IL-2 Sturmovik: Battle of Stalingrad

[Makabb]

-50% for basic BoS, anyone plays this and can tell how it is now ?

 

[Trash]

No dynamic campaign is no buy for me. Amazing how Rowan games had kick ass dynamic campaigns in the 90's and nowadays they simply don't seem to exist anymore. Shame the classics are so hard to get to run properly. Mig Alley for instance was an awesome rendition of the Korean war but it runs like a hog today. If it runs at all.

 

[Burning Bridges]

So they actually removed the Unlock Gulag after 2 fucking years

 

[GarfunkeL]

-50% for basic BoS, anyone plays this and can tell how it is now ?

It's shit. Do not give the inept Russians money.

Well, the flight models are apparently good but literally everything else is shit. And the team banned and drove away their community aside from a handful of diehard fanboys.

 

[Makabb]

Damn, seems the flight sims are dead currently.

 

[Makabb]

So they actually removed the Unlock Gulag after 2 fucking years

this vid is still hilarious

 

[Makabb]

I guess this will take 2-4 more years before it will be in playable state and at -70%.

 

[SmartCheetah]

Damn, seems the flight sims are dead currently.

Unfortunately. We need some sort of Western developer to create a proper flight sim instead of another Russian company. They are either greedy, or their design decisions are fucking hilarious (in a bad way)
In terms of Gaijin, both things apply. Too bad, because War Thunder engine would work really well for a proper flight sim.

 

[Makabb]

Damn, seems the flight sims are dead currently.

Unfortunately. We need some sort of Western developer to create a proper flight sim instead of another Russian company. They are either greedy, or their design decisions are fucking hilarious (in a bad way)
In terms of Gaijin, both things apply. Too bad, because War Thunder engine would work really well for a proper flight sim.

It's funny because there is no good one sim..... if a developer made a good game he would get all the money.

It's like a merchant on a desert does not want to sell water to people because he thinks they will die anyway.

 

[J_C]

Damn, seems the flight sims are dead currently.

Unfortunately. We need some sort of Western developer to create a proper flight sim instead of another Russian company. They are either greedy, or their design decisions are fucking hilarious (in a bad way)
In terms of Gaijin, both things apply. Too bad, because War Thunder engine would work really well for a proper flight sim.

It's funny because there is no good one sim..... if a developer made a good game he would get all the money.

It's like a merchant on a desert does not want to sell water to people because he thinks they will die anyway.

I'm sure you mean there is no good WW2 sim. Because DCS rules the modern sim space with a fuckton of content. If only it was more optimized.

 

[bonescraper]

ITT sunday "sim experts" talk about flight simulators, mention War Thunder. That's all you need to know

 

[J_C]

To be fair, they mentioned WT as a bad example for a sim.

 

[bonescraper]

WT isn't a sim, it's a MMO arcade shooter.

 

[J_C]

True.

 

[Burning Bridges]

It's funny because there is no good one sim..... if a developer made a good game he would get all the money.

It's like a merchant on a desert does not want to sell water to people because he thinks they will die anyway.

This is not so easy. The discussion is as old as gaming and has been decided with finality about 10 years ago. People have always been quick to lament for hardcore realistic simulation but when it was available they found it tedius. All companies who tried have closed, Microprose, Dynamix, Rowan, Sonalysts and dozens others. And it was not because their games were bad but because they could not stay afloat with the usual 50-100$ license price. A good sim with constant updates will be possible when enough people pay for it, but a realistic cost is between 250 and 1,000$ and you must look at VBS, Steel Beasts, Prepar3d and various extra costs. Sims as consumer products have largely failed but exist as professional software packages, with all that this entails. There are a few exceptions (DCS, First Racing, The Hunter ..) but they also just barely live on and customers are anything but happy.

 

[Makabb]

It's funny because there is no good one sim..... if a developer made a good game he would get all the money.

It's like a merchant on a desert does not want to sell water to people because he thinks they will die anyway.

