support are major important.

S!

AKA_TAGERT
01-09-2007, 09:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Nope. Online cheating never killed CFS, but it may have killed the tiny and irrelevant Online "free" gameplay in CFS.

What killed CFSn as a potential quality product was lack of developer support. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>No, that just made it painless to quit it once the cheating started<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

csThor
01-09-2007, 09:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">There WONT be 25 differant P-51's since it takes too much to make 1. There will be 1 P-51 that will be accepted by the community. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gib - in all honesty. If you really believe that you're more than ripe for a long vacation on some far-away tropical island. Especially the P-51 is a perfect examply why that "community policing" won't work. Keywords here are: myth, reputation.

My point was made and I don't see this debate getting any further. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

______________________________
Ab heute heissen wir Meier!

http://home.arcor.de/csthor/bilder/ubi_sig.jpg

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 10:11 PM
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> LEXX:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Nope. Online cheating never killed CFS, but it may have killed the tiny and irrelevant Online "free" gameplay in CFS.

What killed CFSn as a potential quality product was lack of developer support. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, that just made it painless to quit it once the cheating started </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
So, you had that Cheated feeling eh?

The combat flight sim community is moving beyond the dictations of a tiny number of Online Microsoft gamers who still feel they are being Cheated. The combat flight sim community has spoken, and is taking back combat flight sims. Good job Team, and Aggy/Gibbage/Uberdemon/etc...
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 10:46 PM
On the other hand, if we assume Oleg is thinking that opening aircraft to fully independent aircraft modelling is for potential business success reasons, then restricting this to purely Offline play may be sufficient, as the open modded Online servers would surely not be Pay-To-Play. Restricting aircraft modding to Offline play would be sufficient for me. Although it could prove popular for many Online players, the Microsoft Cheated players excepted of course.

I think, what could happen, purely in theory of course, is the Oleg Approved servers may be Pay-To-Play from the Publisher. Expect much whining and pulling of teeth from a few here if this pure guess is correct. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

And another thing...the open modded aircraft will probably be seperate 3D models and flight/damage/weapon models.

Assume Gibbage makes his war winning P-51 Mustang with matching flight model. The community could tweak the flight model even though they don't have 3dMAX modelling software for the aircraft model. Basically, Gibbage's P-51 external model (with a cockpit model made by somebody) could be seen with many different flight models. This could throw a wrench into the concept...or maybe not. StrikeFighters has this system. Download a model, and you can easily change just the flight model text file. We don't know how Oleg's FM will work if its open to the community. Perhaps the "open" flight model will be not as featured as Oleg's own flight models. I could go with this. Honestly, Oleg has proven willing and able to make enough aircraft to satisfy just about everybody, so even for Offline play there is not too much reason for opening the aircraft for modding. Full size map modding, on the other hand, is another story.

Also...there will be nothing stopping lesser modellers from making "inferior" 3D models for Offline play and the "open mod" servers. That's what I would do if I got into aircraft modelling with 3D MAX. I have always said that the fidelity of FB/PF aircraft and cockpit models far exceed the fidelity of the terrain modelling and gameplay and air war simulation content in this sim.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

DDastardlySID
01-09-2007, 11:15 PM
My 2c:

1. Many of the best looking aircraft in IL2 were created by 3rd party modellers (in fact, let's be honest here, often the 3rd party models make some of the 1st party stuff look pretty shabby in comparison).

2. The fact that modellers will be able to make AND FLY any plane they want (at least offline or on their own server) without being reliant on Oleg's team to approve them and incorporate them into the sim (several months after the model's finished, if at all), will lead to the creation of many many more 3rd party aircraft than we saw in IL2. Some of these will be dreadful and nobody will fly them more than once. Some will be better than anything we've seen in IL2, but in order to reach that kind of standard a huge investment of time and effort will be required from the modeller. In the latter case it is in the interest of the modeller to make the FM as accurate as possible as there's not much point in spending months making a beautiful model (and all its various LOD/damaged variants) if no server other than the modeller's own is willing to use it because the FM is ridiculous.

3. Any 3rd party plane which is incorporated officially into the sim will have its FM thoroughly checked out (and probably edited/redone) by Oleg's team anyway.

4. More available planes and content = more buyers of the sim (and players on servers, compensating for any "community fragmentation") = more money for Oleg = more official 1st party planes = everyone's a winner. And maybe if SOW sells plenty of copies as a result, UBI might even get off their backsides and spend more than half an hour per year actually promoting the game, leading to even more sales.



As for what the method for uploading and downloading new planes might be like, imagine the following:

A. Oleg publishes full requirements to have 3rd party planes work in the game engine. These would include stuff like poly limits for the various types of plane - fighters/bombers etc. If your plane exceeds these limits it shouldn't display at all in the engine (thereby avoiding the problem you sometimes see in some 3rd party FS planes which are so poorly optimised that they bring FPS grinding to a halt). Also, all the files used by each plane would be contained within a single folder per plane (rather than spread all over the place as in FS).

B. Once a modeller has put all the appropriate files in a folder and fired up the sim they could then take their plane for a test flight. When they're happy with it (probably after much further tweaking) they could select an "Upload" option from the in-game menu, browse to their plane's folder and hit "Go". The model would then be uploaded to a central 3rd party content server (plus mirrors) along with all the necessary files and would be automatically labelled with the type of plane, the author's name and a version number.

C. When someone else starts up the sim they could select a "download" menu option and browse through any planes which have been uploaded by others, sorting by author, date, type etc. Perhaps you could even set up some kind of option to automatically download any planes by an author whose past work you liked. A rating system would also be a good idea here and if it's handled within the game itself rather than on a website there wouldn't be any problems with ballot box stuffing by the modeller as it would be simple to restrict each player to one vote per plane (by CD key). As well as alerting users to which planes might be worth downloading, the ratings could also serve to automatically let Oleg know what 3rd party content is likely to be worthy of official inclusion in the game.

D. When using the in-game MP server browser you'd be presented with a list of the planes the admin permits on each server, along with their author and rating if they include 3rd party ones. If you see a plane on the list with a low rating then don't bother connecting to the server. If you want to connect but don't yet have all the listed planes then any you are missing would automatically be downloaded when you click on the server. (The downloading would be from the central 3rd party content server, not the game server so no lag would be induced for other players).


N.B. All of the above is just what I could come up with having spent 10 minutes thinking about it - Oleg has almost a year to perfect the 3rd party content adding system so I imagine he'll be able to come up with something far better. The key thing to remember is that if you're one of those people who thinks 3rd party modellers are all in league with Satan then don't worry - you'll never have to download or play against anything other than Oleg approved planes if you don't want to. Personally I'll be having too much fun flying Gibbage's new floatplane to care http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Cheers,
DD<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

==============================

www.mikesteven.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk (http://www.mikesteven.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk)

==============================

LEXX_Luthor
01-09-2007, 11:24 PM
Thanks DDastardlySID.

Very good poast, and a refreshing change from much of the insulting non-sense slogans we see poasted here.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

I looked at your site. The trees you made for Urban Terror. Try some tall Siberian style pine trees. Very few modellers make tall pine trees, not even Oleg Maddox for the Eastern Front. Strange but true. For some reason, the industry standard round green ball dominates computer games, even Eastern Front flight sims. A collection of tall pine trees is very surreal looking.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

DDastardlySID
01-09-2007, 11:41 PM
Thanks m8, I did actually make 20 or so other tree types for a jungle map I was working on but lost the lot when my hard drive kicked the bucket http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif. There was also an Urban Terror map called ut_siberia which was a lot of fun and had plenty of tall, snow-covered pines.
DD<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

==============================

www.mikesteven.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk (http://www.mikesteven.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk)

==============================

Henry_Shrapnel
01-10-2007, 12:09 AM
As someone who has been following what are called "Combat flight Sims" since the days of cfs1 I would have to disagree with most of the post in here going against third party developers. In the first place what killed CFS 2 was the lack of a patch to allow things like online bombing and torpedo attacks and I don't see that it had much to do with third party add ons since most game servers didn't allow them anyway. What killed CFS 3 was the bad user interface for online play and the fact that the servers simply did not allow enough players to join the game. This had little or nothing to do with third party add ons being allowed. I would also point out that no game is going to be any better than the quality of the people playing the game and a disruptive player can figure out a way to ruin any game.
As for The Microsoft?s so called "combat sims" in my opinion the people who kept emphasizing "stock only" seemed to overlook the fact that the Japanese planes nearly all had modded guns or ammo designed to make the overall aircraft more able to win in a dogfight so when many of the vertual squads started using a third party program to test if everyone was using "stock only aircraft" they were actually making sure the aircraft were cheat aircraft.
Having an overall dictator in an ubisoft game will probably also only insure that the aircraft or guns are wrong. I was told that the reason third party scenery was not allowed in PF was that "third party developers don't do a good enough job" in one of these forums. I then looked at the PF map of Oahu and found the entire "Diamond Head" volcano missing. It's Funny but when I downloaded Hawaii scenery for cfs2 none of the versions I installed were missing entire volcanoes. When I went online to play this PF game I found that nearly every server was being ruined by either unrealistic settings or non historical plane sets pitting late period Japanese planes against early war Allied planes.
The mob mentality seems to win out in the Hyper Lobby in that the worst servers will be the most popular.
By disallowing third party add ons to scenery, guns and aircraft the effect won't be to divide the community because the community is already divided and it's probably going to stay that way no matter what.
If I join an online virtual squad or gaming group I'm only going to care if the players in that group are happy with the settings and so on and if someone else who doesn't fit in to the group has a problem with that I'm not going to care too much.
On another point just because one plane on a server far outperforms another it does not always mean the game play will be unbalanced. For example one can have a game with twice as many mediocre aircraft going against the better aircraft or you may simply have the better pilots in the mediocre planes play against the rookies in the higher performing aircraft and still end up with a well balanced game.
My main point is that disallowing third party add ons mainly has the effect of causing the people who want them to not play the game at all. If you subtract the people like myself from the server pool you will simlpy have fewer people playing rather than have seperate groups playing. How do you devide a group if the people are are no longer there to devide?

Xiolablu3
01-10-2007, 01:07 AM
GUys - Online is the future, although offline may be prevalant at the moment, the percentage of players playing the game online will increase and increase.

As soon as fast ADSL is as common as the telephone, people will no longer want to play against dumb bots when they can play online.

In my experience, once people give online a try in any game with a very good online mode, they rarely look back to offline play.

Toatally online games have only become very popular in the last couple of years with WOW, CS, BF2 etc, yet the numbers of players are going up and up.


Anyway - I guess we are just all a bit worried that we will lose such a great thing that IL2 has become. Looking at this thread, I think there are enough of us here who would only want to fly the official planes/flight model anyway, so thats encouraging for me. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"I despise what you say; I will defend to the death your right to say it."
-Voltaire

WOLFMondo
01-10-2007, 02:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:

Even if there is an Oleg agreed upon set of 3rd party addons, allowing anyone to fly *thier* un-aproved 3rd party addon online will kill the sim. So, the only way for the online sim to live as long as IL2 has is to NOT ALLOW any 3rd party addones to be flown online until they have recived the seal of aproval by someone like Oleg. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't see that happening. I see, or reckon that most if not all people will play with the 1C official released material online (including 3rd party approved models) and some of the custom user made stuff offline or within squad co-ops. Even then competitions will most likely only go with official releases. At least I hope that will be the case.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Cheers!!

mrsiCkstar
01-10-2007, 02:21 AM
all I can say is I really do hope you pro 3rd party aircraft guys are right, I really do. There would be nothing cooler than to be able to get great add on planes for the sim. However the pessimist in me remains and I just can't see it working the way you guys believe it will. It would be nice if there was this one united community where everybody worked together with selfless motives to better the sim and work toward the ultimate realism. But they have a word for that, and it's called utopia.

I guess once the sim is released and the first community add-ons start appearing we'll see how this thing will work.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.no.net/jonmarja/images/f4usig.jpg

major_setback
01-10-2007, 02:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
GUys - Online is the future, although offline may be prevalant at the moment, the percentage of players playing the game online will increase and increase.

As soon as fast ADSL is as common as the telephone, people will no longer want to play against dumb bots when they can play online.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oleg also said (I can't remember where) that we would also see more AI online. I personally can't wait for this - the best of both worlds. It might be like playing offline missions, but also coming across real pilots!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

LEXX_Luthor
01-10-2007, 02:42 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif

Xiolablu3:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">GUys - Online is the future
:
:
the numbers of players are going up and up.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
up and up like the stock market, real estate, instant credit, and printing press paper money.

.. .. invest in the Online Futures Market, where every player can be a winner. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

jarink
01-10-2007, 06:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DDastardlySID:
As for what the method for uploading and downloading new planes might be like, imagine the following: </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Interesting idea, though I don't see how payware could be incorporated into it. I think payware aircraft will happen, for all the reasons that Gibbage stated (the much greater time and effort needed to make the newer high-quality models). It could work, though, for "Oleg Maddox approved" 3rd party planes that get added to the official online planeset.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

My PF movies:Aluminum Eagle (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Aluminum_Eagle/OneVisionLg.zip), Fire and Rain (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Fire_and_Rain/Fire_and_Rain.zip) Snowbirds (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Snowbirds/Snowbirds.zip) and Crew 22 (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Crew_22/Crew22.zip)

http://home.grics.net/jrink/signature.jpg

AKA_TAGERT
01-10-2007, 07:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
So, you had that Cheated feeling eh? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
What gave you that impression? I would think that after me pointing all the cases of smacktards calling everything they can not explain a cheat that you would realise that I am well aware of what is and is not a cheat. Which folds nicely back into my main point! I never saw anyone cheating while playing CFS! But I heard hundreds of guys accusing people of cheating! The idea of someone other than the maker of the sim having the ability to modify aircraft feeds those types and results in the death of the sim.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
The combat flight sim community is moving beyond the dictations of a tiny number of Online Microsoft gamers who still feel they are being Cheated. The combat flight sim community has spoken, and is taking back combat flight sims. Good job Team, and Aggy/Gibbage/Uberdemon/etc...http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Funny.. they said the same thing 10+ years ago<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

AKA_TAGERT
01-10-2007, 07:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
I don't see that happening. I see, or reckon that most if not all people will play with the 1C official released material online (including 3rd party approved models) and some of the custom user made stuff offline or within squad co-ops. Even then competitions will most likely only go with official releases. At least I hope that will be the case. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Again, I hope I am wrong! I am simply stating the trend I have witnesses over the past 15+ years of ONLINE fligh simming. With that said, I find it comical that Gibbage in one breath points out how much harder the new 3D models are going to be to make.. ie it will take a team of people in that it is too much work for one man, and than in the next breath talk about how these addons will be downloaded for free when you log into the likes of Winds of War online. Maybe in a perfect world where everyone gets along and sings COOM-BY-YA 24:7.. but if there was such a world there would be no COMBAT to simulate in the first place! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

LEXX_Luthor
01-10-2007, 08:30 AM
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">What gave you that impression? I would think that after me pointing all the cases of smacktards calling everything they can not explain a cheat that you would realise that I am well aware of what is and is not a cheat. Which folds nicely back into my main point! I never saw anyone cheating while playing CFS! But I heard hundreds of guys accusing people of cheating! The idea of someone other than the maker of the sim having the ability to modify aircraft feeds those types and results in the death of the sim. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I got that impression because you are claiming the same thing the Cheat Victims claim -- "Cheating killed CFSn," which as we saw last page, never happened, as you and the Cheat victims are trying to pass off.

Yes, I have heard it said that the Microsoft Online CFSn Cheating was overstated. And some still endlessly complain of cheating today here, with closed aircraft modelling. Nothing new under the FB sun.

----

TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I find it comical that Gibbage in one breath points out how much harder the new 3D models are going to be to make.. ie it will take a team of people in that it is too much work for one man, and than in the next breath talk about how these addons will be downloaded for free when you log into the likes of Winds of War online. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
If what Oleg says is true, the non-Oleg Approved aircraft models won't have to be so Gibbage-Oleg-Perfect, and can be made with the same "quality" of early FB/PF models -- which still far exceed the fidelity of the terrain, FB/PF gameplay, and air war simulation content of this sim even today. I have always said the FB/PF aircraft models artificially far exceed the fidelity and quality of gameplay and air war simulation content. If Oleg's BoB air war simulation does not advance significantly, the BoB Oleg-Perfect Models, aircraft, London buses, trains, etc... will do nothing to maintain customer interest beyond an irrelevant tiny number of polygon screenshot simmers. Without future advances in air war simulation, other types of computer games can offer potential combat flight sim customers just as many, or more, Perfect Polygons, without the need for the "hardcore" flight sim learning curve.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

WOLFMondo
01-10-2007, 08:58 AM
I disagree. SoW is venturing into territory other games have been doing for years i.e. mods.

Look at BF1942, a very heavily modded game but no mod has ever been as popular as BF1942 vanilla itself. Even the expansion packs aren't played that much any more.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Cheers!!

AKA_TAGERT
01-10-2007, 09:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I got that impression because you are claiming the same thing the Cheat Victims claim -- "Cheating killed CFSn," </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Ah, ok so instead of paying att to what I said you assumed.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
which as we saw last page, never happened, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Two or three people agreeing with each other here in this forum really does not have any affect on the real world or reality.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
as you and the Cheat victims are trying to pass off. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes you have convened yourself that it was due to the lack of patches. And in a way your right, in that they never patched it to a point that people could not cheat. Thus back to my square one, cheating killed the sim.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Yes, I have heard it said that the Microsoft Online CFSn Cheating was overstated. And some still endlessly complain of cheating today here, with closed aircraft modelling. Nothing new under the FB sun. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
The NEW thing is it was easy to cheat on CFS and nearly imposable to cheat with IL2, thus the rumors are not taken as seriously here.. thank god! But make IL2 more CFS like by enabling the additions of 3rd party add-ons online and the sim will die like CFS did. Granted it probably take longer, but it wont have the life span that IL2 has had.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
If what Oleg says is true, the non-Oleg Approved aircraft models won't have to be so Gibbage-Oleg-Perfect, and can be made with the same "quality" of early FB/PF models -- which still far exceed the fidelity of the terrain, FB/PF gameplay, and air war simulation content of this sim even today. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nothing like a low quality addon both visually and FM/DM wise to put people off and kill the sim

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I have always said the FB/PF aircraft models artificially far exceed the fidelity and quality of gameplay and air war simulation content. If Oleg's BoB air war simulation does not advance significantly, the BoB Oleg-Perfect Models, aircraft, London buses, trains, etc... will do nothing to maintain customer interest beyond an irrelevant tiny number of polygon screenshot simmers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
True some live for eye candy others don?t, but what does that have to do with what we are talking about?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Without future advances in air war simulation, other types of computer games can offer potential combat flight sim customers just as many, or more, Perfect Polygons, without the need for the "hardcore" flight sim learning curve. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Quake flight sims have been around since day one, but what does that have to do with what we are talking about?

In summary you want to belive that cheating had nothing to do with the demise of CFS.. Be my guest! I wont lose any sleep over it! But based on my experience I don?t agree with your assessment. I will say this, cheating wasn?t the only reaons, just one of the main reasons it not popular! Which results in a chicken or the egg scenario. Did MS stop supporting it because nobody was interested in it or any addons due to the cheating. Or did the lack of support to provide a patch that stop the cheating cause people to lose interest.

Either way cheating factored into it IMHO.

But you go ahead and belive that cheating had nothing to do with it! We can talk again in 10 years to see who was right and who was wrong! For all our sake, I hope I am wrong, but based on the past 15 years of ONLINE flight simming I doubt it! Especially in light of the FACT that online is he future of all games! And with that said, nothing will kill a game faster than the idea of cheating going on.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

LEXX_Luthor
01-10-2007, 10:03 AM
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I will say this, cheating wasn?t the only reaons, just one of the main reasons it not popular! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are slowly "getting it" my son.

TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">but based on the past 15 years of ONLINE flight simming I doubt it! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's where you are stumbling. The claims of CFSn "killed" by cheating, or mere accusations of cheating in your case, applies only to the irrelevant tiny CFSn Online gaming world, and are irrelevant to combat flight sims in general, unless the sims are Pay-To-Play.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

SeaFireLIV
01-10-2007, 10:30 AM
I only read the first page as 10+ is too much, but all I gotta say is I don`t like it. It`s nightmarish enough with other games trying to find the right Mod that`s actually accurate to reality. Another one is the oh so misleading `fixed` aircraft which turn out not fixed, but someone`s `view` of fixed. I prefered it Oleg`s way because one-man in charge stops chaos and confusion, but the `freedom` of everyone doing their own thing ONLINE spells chaos. I just hope the official `Oleg Approved` servers don`t suddenly die leaving only the arcade modded servers, cos I won`t be there.

This is why Offline is still important and always will be as I keep saying.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/LIVeyes.jpg
"If it burns, it is confirmed."

Ivan Lukich Zvyagin

LEXX_Luthor
01-10-2007, 10:46 AM
That's why you will have the Oleg Certificates, backed by the full faith and credit of 1C\Maddox Games.

This is to cool, in the RAS Oleg interview poasted in Oleg's Recovery Room...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
What is new in BoB;SoW?
A: It is a whole new step and whole new level of standards. In essence it will be '11-2 2'. It will be much more 'open' than 11-2 and we will give people the ability to add their own aircraft, maps and objects. But for online flying and multiplayer competitions, there will be a core <span class="ev_code_yellow">'Maddox certificated'</span> set of aircraft to avoid cheating....
~&gt; http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/6941067025

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oleg Certificates http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d178/Lexx_Luthor/Smileys/Crissy-ylflower.gif That surely should be redeemable in gold or silver to the Online player on demand.

Old Ussian silver certificates ~&gt; http://www.ronscurrency.com/rcolssc.htm<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Agamemnon22
01-10-2007, 10:52 AM
When PF came out, I remember reading somewhere that in the first month or something, there were 70,000 copies bought worldwide (which isn't that much either). Oleg also said there were about as many pirated copies. Someone previously said we have ~2,000 pilots on Hyperlobby, which seems about right to me, but I haven't counted them all. If anyone can explain how this proportion is likely to drastically change at some point soon, the floor is yours.

So.. online is nice, but its a really small segment of an already small niche market.
Also, noone buys this game to go online (unlike Battlefield for example), they buy it to fly around offline first, and some venture out into the real world afterwards. And we have already established, I believe, that 3rd party modding can only improve offline, yes?

True, some special considerations may be required for online, the first step of which -- Oleg-regulated servers -- have already been explained ad nauseum. But the fact remains, the game's popularity is generated largely through attracting offline flyers.

I'm also going to throw in this: I'm working on a new project for BoB.. I'm not going to say what it is just yet, everything is quite unofficial right now, but I would really like a chance to finish it. I don't see Maddox taking on a similar project for a long long while, if ever -- a situation similar to the Pe-2. The point being, other legitimate modders are probably thinking along the same lines. If 3rd party modding is blocked completely, these project simply won't happen.

Do you want to give up on those ideas because of the risk (risk! uncertainty!) of some online hoohaa that MG will work through with us?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------------------------
http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/agamemnon22/Pe2sig.jpg

AKA_TAGERT
01-10-2007, 11:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I will say this, cheating wasn?t the only reaons, just one of the main reasons it not popular! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are slowly "getting it" my son. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not ?getting? got/had it from the start. In the hopes of helping you get it I simply stated the obvious.. That there was more than one reason for the death of CFS. Which opened up the door for you to agree with me that ?cheating? was a big part of it, in that you had no objection to me pointing out that cheating was the ?main? reason for not being popular and thus dying out. And they said you can not lead a horse to water and make him drink it! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
That's where you are stumbling. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hardly!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
The claims of CFSn "killed" by cheating, or mere accusations of cheating in your case, applies only to the irrelevant tiny CFSn Online gaming world, and are irrelevant to combat flight sims in general, unless the sims are Pay-To-Play. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not true! Which is not to be confused with saying there is no one playing it offline, or that the offline group is smaller or bigger than the online crowd! Simply that the online crowd is more active and vocal (ie online) and are the ones that the sim makers ?hear? from. The offlie crowd also tend to play "it" once an than move on to something else, espically the games with the static campaign generators. Where as if you like something enough, you will come online to find out more about it. At which point you will find the online play aspects.. at which point you will be hooked! In that the greatest challenge is a real person at the stick! These types tend to be the hard core FLIGHT simmer/gammer types! Alot of people are not so hard core, they buy all types of games. They play a few missions and move onto somthing else. Which is why the inital sales are usally much larger than the core of people you will see online playing. But it is this group of people plaing online that will keep a sim alive!

15+ years ago the only option was offline. At that time the topics on the use-net and forums like CompuServe?s FSFORUM focused more on the dynamic campaign generator vs. static campaign generator debates. As the first online games started to show up the topic of offline campaign generators fell to the way side. Online play is the big driver these days.. Some games don?t even bother with campaign generation anymore and focus on real time play where the server decides he direction of the game. That is the way it is now and the game companies know it. Sure there are still offline capabilities, but those are just there to make some money off of he few shut ins that still don?t play online. Long story short the tide your riding has changed, you just have not realized it yet, but the game companies have. Simply put, in the future less and less resources will be put into offline (campaign generators) play and devote to online play.

And when it comes to online play, nothing.. and I mean nothing will kill a sim faster than the idea of cheating going on!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

ElAurens
01-10-2007, 11:11 AM
I stopped playing CFS 2 after 2 weeks because of all the hacked aircraft I ran into online.

I was such a n00b then.

Oh and I still want to know who apointed Lexx as the mouth of the "flight sim community"?

No one asked me to vote on it.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/photos/ELsKi.jpg

"To explain the lure of speed you would have to explain human nature" - T.E. Lawrence

LEXX_Luthor
01-10-2007, 11:43 AM
(1) Lexx is but one humble member of the combat flight sim community.

(2) Hostile snotty behaving Online computer gamers who attack and insult members of the combat flight sim community at this webboard, and accuse these members of "wanting to cheat," simply because these members desire more immersive air war simulation, generally Offline but also Online, are not members of the combat flight sim community.