This is not so easy. The discussion is as old as gaming and has been decided with finality about 10 years ago. People have always been quick to lament for hardcore realistic simulation but when it was available they found it tedius. All companies who tried have closed, Microprose, Dynamix, Rowan, Sonalysts and dozens others. And it was not because their games were bad but because they could not stay afloat with the usual 50-100$ license price. A good sim with constant updates will be possible when enough people pay for it, but a realistic cost is between 250 and 1,000$ and you must look at VBS, Steel Beasts, Prepar3d and various extra costs. Sims as consumer products have largely failed but exist as professional software packages, with all that this entails. There are a few exceptions (DCS, First Racing, The Hunter ..) but they also just barely live on and customers are anything but happy.

There are a few things which would be needed for a succesfull flight sim, and if i can think of them, anyone can, i don't think developers are retarded.

A flight sim to be succesfull as a game and as a commercial product needs only a few things

-A dynamic campaign (like falcon 4)

-Difficulty settings like in old il2 sturmovik so flight simmers can have a sim mode and not so simmers can make it easier.

-Possibly WW2 setting.



That is pretty much it, but no one ever created a game like this. il2 1946 is the closest but it does not have a dynamic campaign, it just have some shitty linear campaign.


If il2 1946 had a proper dynamic campaign there would no need ever for another flight game, but it's good only for quick combat currently as multiplayer is dead.
Such a wasted potential, it could have been the best flight sim ever.


This is red baron 3d, but the dynamic campaign is too bare bones.

Falcon 4 is too complex to be a market hit, and it does not provide difficulty sliders for not so serious simmers

 

[Burning Bridges]

There are millions of people who are quick to say exactly what they want, but if as you say "no one ever created a game like this" in 30 years of PC gaming there must be other reasons than human stupidity.

There were companies who provided practically everything that was possible at the time. Dynamix for example, but people just pirated their games, played them to death and complained. If there was ever one genre where piracy has truly killed gaming it is the hardcore sector, because these games cost more to make and people play them 1000s of hours, which creates more outrageous demands. It's almost comical that some companies spent more time and resources to model cockpits of WW2 fighters than the original aircraft cost, and then people expected to pay 50$ and play for the rest of their lives. I had these discussions many years ago when there was still a hardcore vs arcade element, and people just called me nuts when I said a modern sim with dynamic campaign and regular update should cost 500$.

But this is over as far as I see. We had companies who ruined themselves trying to do the impossible (Falcon 4 is a nice example), and for a time there was a supply from Russia where people were less business savy and idealistic, and cost were lower. All big companies with enough leverage have abandoned this market (Microsoft, Ubisoft), and today the only possibility is professional studios who develop for serious contractors making a consumer version, but where this happens (eg Steel Beasts, First Racing) people usually stay away because of cost and complexity. We are now way past this topic, the dice was cast around 2000 when all companies dissappeared that had bet on a future for hardcore consumer sims.

 

[Makabb]

There are millions of people who are quick to say exactly what they want, but if as you say "no one ever created a game like this" in 30 years of PC gaming there must be other reasons than human stupidity.

There were companies who provided practically everything that was possible at the time. Dynamix for example, but people just pirated their games, played them to death and complained. If there was ever one genre where piracy has truly killed gaming it is the hardcore sector, because these games cost more to make and people play them 1000s of hours, which creates more outrageous demands. It's almost comical that some companies spent more time and resources to model cockpits of WW2 fighters than the original aircraft cost, and then people expected to pay 50$ and play for the rest of their lives. I had these discussions many years ago when there was still a hardcore vs arcade element, and people just called me nuts when I said a modern sim with dynamic campaign and regular update should cost 500$.

But this is over as far as I see. We had companies who ruined themselves trying to do the impossible (Falcon 4 is a nice example), and for a time there was a supply from Russia where people were less business savy and idealistic, and cost were lower. All big companies with enough leverage have abandoned this market (Microsoft, Ubisoft), and today the only possibility is professional studios who develop for serious contractors making a consumer version, but where this happens (eg Steel Beasts, First Racing) people usually stay away because of cost and complexity. We are now way past this topic, the dice was cast around 2000 when all companies dissappeared that had bet on a future for hardcore consumer sims.

Which is funny because today if one company created the 'ultimate flight sim' and it would be on steam it would sell by truckloads, simply by the fact that there are pretty much no other flight games.

Falcon 4 was killed because it was too complex, a game needs to be a game.

The level of complexity vs game factor is ideal in il2 1946.


To be the flight sim that can be played forever all that has to be done is to make a il2 1946 with dynamic campaign from falcon 4 but not so complex. I tell you it would be the flight sim to end all flight sims.