The combat flight sim community has spoken. Thanks Aggy, Gibbage, Uberdemon, faustnik, etc..., and of course, Oleg.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Agamemnon22
01-10-2007, 11:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:

Not true! Which is not to be confused with saying there is no one playing it offline, or that the offline group is smaller or bigger than the online crowd! Simply that the online crowd is more active and vocal (ie online) and are the ones that the sim makers ?hear? from. The offlie crowd also tend to play "it" once an than move on to something else, espically the games with the static campaign generators. Where as if you like something enough, you will come online to find out more about it. At which point you will find the online play aspects.. at which point you will be hooked! In that the greatest challenge is a real person at the stick! These types tend to be the hard core FLIGHT simmer/gammer types! Alot of people are not so hard core, they buy all types of games. They play a few missions and move onto somthing else. Which is why the inital sales are usally much larger than the core of people you will see online playing. But it is this group of people plaing online that will keep a sim alive!

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your perspective is skewed precisely because you have only been playing online for 15 years. The offline segment is far from the "try-it-and-leave-it" crowd you imagine. To you the sim is alive if its played online. This is simply not reality.

The point I *think* you're trying to make is that only Oleg should develop media for SoW. As previously pointed out, and still unrefuted, this will result in a very narrow planeset, only early war, only british and german (ok and that Sukhoi sports plane). A little limiting isn't it? Do you think this entire community will happily drop their Zeros, Mig-3s, P-40's, etc, and settle for 109E's, Spit I's, Hurri's, and He-111's? If you do, you're living on Narnia. If the new platform is not expanded, and quickly, vast sections of what we have here now will migrate to TagertWare or whatever else.

There are no choices, its 3rd party modding or bust. The technical problems associated with possible cheating (please read the previous 10 pages to understand why this is not an issue that is likely to arise) will be handled as they arise.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------------------------
http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/agamemnon22/Pe2sig.jpg

LEXX_Luthor
01-10-2007, 11:55 AM
Agamemnon22:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If the new platform is not expanded, and quickly, vast sections of what we have here now will migrate to TagertWare or whatever else. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Its possible, however unlikely, that TargetWare will not be up and running full blast until long after several of the 'beyond' theaters of Oleg's BoB And Beyond is releaced.

Oleg will be expanding BoB And Beyond to other theaters (the "beyond" part). Granted, Oleg may not have the desire or resoureces to make all planes flyable, but the community may be willing to do so at varying levels of detail. An independent 3rd Party flyable He-115 or He-177 for example, that won't have to be crippled by Oleg's bizzare and artificial notion of modelling in Perfect Detail all crew positions as playble, which is a tragic waste of development resources for a computer game.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Gibbage1
01-10-2007, 12:01 PM
To be honest, I dont know how Oleg will handle pay 3rd party add-on's. Its a bit of a sticky subject. Im sure the company I work for will want to do some pay add-on's for BoB, but unless the sales figures are as good as FS (In the millions of copy's, not tens of thousands) there wont be enough profit too justify a pay product. My 1st project in SoW will be the PBY, and it will be free. At least the PBY 5. Maybe a sales stratgy can be to release a single aircraft model for free, and sell a pack of sub-models. Say the PBY-5 is free so servers can have it, and if someone likes it and wants a few more models for there single player, they can buy a PBY pack with the PBY-5a, and 6a. Maybe that pack will have some Pacific islands and some Black Cat missions? Who knows. We can only speculate at the moment, and this is all hypothetical untill we know how Oleg will handle content. But one thing is for sure. If Oleg opens up too 3rd party modders, there will be a LOT more content for us then if he did not.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

LEXX_Luthor
01-10-2007, 12:18 PM
Gibbage:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">We can only speculate at the moment, and this is all hypothetical untill we know how Oleg will handle content. But one thing is for sure. If Oleg opens up too 3rd party modders, there will be a LOT more content for us then if he did not. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif Good point Gibbage. Beautifully well said.


TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Online play is the big driver these days.. Some games don?t even bother with campaign generation anymore and focus on real time play where the server decides he direction of the game. That is the way it is now and the game companies know it. Sure there are still offline capabilities, but those are just there to make some money off of he few shut ins that still don?t play online. Long story short the tide your riding has changed, you just have not realized it yet, but the game companies have. Simply put, in the future less and less resources will be put into offline (campaign generators) play and devote to online play. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Cycles. Pendulum swings. The tide is moving back. This "online driver" has failed for combat flight sims, at least for "free" Online play. We will be seeing a return to advancements in campaign generators, and a rebirth of the combat flight sim market in general, now that Microsoft has exited the combat flight sim market, for now at least. We see the popularity of Lowengrin's Offline dynamic campaign modding work among Oleg's customers, even given the enormous difficulties Lowengrin faces without proper 3rd Party campaign modding tools. And, if Aggy last page is correct, a successful and attractive sim focused on Offline play may attract more players to try Online. That, and the Offline campaign features are sorely needed for Online play -- Online War for example, which is a form of dynamic campaign.


However, we do understand your "feelings" about Online play, as you seem a rock solid old timer Online player, and that is your personal favorite form of gameplay. Its also Oleg's, but Oleg has a business to run in addition to his personal hobby. If I may suggest, you may be interested in looking at the TargetWare sim -- Pure online play, all the way, and you say this is the "future." Go for it!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

jarink
01-10-2007, 12:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
Simply that the online crowd is more active and vocal (ie online) and are the ones that the sim makers ?hear? from. The offlie crowd also tend to play "it" once an than move on to something else, espically the games with the static campaign generators. Where as if you like something enough, you will come online to find out more about it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've been playing this game for just over 2 years. I have never played it online. I doubt that I'm the only one here that can say that, either.
You're projecting.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
Online play is the big driver these days.. Some games don?t even bother with campaign generation anymore and focus on real time play where the server decides he direction of the game. That is the way it is now and the game companies know it. Sure there are still offline capabilities, but those are just there to make some money off of he few shut ins that still don?t play online. Long story short the tide your riding has changed, you just have not realized it yet, but the game companies have. Simply put, in the future less and less resources will be put into offline (campaign generators) play and devote to online play. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What you say here might be true for all the FPS's out there, but I don't think it holds as much water for the flight sim community.

I've dabbled with the Strike Fighters series a bit in the past year and I'd say that Combat Flight Sim proves just the opposite. Recently Third Wire released the Fourth in the game's series (First Eagles). Online play in SF has never been a big deal or even popular, yet it continues to do well.

It's been around since 2002!

Did I mention it fully supports 3rd party modelling? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I don't know the exact count for sure, but there are easily <span class="ev_code_yellow">over 500</span> 3rd-party planes available, including a few that are payware.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

My PF movies:Aluminum Eagle (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Aluminum_Eagle/OneVisionLg.zip), Fire and Rain (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Fire_and_Rain/Fire_and_Rain.zip) Snowbirds (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Snowbirds/Snowbirds.zip) and Crew 22 (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Crew_22/Crew22.zip)

http://home.grics.net/jrink/signature.jpg

AKA_TAGERT
01-10-2007, 02:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agamemnon22:
Your perspective is skewed precisely because you have only been playing online for 15 years. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Not true, not by a long shot! As most I started out playing OFFLINE. 15 years ago the ONLINE play was very limited and was only pay-to-play. On that note, 15 years ago it use to cost $12/hr to play Air warrior Online. As a hard core flight simmer that price was worth every dime! Problem was I could not afford to play it for hours on end, thus MOST of my time was spent playing OFFLINE flight sims, and at that time Dynamic/Static Campaign generators were as important if not MORE important than the flight molding! As a mater of fact, I was creating addons to flight sims before most of you knew what a PC was

http://www.gamers.org/pub/archives/cactus/fltsim/AOTP/1946ii.txt

Over that 15 years I have seen the trend of game makers shift from catering to the OFFLINE crowd and focus on the ONLINE crowd! On that note, I don?t think it takes a rocket scientist to SEE THAT TRED! At least I didn?t until now! The second thing I didn?t think needed explain, until now, is how cheating or even he hint of cheating can KILL A GAME!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agamemnon22:
The offline segment is far from the "try-it-and-leave-it" crowd you imagine. To you the sim is alive if its played online. This is simply not reality. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Wrong again!
That statement was with regards to all gamers! Not just flight sim owners! In the GAMER group there is a sub set of people who LIKE flight sims and and even smaller group that LOVE flight sims (aka Sim junkies, Hard Core Simmers). Thus it is not hard to understand why the SALES count of a flight sim are typically much larger than the number of people you run into online. Because many GAMERS buy flight sims, play it once or twice and move on.. The ones that LIKE flight sims will play it more often but no more than any other game.. The ones that LOVE flight sims sometimes don?t even have any other game installed on their PC! They are typically the kind of guys that use to build models of these planes and than run around the back yard goin Vrooom Vrooom Ack Ack Ack Ack! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agamemnon22:
The point I *think* you're trying to make is that only Oleg should develop media for SoW. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No! My point is only Oleg approved 3rd party add-ons should be allowed to be used ONLINE. I have no problem with 3rd party add-ons being used OFFLINE! But unless they have received some sort of approval from Oleg or someone/some group he designates it should not be allowed to be used online. Even if all partys agree to the add-on it should not be allowed to be used online until certified! It will just split the allready small comunity and open the door to the "idea" of cheating!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agamemnon22:
As previously pointed out, and still unrefuted, this will result in a very narrow planeset, only early war, only british and german (ok and that Sukhoi sports plane). A little limiting isn't it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
YES! Just like IL2 Version 1.0 was! But that kind of CONTROL allowed IL2 to live longer than any other flight sim to date.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agamemnon22:
Do you think this entire community will happily drop their Zeros, Mig-3s, P-40's, etc, and settle for 109E's, Spit I's, Hurri's, and He-111's? If you do, you're living on Narnia. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I really don?t care what some whining little smacktard says! In that I learned a long time ago, no mater what you do there will be someone that is not happy! So F them and do what you think is best! All I care about is that the game lives long enough to receive approved add-ons. Allowing un-approved 3rd party add-ons will kill the sim off just like it did CFS and other games. Allow me to bold the next statement, in that I find it comical that none of you and yours addressed it.

Take OFP for example.. I brought that up a few pages back and everyone avoided talking about that game.. Why? Because it proves my point! No control and the game will die off quick! Even though it has more 3rd party add-ons than any other game I have ever seen!

Maybe now I will get some kind of response.. but I doubt it! In that any attempt to address it will just prove my point. Not control of add-ons and cheating will result in a short life and limited number of players

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agamemnon22:
If the new platform is not expanded, and quickly, vast sections of what we have here now will migrate to TagertWare or whatever else. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Doubt that big time! The only real compation Oleg has is himself! His comption to beat is IL2 itself!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agamemnon22:
There are no choices, its 3rd party modding or bust. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not true! Oleg can make add-ons just like he did with IL2!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agamemnon22:
The technical problems associated with possible cheating (please read the previous 10 pages to understand why this is not an issue that is likely to arise) will be handled as they arise. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Funny.. they said the same thing about CFS2 6 years ago!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

jasonbirder
01-10-2007, 02:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But that kind of CONTROL allowed IL2 to live longer than any other flight sim to date. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cough...what about Falcon? Even in its Falcon 4.0 version alone its over 8 years old and still the benchmark other sims measure themselves against...

And the best thingthat ever happened to it was 3rd party modding...

BaronUnderpants
01-10-2007, 03:20 PM
Ok, we now established that online gaming infact is small and insegnifficant.

What i dont understand is why all u from the wast and expanding crowd of offline gamers feel a need to mess up ouer online game experiance with modds, doodas and what not...if all u need to be happy is to be able to modd your games to your harts content offline?

What, if anything has that got to do with us, the "Few" online. Several voices heard here seem to have no intrest in online gaming what so ever to begin with..so whats the problem?

All the money and buissnes lies in offline gaming, atleast thats whats been said here....so, why not just leave the online community as is since it wont have any economical bearing on the game itselfe?

FYI. I played IL2 first time years ago, fiddled with it abit, an then forgott about it. Started playing it a couple of years later...ONLY because i relized i could play it online with a fair amount of servers and plyers to choose from. Sniffed on CFS2 online before that, would u belive it, wich was a dissaster in terms of servers and player numbers.If IL2 would have been anything like CFS in terms of servers and such or if it was offline only...i would have stoped playing IL2 it about 2 years ago.

But seriously...would it be that difficoult to seperate the 2....offline and online?

B.

Gibbage1
01-10-2007, 03:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jasonbirder:
Cough...what about Falcon? Even in its Falcon 4.0 version alone its over 8 years old and still the benchmark other sims measure themselves against...

And the best thingthat ever happened to it was 3rd party modding... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Falcon 4 would of died 5 years ago if not for 3rd party add-ons. And you dont hear about rampant cheating there, do you? What about broken and fractured community? Nope. I dont fly F4, but the quality of the 3rd party content is top-notch and shows what a dedicated community can do. With us working on adding the aircraft, Oleg and his crew can work on more important stuff. Like bug fixes, features, and global fm tuning.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

SeaFireLIV
01-10-2007, 03:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:


Falcon 4 would of died 5 years ago if not for 3rd party add-ons. And you dont hear about rampant cheating there, do you? What about broken and fractured community? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Falcon 4 has a very mature community base due to the very nature of the sim. The sim is one of the most realistic and complex out. That tends to weed out all the potential kids who would make silly mods or whine an aircraft to death. IL2 is far less exclusive (meaning way less realistic or complex). With maturity freedom is good but freedom needs to be earned with maturity.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/LIVeyes.jpg
"If it burns, it is confirmed."

Ivan Lukich Zvyagin

carguy_
01-10-2007, 04:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BaronUnderpants:
Ok, we now established that online gaming infact is small and insegnifficant.

What i dont understand is why all u from the wast and expanding crowd of offline gamers feel a need to mess up ouer online game experiance with modds, doodas and what not...if all u need to be happy is to be able to modd your games to your harts content offline?

What, if anything has that got to do with us, the "Few" online. Several voices heard here seem to have no intrest in online gaming what so ever to begin with..so whats the problem?

All the money and buissnes lies in offline gaming, atleast thats whats been said here....so, why not just leave the online community as is since it wont have any economical bearing on the game itselfe?

FYI. I played IL2 first time years ago, fiddled with it abit, an then forgott about it. Started playing it a couple of years later...ONLY because i relized i could play it online with a fair amount of servers and plyers to choose from. Sniffed on CFS2 online before that, would u belive it, wich was a dissaster in terms of servers and player numbers.If IL2 would have been anything like CFS in terms of servers and such or if it was offline only...i would have stoped playing IL2 it about 2 years ago.

But seriously...would it be that difficoult to seperate the 2....offline and online?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly my point,do all you want offline but leave the core product to be played online exclusively.

After all,if offline is the thing keeping a sim alive,online play which gathers ~5% of players is still a side-feature of the game.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
Take OFP for example.. I brought that up a few pages back and everyone avoided talking about that game.. Why? Because it proves my point! No control and the game will die off quick! Even though it has more 3rd party add-ons than any other game I have ever seen! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ofcourse,none of them answered to my points either.Those people just want to mess up online play just for the hell of it it seems!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sigjzg23upgraded.jpg
Self-proclaimed dedicated Willywhiner since July 2002
: Badsight.:"increased manouverability for bf-109s was satire" :
Please bring back 3.01 dots!

LEXX_Luthor
01-10-2007, 04:01 PM
Good call SeaFire. You identify the problem as hostile Online computer gamers, and not the 3rd Party aircraft mods. Thanks.


BaronUnderpants:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But seriously...would it be that difficoult to seperate the 2....offline and online?

B. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
This can be arranged. Oleg said he will do just that, and we may assume the Oleg Certificates are part of this process. The Offline segment of the combat flight sim community has been asking for a seperated sim version from the crippled Online play version for ages, only to be attacked by Online "kid" gamers here crying the slogan Community Split -- see SeaFire about "online kids."

The combat flight sim community wellcomes seperated Offline and Online play versions of the sim. One version can have functional elevator trim in fully detailed flight models, the other version can have no elevator trim in disabled flight models, to prevent online cheating.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

jasonbirder
01-10-2007, 04:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Those people just want to mess up online play just for the hell of it it seems! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Surely its the reverse...Some Online players seem to object to Modding even if they choose only to use oficial products...
But no Offliners object to Onliners being able to choose not to utilise third party mods...

SeaFireLIV
01-10-2007, 04:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Good call SeaFire. You identify the problem as hostile Online computer gamers, and not the 3rd Party aircraft mods. Thanks.


</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My point is, I don`t believe there`s enough maturity in the IL2 community to pull it off. Or should I say enough MATURE people compared to the mob who don`t really care as long as their fave plane kills everything and flies to the moon and back in one second! How many Lerches will be created disguised as P51s or spitfires? If I thought it could work, I`d be all for it. Though for offline use I am not againts it, only where online community play comes in.

That`s why I`d rather keep it to one man. But perhaps it might work without becoming a quagmire...


p.s You do realise that the UBI forums are referred to as `Ubizoo` from outsiders, don`t you?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/LIVeyes.jpg
"If it burns, it is confirmed."

Ivan Lukich Zvyagin

LEXX_Luthor
01-10-2007, 04:19 PM
Ya SeaFire, I do see your point, but the Oleg Certificates will weed out these "online kids" from the servers that use only Oleg's aircraft, or Oleg's approved 3rd Party aircraft.

TAGERT seems to be trying to claim that the servers using non-certificated aircraft will cause accusations of cheating in the certificated servers. This is a false claim. There will be a community split just like today's community split between "full real" and "arcade" servers, like the community split between "dogfight," "co-op," and "online war" servers.

Listen to Aggy22 and Uberdemon. These people know what they are talking about...far more than I do. And Aggy (and Gibbage) are right about one thing -- the much larger potential content will create a far larger community that can much better weather any "splits" unlike today's server environment. rnzoli has poasted that online play has stagnated. If we continue the same system we have today, nothing changes and we will still be stagnated. I'm thinking that Oleg's allowing this aircraft modding can offer something different than the system we have today, which is just not working to grow online numbers as rnzoli has noted.

There will always be a large "immature" segment of the community, just like there is today. Let them have their fun in their own space, as it brings Oleg more revenue to further build his sim. We may assume that you fly the more "mature" servers today. We may equally assume that you will fly the more "mature" servers tommorow.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-10-2007, 04:32 PM
Basically, I trust Oleg when he says that his Oleg Certificate system will protect the servers wishing to use just Oleg's aircraft or the Oleg Certificated aircraft. As noted to Baronunderpants, Oleg is doing something to seperate the sim versions. Oleg started out making banking software, and his encryption is pretty good we hear. Yes? No? When Oleg says aircraft mod cheating won't happen in the certificated aircraft servers, I believe it. This is why I claim that TAGERT's claim is false.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

AKA_TAGERT
01-10-2007, 06:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Falcon 4 would of died 5 years ago if not for 3rd party add-ons. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
True.. "IF" you call 8 people online LIVING! (seven actully in that I counted as one just loggin in for the pic)

http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/STFU/falcon4.JPG

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
And you dont hear about rampant cheating there, do you? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Becaue I don't think you can use the word RAMPANT and EIGHT in the same sentance?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
What about broken and fractured community? Nope. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Becaues I don't think you can refer to EIGHT as a COMUMUNITY

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
I dont fly F4, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Join the club

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
but the quality of the 3rd party content is top-notch and shows what a dedicated community can do. With us working on adding the aircraft, Oleg and his crew can work on more important stuff. Like bug fixes, features, and global fm tuning. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
LOL!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jasonbirder:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But that kind of CONTROL allowed IL2 to live longer than any other flight sim to date. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cough...what about Falcon? Even in its Falcon 4.0 version alone its over 8 years old and still the benchmark other sims measure themselves against...

And the best thingthat ever happened to it was 3rd party modding... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>The code to Falcon 4.0 was stolen years ago which allowed alot of un-intended 3rd party access.. As for popularity.. it is a dead sim IMHO. Even the resent re-release was DOA. Or are you like Gibbage and belive that 8 people playing means it is alive and well?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

AKA_TAGERT
01-10-2007, 06:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Basically, I trust Oleg when he says that his Oleg Certificate system will protect the servers wishing to use just Oleg's aircraft or the Oleg Certificated aircraft. As noted to Baronunderpants, Oleg is doing something to seperate the sim versions. Oleg started out making banking software, and his encryption is pretty good we hear. Yes? No? When Oleg says aircraft mod cheating won't happen in the certificated aircraft servers, I believe it. This is why I claim that TAGERT's claim is false. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>And here is why I claim your take on it is in error..

Paraphraing you said that the ONLINE numbers are so small that they don't mater and that the game companys make thier software for the OFFLINE playing aspects.

Now if that is the case..

Then it should NOT mater if the 3rd party addons are not usable ONLINE..

Try and spin that one!

Or will you just avoid refering to that like you avoided refering to OFP and how the uncontrolled addons and cheating hurt it more than helped it.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

LEXX_Luthor
01-10-2007, 07:31 PM
TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Then it should NOT mater if the 3rd party addons are not usable ONLINE..

Try and spin that one!
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Spinning up! That's close to my thinking, as a purely Offline player as of now, although there seem to be significant numbers of Online community members and server admins who would enjoy the additional 3rd Party content of non-certificated servers, although they are rather quiet as they know they will be accused of "wanting to cheat" by the snotty and bitter online computer gamers at this webboard.

Indeed, your claim of CFSn being killed by just mere accusations of cheating and not by actual cheating contradicts the loud claims of the angry Online gamers at this webboard that they were indeed cheated by aircraft mods in Microsoft CFSn. Yet both you and these bitter ex-CFSn "cheated" gamers seem to be equally opposed to Oleg's idea of certified and open mod non-certified servers. Fascinating behavior.

TAGERT:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Paraphraing you said that the ONLINE numbers are so small that they don't mater and that the game companys make thier software for the OFFLINE playing aspects. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
All paraphrasing aside, the number of Online players are more than sufficient for developers who pursue Online Pay-To-Play, otherwise, the future combat flight sim developers will return to an Offline focus that can maintain Offline customer interest and long term sales which is needed to support development of "free" Online play.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Agamemnon22
01-10-2007, 08:11 PM
OFP is an example of an uncontrolled game that was modded out of existence. Battlefield is an example of an uncontrolled game that to this day enjoys enormous popularity without the various mods stepping on each other's feet. And may I note that Battlefield has a far less mature crowd. Point being, that there are ways to handle 3rd party additions correctly, and there are ways to do it incorrectly, as pointed out at length.

You could cite precedents of damn near anything in the game industry to support virtually any claim imaginable, its a very volatile and multifaceted situation.

That is not to say that the precedents cited should be discounted. There is merit in what everyone here says.

Therefore, from where I'm sitting I can see only one solution that will both allow a form of control over content and allow the speedy expansion of the series that is necessary for it to make any impact and not fall by the wayside.

Allow mods only by Oleg-approved devs. MG licenses out a dev kit to the interested party, that party needing to present some measure of credibility. For instance, the folks Gibbage works for, the FS mod company would be one such licensee. I could be another. RRG (Luthier) a third, and so on.

This way we get the expansion we need, while keeping the dev tools out of 14-year old Billie's cheating little hands.

Sound fair?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------------------------
http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/agamemnon22/Pe2sig.jpg

Gibbage1
01-10-2007, 08:13 PM
Tagert, cherry picking? Like he accuses Kurfurst of doing? FOR SHAME!!!

You should know better then to Cherry pick with me.

Just like YOU said, online population is very small. Also there are a few differant online services, plus I think F4 has its own internal server browser? Yet you only posted results from one?

Now, lets talk about its death? Lack of players online does not = death. Lack of forum activity does. Because that combines both the online and offline players. I did a quick search for F4 forums. On Sim-HQ (currently down) the Falcon 4.0 forum has 10,000 post's. Not much. But the 3rd party addon to Falcon 4 (A;;oed Force) has 40,000 post's. 3rd most active group on the forum, behind IL2 and Strike Fighter! Above FS2002,2004, and FSX combined. And yes, there where many recent post's.

Now before you try and give the excuse that Falcon 4 had 8 years to generate that 40,000 post's, wrong. Allied Force was released in 05. I would say its still alive and kicking!

So 40,000 post's in a forum = dead to Tagert? Man. What does it take to be alive in your eyes?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

Gibbage1
01-10-2007, 08:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agamemnon22:
OFP is an example of an uncontrolled game that was modded out of existence. Battlefield is an example of an uncontrolled game that to this day enjoys enormous popularity without the various mods stepping on each other's feet. And may I note that Battlefield has a far less mature crowd. Point being, that there are ways to handle 3rd party additions correctly, and there are ways to do it incorrectly, as pointed out at length.

You could cite precedents of damn near anything in the game industry to support virtually any claim imaginable, its a very volatile and multifaceted situation.

That is not to say that the precedents cited should be discounted. There is merit in what everyone here says.

Therefore, from where I'm sitting I can see only one solution that will both allow a form of control over content and allow the speedy expansion of the series that is necessary for it to make any impact and not fall by the wayside.

Allow mods only by Oleg-approved devs. MG licenses out a dev kit to the interested party, that party needing to present some measure of credibility. For instance, the folks Gibbage works for, the FS mod company would be one such licensee. I could be another. RRG (Luthier) a third, and so on.

This way we get the expansion we need, while keeping the dev tools out of 14-year old Billie's cheating little hands.

Sound fair? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I like what your saying here and I must say I agree with you on many if not all of the points. The concern I have is licensing the tool's to 3rd party dev's will mean most likley any 3rd party stuff is pay-ware. There wont be much if any free content. Me, I dont mind getting paid for my work. Heck, most of my stuff I did for Oleg I got paid for! But then again, a lot of my stuff was given out for free to people who paid for the game. The free aircraft really excited the community, and made people stick around. People paying 20$ for a P-51 I dont think will go over well with this crowd when they were raised on 20+ free aircraft! The FS community is used too it, and I have a 25$ P-38 for sale, but I dont think this community will addopt that easy.