 

[Burning Bridges]

But this exactly the attitude I describe. If a sim ticks off all the boxes it is too complex, but then people complain that all games are too arcadish. It is not 2005 any more, we had all this before, learning curves, casual gamers, dynamic campaigns, modding teams, realism debates, steep hardware requirements, millions of stupid ideas, dumbasses who announced games they could never realize, it has all been said and done 10 years ago, and the battle has been lost.

 

[J_C]

Falcon 4 was killed because it was too complex, a game needs to be a game.

The level of complexity vs game factor is ideal in il2 1946.


falcon 4 but not so complex. I tell you it would be the flight sim to end all flight sims.

Now make up your mind. You want a simulator or not? Falcon 4 was not too complex, it was complex just the right ammount because it was a near perfect simulation of an F16.

The complexity of the IL2 series was lower because the technology present is less advanced than in modern jets.

You can't make the ultimate flight sim and believe that it would sell a shitload of copies. Real flight simulators are the nichest genre on the market, and it costs a lot to make one.

 

[Makabb]

Falcon 4 was killed because it was too complex, a game needs to be a game.

The level of complexity vs game factor is ideal in il2 1946.


falcon 4 but not so complex. I tell you it would be the flight sim to end all flight sims.

Now make up your mind. You want a simulator or not? Falcon 4 was not too complex, it was complex just the right ammount because it was a near perfect simulation of an F16.

The complexity of the IL2 series was lower because the technology present is less advanced than in modern jets.

You can't make the ultimate flight sim and believe that it would sell a shitload of copies. Real flight simulators are the nichest genre on the market, and it costs a lot to make one.

Well then WW2 is the perfect setting for a flight sim and for it to still be a nice a game.

ww1 might be a little to lackluster

 

[J_C]

Falcon 4 was killed because it was too complex, a game needs to be a game.

The level of complexity vs game factor is ideal in il2 1946.


falcon 4 but not so complex. I tell you it would be the flight sim to end all flight sims.

Now make up your mind. You want a simulator or not? Falcon 4 was not too complex, it was complex just the right ammount because it was a near perfect simulation of an F16.

The complexity of the IL2 series was lower because the technology present is less advanced than in modern jets.

You can't make the ultimate flight sim and believe that it would sell a shitload of copies. Real flight simulators are the nichest genre on the market, and it costs a lot to make one.

Well then WW2 is the perfect setting for a flight sim.

So basicly we need another IL2 game with dynamic campaign. I would be OK with that.

 

[Makabb]

So basicly we need another IL2 game with dynamic campaign. I would be OK with that.

we need an autist who will dedicate rest of his life for this task and make a kickstarter out of it.

any volunteers ?

 

[Burning Bridges]

Not to forget that games and gamers have also moved on.

These days I find myself not even interested in flight sims any more, the excitement of flying is gone and when I play a flight sim I immediately lose interest because I am just looking at a cockpit and a stretch of terrain. Boring.

I realized was actually interested in flight sims only because I like to look at airplanes, like to build them and improve their performance, and also strategic aspects. The way ahead for me is new ideas that keep me fascinated for a couple of years, games like KSP where I can customize everything, or Automation where I can design engines, or Subnautica where I can build underwater bases, generally games where I am not just the human autopilot, but my decisions result in something. But just flying airplanes, driving cars, sitting in trains or running around with a gun in front of me has become boring.

 

[J_C]

Not to forget that games and gamers have also moved on.

These days I find myself not even interested in flight sims any more, the excitement of flying is gone and when I play a flight sim I immediately lose interest because I am just looking at a cockpit and a stretch of terrain. Boring.

I realized was actually interested in flight sims only because I like to look at airplanes, like to build them and improve their performance, and also strategic aspects. The way ahead for me is new ideas that keep me fascinated for a couple of years, games like KSP where I can customize everything, or Automation where I can design engines, or Subnautica where I can build underwater bases, generally games where I am not just the human autopilot, but my decisions result in something. But just flying airplanes, driving cars, sitting in trains or running around with a gun in front of me has become boring.

I can't agree with it. A well designed mission is not just about looking at the terrain. Flying the plane to avoid radars, avoid air defence, chasing bombers or other fighters, a good old dogfight are everything but boring.