Again, not saying I disagree with you. Just saying that there could be complications with it.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

AKA_TAGERT
01-10-2007, 09:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Spinning up! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
More like spun out!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
That's close to my thinking, as a purely Offline player as of now, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Roger, AI is easier to shoot down that real people

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
although there seem to be significant numbers of Online community members and server admins who would enjoy the additional 3rd Party content of non-certificated servers, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>As I am sure the 8 or so Falcon 4.0 players enjoy them

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
although they are rather quiet as they know they will be accused of "wanting to cheat" by the snotty and bitter online computer gamers at this webboard. Indeed, your claim of CFSn being killed by just mere accusations of cheating and not by actual cheating contradicts the loud claims of the angry Online gamers at this webboard that they were indeed cheated by aircraft mods in Microsoft CFSn. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Now your catching on!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Yet both you and these bitter ex-CFSn "cheated" gamers seem to be equally opposed to Oleg's idea of certified and open mod non-certified servers. Fascinating behavior. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Are you really that dence? First things first, I allready told you once that "I" never saw any cheating going on. Second I never said I was opposed to CERTIFIED 3rd party addons.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
All paraphrasing aside, the number of Online players are more than sufficient for developers who pursue Online Pay-To-Play, otherwise, the future combat flight sim developers will return to an Offline focus that can maintain Offline customer interest and long term sales which is needed to support development of "free" Online play. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Disagree 100%! Early on the only choice was pay-to-play, now there is pay-to-play and free online games like IL2 to choose from. There was a time that pay-to-play had an edge in that it had CONTINUED support where as other games saw one or two patches and if they determined there was not enough return in making an addons the game/sim was shelved. The first sim I know of that had good support was Falcon 3.0 in that it had several addons, Oleg IL2 followed that model and it worked. Controlled addons work! Un-controlled addons like OFP, Falcon4.0, Strike Fighters, etc don't work as well. Oh sure, you can allays find 10 or so people playing them, but nothing like you see in IL2.

PS you forgot to try and spin.. i.e. explain how OFP with thousands of free 3rd party addons did not result is a sim that is still being played by hundreds of people online.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

Agamemnon22
01-10-2007, 09:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:

I like what your saying here and I must say I agree with you on many if not all of the points. The concern I have is licensing the tool's to 3rd party dev's will mean most likley any 3rd party stuff is pay-ware. There wont be much if any free content. Me, I dont mind getting paid for my work. Heck, most of my stuff I did for Oleg I got paid for! But then again, a lot of my stuff was given out for free to people who paid for the game. The free aircraft really excited the community, and made people stick around. People paying 20$ for a P-51 I dont think will go over well with this crowd when they were raised on 20+ free aircraft! The FS community is used too it, and I have a 25$ P-38 for sale, but I dont think this community will addopt that easy.

Again, not saying I disagree with you. Just saying that there could be complications with it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, that's a good point. One could argue that this is the reality of developing more complex models and the community should get used to it, but I agree with you that pure payware won't go over well.

I suppose the dev kit need not be paid, on the condition that content created with it is not-for-revenue. Those intending to make a business of it could be charged a fee by MG.

I don't have an answer right now, but its a good point you make. Perhaps we can devote 10 pages of discussion to this now :P

Incidently, how do you guys prevent piracy in FS? What prevents someone from buying your P-38, for example, and passing it out to all his buddies? This is a total aside, so if you feel up to it please drop me a PM, since this is going to be important if/when payware addons come here.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------------------------
http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/agamemnon22/Pe2sig.jpg

AKA_TAGERT
01-10-2007, 09:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Tagert, cherry picking? Like he accuses Kurfurst of doing? FOR SHAME!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually no, you are the king of the cherry pickers! And that **** dance you do with Krusty each time defines shameful!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
You should know better then to Cherry pick with me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I should know better than to try and reason with you.. that much is true.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Just like YOU said, online population is very small. Also there are a few different online services, plus I think F4 has its own internal server browser? Yet you only posted results from one? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, you were not worth the effort to find more than one.. In that I knew you would try and change the topic from addressing the count of only 8 to something like accusing me of doing something like cherry picking.

But on that note.. lets take another look at another 3rd party add on flight sim Strike Fighters Project 1
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/STFU/strikefightersproject1.JPG

Shhhh did you hear it? That sounded like a pin drop!

And how about another flight sim.. A flight sim that set out from the get to to not only ALLOW 3rd party addons but make it EASY for them to do by providing the tools with the sim to do it.. I give you Fighter Squadron SDOE
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/STFU/FighterSquadronSDOE.JPG

Taa Daa!

So.. is this what you guys what Oleg's next project to look like? History shows us.. Controlled addons work.. Falcon 3.0 and IL2.. Un-controlled addons don't. Unless you consider forum activity a way of playing the game! ROTFL

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Now, lets talk about its death? Lack of players online does not = death. Lack of forum activity does. Because that combines both the online and offline players. I did a quick search for F4 forums. On Sim-HQ (currently down) the Falcon 4.0 forum has 10,000 post's. Not much. But the 3rd party add on to Falcon 4 (A;;oed Force) has 40,000 post's. 3rd most active group on the forum, behind IL2 and Strike Fighter! Above FS2002,2004, and FSX combined. And yes, there where many recent post's. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nice try.. but no sale!

Everyone knows that flight simmers are some of the most if not thee most vocal bunch of gammers! In that we can actually argue about how a F86 performs because there was such a thing.. Where as in something like the Quake forums who is going to argue that their plasma blaster is not molded right? Thus counting forum posts means nothing really! They could be arguing about a .50 cal and not the game! Heck look at how many OT post are here in this forum! That and using your logic would mean that IL2 is the most popular and profitable game on ubi! So, nice try, gold star for effort!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Now before you try and give the excuse that Falcon 4 had 8 years to generate that 40,000 post's, wrong. Allied Force was released in 05. I would say its still alive and kicking! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
See above

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
So 40,000 post's in a forum = dead to Tagert? Man. What does it take to be alive in your eyes? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
So what part of me talking about ONLINE do you not understand? As in ONLINE playing the game and NOT arguing about how the shade of green in the cockpit is wrong in some ONLINE forum.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

UberDemon
01-10-2007, 09:56 PM
I am with you Gibbage1. I'll update UQMG with anything you create my man! Lexx, thanks for throwing some sanity around...

I understand why the concerns are there, but I don't lose sleep, because the concerns are not coming from the people that are writing the code for the sim anyway. They know what they are doing; let them do their jobs. If there is a screw up, they'll fix it. That is what testing is for.

Panic is an inherent quality of human beings, that causes mob mentality, such as associating cats with witches, killing them, causing the rat population to grow more than nature means for it to, and causing the Black Plague.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Best Regards,
Demon/UberDemon
Get UQMG (UberQuick Mission Generator for PF/FB) for Free at www.uberdemon.com (http://www.uberdemon.com)

Agamemnon22
01-10-2007, 10:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:

So what part of me talking about ONLINE do you not understand? As in ONLINE playing the game and NOT arguing about how the shade of green in the cockpit is wrong in some ONLINE forum. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As already explained, you talk about it as if Online is the only thing. It isn't. At 140,000 copies in play initially and 2,000 online players, even if 90% of buyers threw the game in the trash the next day, Online still makes up at most 1/7th of the number of people playing the game. With me so far?

Forum activity, then, is the next best indication of game activity, since people still discuss the game, they must be playing it.

Secondly, do you really believe SF,SDOE are competition to IL2? Do mods have anything to do with people migrating over to a better sim? The IL2 1.0 lobby has 0 players as well, by your logic it must have failed horribly as a game. Apples to oranges sir http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Finally, Gibbage's point about neglecting to reference the F4 in-game browser, as well as ASE, still stands. You stab at his personality conveniently skirted the issue.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------------------------
http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/agamemnon22/Pe2sig.jpg

Gibbage1
01-11-2007, 01:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agamemnon22:
Incidently, how do you guys prevent piracy in FS? What prevents someone from buying your P-38, for example, and passing it out to all his buddies? This is a total aside, so if you feel up to it please drop me a PM, since this is going to be important if/when payware addons come here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sadly, nothing. Its more of the honor system. We have a system that allows people to download, but un order to unlock the aircraft file, they need to pay up, or put in a serial key. There is nothing to prevent people from passing serial keys, or just zipping up the unlocked files after the install. This wont prevent anyone deturmined to pirate the game. What it will do is stop casual copy's. As I see it, if someone goes through the trouble of pirating it, they never planned on paying for it. There was a torrent of the P-38 on release, and there was something like 2000 downloads on that torent alone. I can see that as me loosing 10,000$ in lost pay (I make about 5$ per sale) or I see that as 2000 potential customers who may just buy it later. The latter is about as likley as Tagerd admiting F4 is not dead, but there is nothing I can do. There is simply no way to stop it without doing something like Steam or Boonty, and we have all seen what a greeting that got in our little community. So I lost 10,000$ to keep the few customers I have happy.

P.S. That was just 2 weeks of torrent downloading. God only knows how much its been downloaded now in torrent and other sources.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

LEXX_Luthor
01-11-2007, 02:32 AM
Agamemnon22:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As already explained, you [TAGERT]talk about it as if Online is the only thing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
TAGERT just apparently threw it, using StrikeFighters as an example of an Online sim in one of the screenshots above, as the SF developer has no interest in further developing any Online play features, much like the TargetWare developers have no interest in developing any Offline play features at all. I say apparently, because TAGERT almost seems to be using reverse Psycho technology to demonstrate to us the fraudulent nature of accusations of cheating by a few hostile ex-Microsoft CFSn gamers, or he's forcing us to clarify our own positions. If so, that's brilliant TAGERT!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

mrsiCkstar
01-11-2007, 02:37 AM
OFP dying due to mods and Battlefield not dying are two different things... the difference is that OFP set out to be realistic whereas Battlefield did not and isn't. Of course no mods are going to kill it because no one there cares if their weapons are modelled correctly or if their MiG flies right... it's immune.

I don't see BoB as being that arcade.

Also F4's survival has got nothing to do with 3rd party aircraft, to this day there is but one plane that is flyable... the F-16... 3 variants are flyable.

Sure at some point there was an F-14... but that flew with the F-16's FM and cockpit! And someone here already said that commynity is more mature than this one, which is correct, but had no effect whatsoever on that F-14 and how it was modelled.

Also F4 is not dead Tagert, there are many forums and eventhough you may not see them playing it on HL, they have their own server browser... also there are many virtual squadrons flying that sim. Plus that sim has a WAY better campaign system than IL2 does so a lot of people actually enjoy playing it offline as well.

Even so, F4's success has nothing to do with 3rd party aircraft.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.no.net/jonmarja/images/f4usig.jpg

Gibbage1
01-11-2007, 02:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mrsiCkstar:
Even so, F4's success has nothing to do with 3rd party aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

3rd party aircraft? No. 3rd party modding? Yes. In the form of Allied Force. Without that add-on, F4 would be dead.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

mrsiCkstar
01-11-2007, 02:58 AM
not disputing that, however what is being discussed here is 3rd party aircraft. So in my opinion using F4 as an example of a succesfull sim that is succesful because of 3rd party modding to argue in favor of 3rd party aircraft for BoB is a little off base.

Maps, vehicles, buildings, objects etc etc... I would be delighted to have people in the community making stuff like that for the sim... Aircraft I'm not sure about... if the quality can be guaranteed there would be no problem. But if people are doing this stuff for free on their sparetime, I don't see how that quality can be guaranteed... to make an add-on plane to the degree of say Shockwave's Wings of Power series takes a lot of resources and money...<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.no.net/jonmarja/images/f4usig.jpg

Airmail109
01-11-2007, 03:50 AM
http://www.gonzoville.com/share/files/1/Motivators/********.jpg <div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Megile : "Hey it's not technically spamming if its on different forums right?"

LEXX_Luthor
01-11-2007, 03:53 AM
If we don't like the low quality mods, we can confine ourselves to the high quality mods.


mrsiCkstar:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">to make an add-on plane to the degree of say Shockwave's Wings of Power series takes a lot of resources and money... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That may be why Oleg is possibly opening up aircraft modding, as there are very many artists out there who can do high quality work, including currently serving and retired military members.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

mrsiCkstar
01-11-2007, 04:01 AM
true but can those people get to documents and test data, talk to veteran pilots and have them test out and hone their flight models? there is a lot more involved than building a great 3D model and crunching some numbers for a FM file... not trying to be condesecending here, and I know many here do this, perhaps for a living even.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.no.net/jonmarja/images/f4usig.jpg

LEXX_Luthor
01-11-2007, 04:38 AM
If you don't like certain aircraft models, you don't download them.

Or, you "fix" the flight models to your taste (or ask the author to work it out with your superior expertise).

Or, you stay safe with Oleg Certificated aircraft.

Class dismissed.



---

SeaFire:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">LEXX::<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Good call SeaFire. You identify the problem as hostile Online computer gamers, and not the 3rd Party aircraft mods. Thanks. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
:
p.s You do realise that the UBI forums are referred to as `Ubizoo` from outsiders, don`t you?
:
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ya, I'm beginning to see that. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

ElAurens
01-11-2007, 05:45 AM
Tagert, we are wasting our time here.

Lexx wants to tinker with FMs to suit his poor skillz is about the size of it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Or, you "fix" the flight models to your taste...
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

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

Don't you see Lexx? This is exactly what we are trying to avoid.

Your comment about "fixing" the FM to taste merely enforces my opinion that you are not at all concerned with the fidelity of the product at all. You just want another platform to "play" your modding game on.

Strike Fighters getting boring?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/photos/ELsKi.jpg

"To explain the lure of speed you would have to explain human nature" - T.E. Lawrence

carguy_
01-11-2007, 06:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
Tagert, we are wasting our time here.

Lexx wants to tinker with FMs to suit his poor skillz is about the size of it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


More like another naive fool who thinks everything is going to turn out great just like that,by itself.Every society,even the smallest,has a group that is assigned to think for those people since they do not have that skill.

As for people that make money from this - Oleg,Gibbage and others it is quite clear why the idea is of great potential benefit.I don`t blame them for suuporting it.

The truth is that hardly anyone cares if those planes fly like they really did.If we can extend the market,make more arcade players hook up with the game,the money will keep flowing,people will have fun with their favorite planes.Basically everyone is happy with the idea.

Cheating is a separate issue.Allowing 3rd party planes being played online creates a direct possibility of official servers dying out due to complete lack of popularity.

As you all can see,the problem of historical accuracy is of lower priority to those folks whereas to the minority it is the very ESSENCE of a WWII cfs.

BUT,as the HA fans tend to represent the very minority of cfs players there is no real reason why the top priority should be set on them.All big hits must have vast public and BoB is heading the same way.

Quite simple,market laws prevail in the end.The marginal group of those willing to recreate WWII combat as close as possible do not make a good money spending ground simply because there are far too few of them.

It is no use going against the trend as it is unavoidable.Those who resist get left in the dark.

The folks in charge are quite sure that this is the way to go to make WWII cfs something else than just a niche.A complete depletion of realistic,historically accurate servers is a small price to pay for extending the market,increasing sales,bringing more folks to play,etc.


But puuuuuhleaseee don`t tell me things will stay just as they are now - that majority will play historical servers with historical planes,that the HA will not suffer at all and everything just will sort out itself.

That is naivness,shortsightness,lack of imagination and experience.

Contrary to what you people think,there are still few folks here that have their own brains and can deduct themselves.

Trying to hammer those silly scenarios into our heads is disrespectful at best.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sigjzg23upgraded.jpg
Self-proclaimed dedicated Willywhiner since July 2002
: Badsight.:"increased manouverability for bf-109s was satire" :
Please bring back 3.01 dots!

AKA_TAGERT
01-11-2007, 07:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
Tagert, we are wasting our time here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Does look that way!

On that subject, note that Gibbage never attempted to address the FACT that there were only 8 people log into Falcon 4.0. Of that 8, 4 were the servers that were not even playing, and 1 was me. It is an old troll tactic, when you don?t want to address the issue, start a tangent topic. Typically the tangent topic consists of some sort of personal attack to try and take the focus off of the current topic. He aludes at the idea of other servers (other than HL) having lots and lots of Falcon 4.0 players.. but he never provided any proof of it! Another troll tatic, plant the idea in the hopes that people will accept it without any proof to support it. Last but not least he tried to sell the idea that forum activity is some form of playing the game and proof that it is not dead! Just not true! Take this forum or example, most of the threads here have nothing to do with the game! I would say that over half of them are OT or end up that way! For example, thanks to the topics in this forum I know more about BillFish's yonger years than some WWII pilots! Talk about TMI! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif But Gibbage would have us belive this is proof that IL2 is alive and well!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
Lexx wants to tinker with FMs to suit his poor skillz is about the size of it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
If that is the case, that is sad! I hope he is just doing it because he is excited with the idea of being able to fly all sorts of planes OFFLINE. But I fear most of the people that do want these un-controlled 3rd party add-ons are one to two type.

1) Can make some $ off of making 3rd party add-ons (aka Gibbage)
2) Can tweak the 3rd party add-ons to obtain an edge over others, be it AI or real people (aka cheaters)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
Don't you see Lexx? This is exactly what we are trying to avoid. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
WOW! I missed that one! Maybe your right about his skill level? Sad to because this is how it all begins! Enabling anyone to tweak how a plane flies is one of the main problems with un-controlled add-ons! Everyone thinks they know better! Here is how it works and how it can kill a sim

1) They have some faviorate plane.
2) They take that plane for a spin and get shot down.
3) They convince themselves that this plane is too good to be shot down.
4) They tweak the FM so they don?t get shot down

Never stopping to consider (or admit to themselves) that he problem is NOT with the FM but themselves. Which in turn results in 50 servers with 50 different version of a plane flying around. The community is just to small to support that diversity. Thus people move onto another sim that has more control leaving behind the die hard few (around 8 people) that just all happen to agree with 1 of the 50 interpretations of the FM.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
Your comment about "fixing" the FM to taste merely enforces my opinion that you are not at all concerned with the fidelity of the product at all. You just want another platform to "play" your modding game on.

Strike Fighters getting boring? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
ROTFL!

Ill say it again, I HOPE I AM WRONG! If anyone can pull it off it is Oleg! But history has shown, Controlled add-ons work, un-controlled add-ons don?t! There are so many examples of this I am really surprised at the response of so many people here who I thought had a clue! But I guess the idea of being able to fly anything ALONE is more important to them than anything else<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

rumsinsfeld
01-11-2007, 07:26 AM
Dedicated servers should recalculate the flight model of the client. So it┬┤s no problem to have 3rd party aircraft. You don┬┤t have to recalculate each aircraft any time, but in combat situations or at full throttle. Besides, the flight model doesn┬┤t use much cpu power anyway.

The best anti-piracy tool is a key for online gaming. There are hacks vor every offline game, but there are only few hacks for online gaming. Nobody wants to play on cracked servers.

AKA_TAGERT
01-11-2007, 07:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
More like another naive fool who thinks everything is going to turn out great just like that,by itself.Every society,even the smallest,has a group that is assigned to think for those people since they do not have that skill.

As for people that make money from this - Oleg,Gibbage and others it is quite clear why the idea is of great potential benefit.I don`t blame them for suuporting it.

The truth is that hardly anyone cares if those planes fly like they really did.If we can extend the market,make more arcade players hook up with the game,the money will keep flowing,people will have fun with their favorite planes.Basically everyone is happy with the idea.

Cheating is a separate issue.Allowing 3rd party planes being played online creates a direct possibility of official servers dying out due to complete lack of popularity.

As you all can see,the problem of historical accuracy is of lower priority to those folks whereas to the minority it is the very ESSENCE of a WWII cfs.

BUT,as the HA fans tend to represent the very minority of cfs players there is no real reason why the top priority should be set on them.All big hits must have vast public and BoB is heading the same way.

Quite simple,market laws prevail in the end.The marginal group of those willing to recreate WWII combat as close as possible do not make a good money spending ground simply because there are far too few of them.

It is no use going against the trend as it is unavoidable.Those who resist get left in the dark.

The folks in charge are quite sure that this is the way to go to make WWII cfs something else than just a niche.A complete depletion of realistic,historically accurate servers is a small price to pay for extending the market,increasing sales,bringing more folks to play,etc.


But puuuuuhleaseee don`t tell me things will stay just as they are now - that majority will play historical servers with historical planes,that the HA will not suffer at all and everything just will sort out itself.

That is naivness,shortsightness,lack of imagination and experience.

Contrary to what you people think,there are still few folks here that have their own brains and can deduct themselves.

Trying to hammer those silly scenarios into our heads is disrespectful at best. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Agreed 100%<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

AKA_TAGERT
01-11-2007, 07:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mrsiCkstar:
OFP dying due to mods and Battlefield not dying are two different things... the difference is that OFP set out to be realistic whereas Battlefield did not and isn't. Of course no mods are going to kill it because no one there cares if their weapons are modelled correctly or if their MiG flies right... it's immune.

I don't see BoB as being that arcade. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That is a very good point!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mrsiCkstar:
Also F4's survival has got nothing to do with 3rd party aircraft, to this day there is but one plane that is flyable... the F-16... 3 variants are flyable.

Sure at some point there was an F-14... but that flew with the F-16's FM and cockpit! And someone here already said that commynity is more mature than this one, which is correct, but had no effect whatsoever on that F-14 and how it was modelled. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Agreed 100%

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mrsiCkstar:
Also F4 is not dead Tagert, there are many forums and eventhough you may not see them playing it on HL, they have their own server browser... also there are many virtual squadrons flying that sim. Plus that sim has a WAY better campaign system than IL2 does so a lot of people actually enjoy playing it offline as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well when I say DEAD I mean relitivly! For example, a few years ago some guy from some 3rd world country emailed me with regards to some add-ons I made or AOTP back in 1992. He had a very old PC that would not run any new games, so he had to settle for 10 year old games. So, sure there are a few people still playing AOTP, so it is not TOTALLY DEAD! But relitive to IL2 it is! Same goes for Falcon 4.0 IMHO!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mrsiCkstar:
Even so, F4's success has nothing to do with 3rd party aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Agreed 100%<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

SeaFireLIV
01-11-2007, 07:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
Tagert, we are wasting our time here.

Lexx wants to tinker with FMs to suit his poor skillz is about the size of it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


More like another naive fool who thinks everything is going to turn out great just like that,by itself.Every society,even the smallest,has a group that is assigned to think for those people since they do not have that skill.

As for people that make money from this - Oleg,Gibbage and others it is quite clear why the idea is of great potential benefit.I don`t blame them for suuporting it.

The truth is that hardly anyone cares if those planes fly like they really did.If we can extend the market,make more arcade players hook up with the game,the money will keep flowing,people will have fun with their favorite planes.Basically everyone is happy with the idea.

Cheating is a separate issue.Allowing 3rd party planes being played online creates a direct possibility of official servers dying out due to complete lack of popularity.

As you all can see,the problem of historical accuracy is of lower priority to those folks whereas to the minority it is the very ESSENCE of a WWII cfs.

BUT,as the HA fans tend to represent the very minority of cfs players there is no real reason why the top priority should be set on them.All big hits must have vast public and BoB is heading the same way.

Quite simple,market laws prevail in the end.The marginal group of those willing to recreate WWII combat as close as possible do not make a good money spending ground simply because there are far too few of them.

It is no use going against the trend as it is unavoidable.Those who resist get left in the dark.

The folks in charge are quite sure that this is the way to go to make WWII cfs something else than just a niche.A complete depletion of realistic,historically accurate servers is a small price to pay for extending the market,increasing sales,bringing more folks to play,etc.


But puuuuuhleaseee don`t tell me things will stay just as they are now - that majority will play historical servers with historical planes,that the HA will not suffer at all and everything just will sort out itself.

That is naivness,shortsightness,lack of imagination and experience.

Contrary to what you people think,there are still few folks here that have their own brains and can deduct themselves.

Trying to hammer those silly scenarios into our heads is disrespectful at best. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well said, carguy. Mods are ok for offline, but I just don`t trust the public enough to see Mods working online. One of my fears is that Oleg`s certified aircraft servers will slowly die out while the arcady servers will probably splurge forth like a giant puking whale. It suits Oleg and co moneywise, but not for authentic realism. Guess he`s learning how to be a good capitalist. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif I reckon the money would come anyway without needing to open the floodgates. There`s sensible and there`s not... so.. sensible...

This is why I never say Offline should be ignored, because I reckon a lot of people will just fly offline instead when they see just how few the realistic `Oleg approved servers ` are.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/LIVeyes.jpg
"If it burns, it is confirmed."

Ivan Lukich Zvyagin

major_setback
01-11-2007, 07:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But I fear most of the people that do want these un-controlled 3rd party add-ons are one to two type.

1) Can make some $ off of making 3rd party add-ons (aka Gibbage)
2) Can tweak the 3rd party add-ons to obtain an edge over others (aka cheat) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Well, I'm not Gibbage, and neither do I want to be a cheat.

You missed out some other categories:
3). People who want more than the stock 4-6 flyable single engined aircraft that will accompany each SoW release.
4.) Those who want to see more AI aircraft when we fly.
5.) Those that think it will bring more money into the game via more interest (and sales), and thus will bring more money for development - eventually improving the game.
6.) Those that think Oleg might know what he's doing.


How many years has BoB been in development now? How much has that cost? Looking at the Bonus disc videos on the Sturmovik 1946 DVD I was amazed by the size of the development team. These peolpe all need to be payed. I really don't think Oleg can afford not to try for a bigger share of the sim market. A lot more people will buy BoB/SoW if add-ons (either user-made or commercial) are available.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/B17sig11LowResPlane2.jpg (http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Editthisnov06a003k1800xLaterimprove.jpg)

mrsiCkstar
01-11-2007, 07:57 AM
truthfully I'm a little surprised at the amount of "I want more than the few stock aircraft!" people that seem to be around because I distinctly remember a lot of people here have said that they would rather take a few quality planes than 200 mediocre planes. Where are all those people suddenly?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.no.net/jonmarja/images/f4usig.jpg

rumsinsfeld
01-11-2007, 08:05 AM
Yes, 3rd party MAPS would be useful.

major_setback
01-11-2007, 08:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mrsiCkstar:
truthfully I'm a little surprised at the amount of "I want more than the few stock aircraft!" people that seem to be around because I distinctly remember a lot of people here have said that they would rather take a few quality planes than 200 mediocre planes. Where are all those people suddenly? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Some of the user-made/commercial aircraft will be quality planes.....and get the Oleg approval.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/B17sig11LowResPlane2.jpg (http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Editthisnov06a003k1800xLaterimprove.jpg)

AKA_TAGERT
01-11-2007, 08:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mrsiCkstar:
truthfully I'm a little surprised at the amount of "I want more than the few stock aircraft!" people that seem to be around because I distinctly remember a lot of people here have said that they would rather take a few quality planes than 200 mediocre planes. Where are all those people suddenly? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Good Point!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

AKA_TAGERT
01-11-2007, 08:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
Well said, carguy. Mods are ok for offline, but I just don`t trust the public enough to see Mods working online. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Agreed 100%

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
One of my fears is that Oleg`s certified aircraft servers will slowly die out while the arcady servers will probably splurge forth like a giant puking whale. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That is it in a nut shell!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
It suits Oleg and co moneywise, but not for authentic realism. Guess he`s learning how to be a good capitalist. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Sad if true, but I fear you may be right

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
I reckon the money would come anyway without needing to open the floodgates. There`s sensible and there`s not... so.. sensible...

This is why I never say Offline should be ignored, because I reckon a lot of people will just fly offline instead when they see just how few the realistic `Oleg approved servers ` are. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Agreed 100%<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

AKA_TAGERT
01-11-2007, 08:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by major_setback:
You missed out some other categories: </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, didn't miss any! In that I said "I fear <span class="ev_code_yellow">most</span>" not all, most of the people that want this are one of two types<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

jarink
01-11-2007, 09:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by major_setback:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But I fear most of the people that do want these un-controlled 3rd party add-ons are one to two type.

1) Can make some $ off of making 3rd party add-ons (aka Gibbage)
2) Can tweak the 3rd party add-ons to obtain an edge over others (aka cheat) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Well, I'm not Gibbage, and neither do I want to be a cheat.

You missed out some other categories:
3). People who want more than the stock 4-6 flyable single engined aircraft that will accompany each SoW release.
4.) Those who want to see more AI aircraft when we fly.
5.) Those that think it will bring more money into the game via more interest (and sales), and thus will bring more money for development - eventually improving the game.
6.) Those that think Oleg might know what he's doing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Tagert, you've pointed out a dearth of people playing Strike Fighters online. Yet, as I pointed out earier, SF is still a very popular game and Third Wire has even offered 3 expansions. The game's forum at SimHQ is second only in activity to the IL2 forum, so you can't make any claims about it being "dead".

Here's a thought for you to ponder:
<span class="ev_code_yellow">Maybe the number of online players has little or nothing to do with the COMMERCIAL SUCCESS or POPULARITY of current combat flight sims!</span>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
No, didn't miss any! In that I said "I fear most" not all, most of the people that want this are one of two types </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, you're projecting your thoughts and your fears onto others! You're not one of those that want the 3rd party models, but I am.

Who do you think you are to tell me what I think?
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

My PF movies:Aluminum Eagle (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Aluminum_Eagle/OneVisionLg.zip), Fire and Rain (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Fire_and_Rain/Fire_and_Rain.zip) Snowbirds (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Snowbirds/Snowbirds.zip) and Crew 22 (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Crew_22/Crew22.zip)

http://home.grics.net/jrink/signature.jpg

EiZ0N
01-11-2007, 09:56 AM
This WILL make the game more popular, the developers WILL be more successful, the flight sim genre WILL as a result do better, the flight sim gamers WILL benefit.

End of discussion, right? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

BaldieJr
01-11-2007, 10:00 AM
Hey check this out...<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.hi-techredneck.org/sigsigsig.jpg
This is a line of text. It does not exceed 80 characters. I have 4 lines total http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
This is a line of text. It does not exceed 80 characters. I have 4 lines total http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
This is a line of text. It does not exceed 80 characters. I have 4 lines total http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
This is a line of text. It does not exceed 80 characters. I have 4 lines total http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BaldieJr
01-11-2007, 10:02 AM
Consider this:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BaldieJr:
Hey check this out... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Amazing? You bet.

Off topic? Hardly.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.hi-techredneck.org/sigsigsig.jpg
This is a line of text. It does not exceed 80 characters. I have 4 lines total http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
This is a line of text. It does not exceed 80 characters. I have 4 lines total http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
This is a line of text. It does not exceed 80 characters. I have 4 lines total http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
This is a line of text. It does not exceed 80 characters. I have 4 lines total http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

AKA_TAGERT
01-11-2007, 10:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Tagert, you've pointed out a dearth of people playing Strike Fighters online. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
A dearth?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Yet, as I pointed out earier, SF is still a very popular game </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well if it is.. you wouldnt know it from the HL lobby

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
and Third Wire has even offered 3 expansions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, three seperate games! Basically the same game each time but with just a different mix of planes. That and you can not even use one to play on the other even though the planes in each are the same.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
The game's forum at SimHQ is second only in activity to the IL2 forum, so you can't make any claims about it being "dead". </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes I can, just like I said before, forum activity is not a direct indicator of a sim being alive!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Here's a thought for you to ponder:
<span class="ev_code_yellow">Maybe the number of online players has little or nothing to do with the COMMERCIAL SUCCESS or POPULARITY of current combat flight sims!</span> </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Neat theory but does not hold much water.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Again, you're projecting your thoughts and your fears onto others! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Based on a historic trend

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
You're not one of those that want the 3rd party models, but I am. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Wrong! I want 3rd party models! I just want them certified before they can be used online. As for un-certified 3rd party modles with F15 FM's for P51 and M1A1 abrams armor for B17 used offline I could care less! That only impacks the smacktard using them.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Who do you think you are to tell me what I think?
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
So what part of MOST not being equal to ALL do you not understand?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

jarink
01-11-2007, 11:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">So what part of MOST not being equal to ALL do you not understand? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The part where you have become the spokesperson for people that DO want 3rd party models in the game.

In case you've forgotten what you said earlier, here's a reminder:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But I fear most of the people that do want these un-controlled 3rd party add-ons are one to two type.

1) Can make some $ off of making 3rd party add-ons (aka Gibbage)
2) Can tweak the 3rd party add-ons to obtain an edge over others (aka cheat) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I'm neither of those. From my reading of the 13 pages of this thread, there are very few people who want "uncontrolled" 3rd party planes. I suppose the he difference is that you think "control" means "Oleg" whereas most others think the community can "control" itself.

Why is there a problem with people making money? Have you any inkling of the time, effort and resources needed to make a decent add-on? I have no problems if someone wants compensation for their hard work, do you? Do you have a problem with the companies selling things like "Ostfront", "Rebirth of Honor", "Wings over Waves" or "Wings over Jungles"? Maybe Oleg should not allow user-created missions or campaigns, lest someone make money off of it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

I also don't think that payware will be all-pervasive or even constiture the majority of 3rd party planes. Tons of payware planes in MSFS have not killed off the freeware, has it? Quite a bit of the freeware are high-quality, too. Even Gibabge, who has made models for profit has stated he thinks there must be provisions for FREEware planes. Sure, there will be cr@p freeware planes. It's doubtful anyone will use them, though (beause they're cr@p), meaning they'll be irrelevant.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">No, three seperate games! Basically the same game each time but with just a different mix of planes. That and you can not even use one to play on the other even though the planes in each are the same. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Boy, I can tell you've never played the game. You also contradict yourself ("different mix of planes" and "the planes in each are the same"). Yes, it's the same basic engine. As newer games were released, TW has updated the older games to make them roughly equivalent engine-wise. By the way, all of the included planes in each game can used in one of the others. Most 3rd party planes work in all versions as well. Sometimes some twaeking is involved on planes released some time ago, but that's due to the gradually changing nature of the game engine.

Next time, you may want to do some research before making such an obviously incorrect statement.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yes I can, just like I said before, forum activity is not a direct indicator of a sim being alive! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, this is simply your opnion.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Neat theory but does not hold much water. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Neither does yours about online activity meaning the life or death of a combat flight sim. (all posted evidence to the contrary - by the way, where are your figures backing up your claims?)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Wrong! I want 3rd party models! I just want them certified before they can be used online. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<span class="ev_code_yellow">Finally!</span> Something we can agree on. Like I've said before, what happens online doesn't concern me very much. I think that no matter what 1C does about this issue, there will still be "historical" servers, more open servers and ones with UFOs that most people avoid. It won't "fracture" the community any worse than it is now.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

My PF movies:Aluminum Eagle (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Aluminum_Eagle/OneVisionLg.zip), Fire and Rain (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Fire_and_Rain/Fire_and_Rain.zip) Snowbirds (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Snowbirds/Snowbirds.zip) and Crew 22 (http://files.netwings.org/files/fb_videos/Crew_22/Crew22.zip)

http://home.grics.net/jrink/signature.jpg

Gibbage1
01-11-2007, 12:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mrsiCkstar:
true but can those people get to documents and test data, talk to veteran pilots and have them test out and hone their flight models? there is a lot more involved than building a great 3D model and crunching some numbers for a FM file... not trying to be condesecending here, and I know many here do this, perhaps for a living even. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, we do. Building the P-38 for FS, I spoke with no less then 5 real WWII and current P-38 pilots and had 1 P-38 ace test and verify my model and flight model. Im not saying we all do it, but the resources are out there to do it.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

Ugly_Kid
01-11-2007, 12:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mrsiCkstar:
truthfully I'm a little surprised at the amount of "I want more than the few stock aircraft!" people that seem to be around because I distinctly remember a lot of people here have said that they would rather take a few quality planes than 200 mediocre planes. Where are all those people suddenly? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...Enjoying time-out after the late release of yet another dozen add-on aircraft that have vaguely remote real counterparts in looks (haphazardly drawn with pencil on the bag of the cigarette box, right next to smeared sketch of a female genitals, during the lunchbreak in a Mtt factory - might have even mixed them two sketches when doing the model of Lerche) and physics model fresh from Mars?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.f19vs.se/fokker_now.jpg

AKA_TAGERT
01-11-2007, 01:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">So what part of MOST not being equal to ALL do you not understand? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
The part where you have become the spokesperson for people that DO want 3rd party models in the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Again, What part of <span class="ev_code_yellow">MOST</span> people not being equal to <span class="ev_code_yellow">ALL</span> people do you not understand?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
In case you've forgotten what you said earlier, here's a reminder:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
But I fear <span class="ev_code_yellow">most</span> of the people that do want these un-controlled 3rd party add-ons are one to two type.

1) Can make some $ off of making 3rd party add-ons (aka Gibbage)
2) Can tweak the 3rd party add-ons to obtain an edge over others (aka cheat) </div></BLOCKQUOTE> </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thank you for reposing what I said.. In that it saves me from doing it! Note I took the liberty of highlighting a word in <span class="ev_code_yellow">YELLOW</span>.

The word I am refering to is <span class="ev_code_yellow">MOST</span>.

Now, again, looking at what I originally said..

What part of <span class="ev_code_yellow">MOST</span> people not being equal to <span class="ev_code_yellow">ALL</span> people do you not understand?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Well, I'm neither of those. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Than you are not <span class="ev_code_yellow">MOST</span>! Any of this sinking in yet?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
From my reading of the 13 pages of this thread, there are very few people who want "uncontrolled" 3rd party planes. I suppose the he difference is that you think "control" means "Oleg" whereas most others think the community can "control" itself. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes, Oleg, and No the community is fooling themselves!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Why is there a problem with people making money? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Just to be clear here I never said there was a problem! I simply pointed out why.. now pay att here.. why SOME (i.e. not ALL) would be in favor to un-controlled add-ons in that it means they will make $. A subtle difference, but in light of the fact that your having trouble with the difference between the word MOST and ALL I feel it is necessary to state the obvious.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Have you any inkling of the time, effort and resources needed to make a decent add-on? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, as I pointed out a few pages back I myself have made add-ons or sims like AOTP in the past.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
I have no problems if someone wants compensation for their hard work, do you? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
See above and note that I never said I did have a problem with it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Do you have a problem with the companies selling things like "Ostfront", "Rebirth of Honor", "Wings over Waves" or "Wings over Jungles"? Maybe Oleg should not allow user-created missions or campaigns, lest someone make money off of it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Are you this confused or are you trying to muddy the waters with a troll tactic to change the subject?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
I also don't think that payware will be all-pervasive or even constiture the majority of 3rd party planes. Tons of payware planes in MSFS have not killed off the freeware, has it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>MSFS is not a combat flight sim. Nobody cares if your P51 has the flight model of an F15 in MSFS!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Quite a bit of the freeware are high-quality, too. Even Gibabge, who has made models for profit has stated he thinks there must be provisions for FREEware planes. Sure, there will be cr@p freeware planes. It's doubtful anyone will use them, though (beause they're cr@p), meaning they'll be irrelevant. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Doubt all you want.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Boy, I can tell you've never played the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hard to play it online when you?re the only one there. As for who is wrong, I noticed that you had nothing to say with the FACT that you were wrong in calling them an add-on when in FACT they were three separate games that don?t interact with each other online.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
You also contradict yourself ("different mix of planes" and "the planes in each are the same"). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Same planes different mix.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Yes, it's the same basic engine. As newer games were released, TW has updated the older games to make them roughly equivalent engine-wise. By the way, all of the included planes in each game can used in one of the others. Most 3rd party planes work in all versions as well. Sometimes some twaeking is involved on planes released some time ago, but that's due to the gradually changing nature of the game engine. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Just some tweaking.. LOL!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Next time, you may want to do some research before making such an obviously incorrect statement. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actully you might want to look up the difference between MOST and ALL and the difference between an ADD-ON and STAND ALONE GAME

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Again, this is simply your opnion. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
As it is yours that it is in error

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
Neither does yours about online activity meaning the life or death of a combat flight sim. (all posted evidence to the contrary - by the way, where are your figures backing up your claims?) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Disagree 100%

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
<span class="ev_code_yellow">Finally!</span> Something we can agree on. Like I've said before, what happens online doesn't concern me very much. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>And it shows

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jarink:
I think that no matter what 1C does about this issue, there will still be "historical" servers, more open servers and ones with UFOs that most people avoid. It won't "fracture" the community any worse than it is now. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Think again! The three different version of the game now (4.04, 4.05, 4.07) are practically killing it off! You can not take a small group and split it into 3 different directions and expect it to survive! I hope I am wrong, but I have seen this happen before! It is not good! And with 3rd party add-ons there would be many more versions running around splintering the community ever further.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

Gibbage1
01-11-2007, 01:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
Wrong! I want 3rd party models! I just want them certified before they can be used online. As for un-certified 3rd party modles with F15 FM's for P51 and M1A1 abrams armor for B17 used offline I could care less! That only impacks the smacktard using them.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That, for me, is an acceptable middle ground. The question is WHO certifies them? Oleg? His team? My basic therie is EVERYONE is bies, no matter who. Nobody is above it. There may be differant levels of it, with one extreme being Kurfurst. I for one dont trust Olegs OPENION of US aircraft. We have had to fight long and hard to get both the P-47 and P-38 anywhere CLOSE too historical performance, even with pages of documents! Thats why I like the P-38 forum at ACWOS. It helps us sort though the garbage and find the truth, and it typically lies in the middle.

My fear is that if I made a BoB P-38 and it matched 100% too historical documents that we gathered in the P-38 forum, and I submit it too Oleg, he will nerf it due too his pre-concieved notion that big=bad.

Big does NOT always = bad. Just ask an F-15 pilot what they think of there large, heavy twin engine aircraft.

So who should certify aircraft if everyone is biest in some way? My answer is the community.

Say I make a P-38, and I release it for free on single player. People download it and look it over with a fine tooth comb. Once thats done, and its generally accepted as being accurate in performance, then thats the certification that it can be accepted on servers.

Also, servers should have a CRC check for ALL flight models, 3rd party or 1st party, that makes sure that every pilot uses the same FM file. That will prevent people from modding there own flight models to gain an edge, and eleminate the risk of cheaters with 3rd party aircraft.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

striker-85
01-11-2007, 01:25 PM
Tagert you missed a few steps here:

1) They have some faviorate plane.
2) They take that plane for a spin and get shot down.
3) They convince themselves that this plane is too good to be shot down.
4) They tweak the FM so they don?t get shot down

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">
5) Everyone else goes somewhere else to play on a server that doesn't support this over-tweaked plane.

6) Ubber-boy is now flying alone.
</span>


It is up to the server to choose which planesets and FM models are available. If unrealistic models are available then that server will not have much interest by this community, no one has much interest in just being target practice for an over-tweaked plane.

Servers that supports some fan-boy ubber tweaked plane will have no activity from other players. Servers that offer a realistic and balanced planeset and FMs will be the choice for most of us.


It would be great to get more planes like the Avenger, Kate, or a Ki-21 that are likely to never be modelled.

My personal interest and I'm sure I'm not alone is the PTO and without 3rd party A/C (or a change in the legal system) I may never see another Grumman or Vought-Chance A/C in this sim.

Ugly_Kid
01-11-2007, 01:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
My answer is the community.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah right exactly where loudest and whiniest bunch governs. The community is anything but a harmonic population.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.f19vs.se/fokker_now.jpg

mrsiCkstar
01-11-2007, 01:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Yes, we do. Building the P-38 for FS, I spoke with no less then 5 real WWII and current P-38 pilots and had 1 P-38 ace test and verify my model and flight model. Im not saying we all do it, but the resources are out there to do it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm glad and somewhat relieved to hear that.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.no.net/jonmarja/images/f4usig.jpg

Ugly_Kid
01-11-2007, 01:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by striker-85:

4) They tweak the FM so they don?t get shot down

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

4a) opposite tweaks their planes

5) Everyone flies on a server full of g@y UFOs on both sides noone really giving a **** about historical scenario. The learning effect now becomes nill and the FPS bang for the bucks crowd get a fire-it up and get some game.

6) A PS3 version will come out with even further simplified engine.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.f19vs.se/fokker_now.jpg

carguy_
01-11-2007, 01:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
That, for me, is an acceptable middle ground. The question is WHO certifies them? Oleg? His team? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Seems like 6years of Oleg certifying proved itself to be quite effective.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">My basic therie is EVERYONE is bies, no matter who. Nobody is above it. There may be differant levels of it, with one extreme being Kurfurst. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


LMFAO look who`s talking!!!


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I for one dont trust Olegs OPENION of US aircraft. We have had to fight long and hard to get both the P-47 and P-38 anywhere CLOSE too historical performance, even with pages of documents! Thats why I like the P-38 forum at ACWOS. It helps us sort though the garbage and find the truth, and it typically lies in the middle. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand that it is US whiner community middle ground then.Long and hard fight LOL
You WHINED Oleg into changing 50cal TWICE aswell as you WHINED him into changing multiple plane FMs providing only one side being the US data and your famous "P51 PWNS 109" pilot accounts not to mention the never proved P38Llate!


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
My fear is that if I made a BoB P-38 and it matched 100% too historical documents that we gathered in the P-38 forum, and I submit it too Oleg, he will nerf it due too his pre-concieved notion that big=bad.

Big does NOT always = bad. Just ask an F-15 pilot what they think of there large, heavy twin engine aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Gibbage FM = good

Oleg FM = bad.



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
So who should certify aircraft if everyone is biest in some way? My answer is the community. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What community??Those multiple groups of heavily biased armchair experts who have been doing nothing else than whine for the last 6years?!


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Say I make a P-38, and I release it for free on single player. People download it and look it over with a fine tooth comb. Once thats done, and its generally accepted as being accurate in performance, then thats the certification that it can be accepted on servers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes,you can have your fine tooth comb P38`46 Late-late-late FM offline whenever you want.Keep this BS out of online servers though.
Accurate FM?Based on what?One side perfect US data and Yankee doodle redwhiteandblie hero pilot accounts?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Also, servers should have a CRC check for ALL flight models, 3rd party or 1st party, that makes sure that every pilot uses the same FM file. That will prevent people from modding there own flight models to gain an edge, and eleminate the risk of cheaters with 3rd party aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Sure,the problem is already gone since USAAF/LW/RAF/IJN fanbois will all have their own modded uber FM servers.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sigjzg23upgraded.jpg
Self-proclaimed dedicated Willywhiner since July 2002
: Badsight.:"increased manouverability for bf-109s was satire" :
Please bring back 3.01 dots!

AWL_Spinner
01-11-2007, 01:54 PM
Blimey, well, a new year has dawned and in 2007 I appear to have found something with which I agree with Tagert "100%".

The online aspect of this sim lives and breathes in a way no other has ever managed; like it or loathe it in principal, that's only down to one thing, and that's total, complete 1C control providing an unparallelled level playing field for all. If it was a free for all, most would have given up long ago.

Allowing the community the tools to work on additions themselves is a great idea, no problem whatsoever.

Developing new maps and objects for online play is not contentious and merely a logical extension of the map-building currently available.

Having offline aircraft tools for NEW planes (not modding existing 1C productions, that would just encourage whining) is also a good idea to encourage development.

However, retaining an iron grip of the aircraft in the online game and enforcing standards is vital, IMHO.

After all these years, I trust Oleg and 1C: I think they're liable to come up with a working solution that, whilst not pleasing all (when does it ever?), will keep things predictable and solid in the online arena rather than flakey and fragmented.

A few snippets of "Olegish" and everyone's jumping to their own conclusions. We'll see.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Cheers, Spinner

<hr class="ev_code_hr" />
o Squads! Take a look at the ADW War (http://adwwar.com/en/#), it's fantastic!
o Spinner has been alive in ADW for a maximum of: 3hrs 38mins!

striker-85
01-11-2007, 02:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> 4a) opposite tweaks their planes

5) Everyone flies on a server full of g@y UFOs on both sides noone really giving a **** about historical scenario. The learning effect now becomes nill and the FPS bang for the bucks crowd get a fire-it up and get some game.

6) A PS3 version will come out with even further simplified engine.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And why would that bother you or me? We wouldn't fly there... It would just be filled with noobs with an FPS mentality that I probably wouldn't want to fly with anyway.

A PS3 arcade version? Great Oleg makes some extra dough off the Quake crew so he can keep making flight sims for us.

Gibbage1
01-11-2007, 02:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:

LMFAO look who`s talking!!!
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What have I ever lied about? I have never once tried to give the US side an un-fair or un-historical advantage.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

BaronUnderpants
01-11-2007, 02:15 PM
The argument that 3:rd party modded ac`s and whatnots will magicly produce a steddy stream of new and fresh gamers is so wrong its not even funny.

The reason flight sims in general and IL2 in perticular is as small as it is, is simply because its a difficoult game to master, it has a very steep learning curv.

Thats why the kidds with the dough doesnt wanna play it...they turn to for ex. CS instead. One of the, if not the biggest online game in the world....unmodded i might add.

They want a quick fix, blast away and be done with it.

I asked my brother whom i manage to suck into IL2 air racing for quite some time, why he wasnt intrested in DF`s, combatflying and so on? Hes reply was simple, to difficoult, to boring taking of everytime u get killed, takes to long and so on. I Asked what would make it more fun, he replyed ( in a nutshell ) more quake, more CS kind of stuff ( need i point out he playes CS, and is very good at it ) more stuff like airstarts, unlimmited ammo an more.....all this on official servers run by for ex. Ubi.

So if all u pro people is so concerned with olegs livlyhood surviving...thats what u should look into to help sell more games the first 2 weeks.

Like i said before...im all for 3:rd party modding OFFLINE. Im all for 3:rd party modded terrain, groundobjects, trees, bunkers..u name it ONLINE. Im even for 3:rd party modded ac`s online...but ONLY with Olegs final say in all aspects of the subbmitted ac. ESPECIALLY the FM`s and DM`s.

Im NOT hower for a 3:rd party modded "free for all" version of the game ONLINE.

Come back when u flown ALL the ac`s we have in this game, and can fly them well....untill then, im sorry, but until then your all but a bunch of kiddies only wanting the one thing u cant have, that one sooo important ac, sandbag, fence or your granny on a moped hurrying along the airfield.

BoB is at least 1 year away, and we all pretty much agree that it will be something very intresting new stuff....and some of u are allredy biching about "to few ac`s"??

Jeeze, give him some time for pete sake.

When is it enough?

Ugly_Kid
01-11-2007, 02:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
What have I ever lied about? I have never once tried to give the US side an un-fair or un-historical advantage. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Isn't this the guy who hostaged the Catalina to get 0.50 cal "fixed" to his perception?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.f19vs.se/fokker_now.jpg

AKA_TAGERT
01-11-2007, 02:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
That, for me, is an acceptable middle ground. The question is WHO certifies them? Oleg? His team? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Seems like 6years of Oleg certifying proved itself to be quite effective.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">My basic therie is EVERYONE is bies, no matter who. Nobody is above it. There may be differant levels of it, with one extreme being Kurfurst. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


LMFAO look who`s talking!!!


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I for one dont trust Olegs OPENION of US aircraft. We have had to fight long and hard to get both the P-47 and P-38 anywhere CLOSE too historical performance, even with pages of documents! Thats why I like the P-38 forum at ACWOS. It helps us sort though the garbage and find the truth, and it typically lies in the middle. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand that it is US whiner community middle ground then.Long and hard fight LOL
You WHINED Oleg into changing 50cal TWICE aswell as you WHINED him into changing multiple plane FMs providing only one side being the US data and your famous "P51 PWNS 109" pilot accounts not to mention the never proved P38Llate!


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
My fear is that if I made a BoB P-38 and it matched 100% too historical documents that we gathered in the P-38 forum, and I submit it too Oleg, he will nerf it due too his pre-concieved notion that big=bad.

Big does NOT always = bad. Just ask an F-15 pilot what they think of there large, heavy twin engine aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Gibbage FM = good

Oleg FM = bad.



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
So who should certify aircraft if everyone is biest in some way? My answer is the community. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What community??Those multiple groups of heavily biased armchair experts who have been doing nothing else than whine for the last 6years?!


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Say I make a P-38, and I release it for free on single player. People download it and look it over with a fine tooth comb. Once thats done, and its generally accepted as being accurate in performance, then thats the certification that it can be accepted on servers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes,you can have your fine tooth comb P38`46 Late-late-late FM offline whenever you want.Keep this BS out of online servers though.
Accurate FM?Based on what?One side perfect US data and Yankee doodle redwhiteandblie hero pilot accounts?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Also, servers should have a CRC check for ALL flight models, 3rd party or 1st party, that makes sure that every pilot uses the same FM file. That will prevent people from modding there own flight models to gain an edge, and eleminate the risk of cheaters with 3rd party aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Sure,the problem is already gone since USAAF/LW/RAF/IJN fanbois will all have their own modded uber FM servers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>carguy when you right your right! S!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

Ugly_Kid
01-11-2007, 02:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BaronUnderpants:
So if all u pro people is so concerned with olegs livlyhood surviving...thats what u should look into to help sell more games the first 2 weeks.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is unfortunately true but the brightest flame goes quickest. I believe that a complex game with lots of consequent levels and a-ha experiences provides a more enjoyable and interesting long term enjoyment. This is also what I think is the drawback of multitude of simplistic fire it up rides with hyperboosted performance for DF servers. They get quickly crowded and that is also what draws in the normal "Joe Average" and he does not get to dig deeper into the matter. I have enjoyed the time with IL-2 for the reason of learning with it also the background of the engineering behind the aircraft development - I am disappointed in that the development does not direct itself getting even deeper to this matter to really provide more of it.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.f19vs.se/fokker_now.jpg