(BoS) Battle of Stalingrad = is same as cheap arcade game

[purkkafin]

Hi

I have expirienced lot of flight sims since warbirds etc and all il-2 series and lot of IL-2 CoD.
Since i bought BoS and and have flow it for 1 night. Its full arcade. Is it real flight simulation. NO never ever. the arcade ai trucks damage you can trow a hit from 500m. no bulletholes. no damage in planes. If your plane gets damaged you can clearly see there is very few polygones in aircrafts or land units all over Like dx9 its it . And there isnt even decent airplane frame desing what would even resemble real plane. All that IL-2 CoD have The (BoS) Battle of Stalingrad does not. Worst 44€ i have ever spent. You just can see it from Miles away They just like your money nothing else

[ATAG_Colander]

Hi purkkafin,

Welcome to the ATAG forums and may I say, what a first post :D

To everyone, keep it clean please.

[TheVino3]

All hands to battlestations.





:popcorn2:

[ChiefRedCloud]

Hi

I have expirienced lot of flight sims since warbirds etc and all il-2 series and lot of IL-2 CoD.
Since i bought BoS and and have flow it for 1 night. Its full arcade. Is it real flight simulation. NO never ever. the arcade ai trucks damage you can trow a hit from 500m. no bulletholes. no damage in planes. If your plane gets damaged you can clearly see there is very few polygones in aircrafts or land units all over Like dx9 its it . And there isnt even decent airplane frame desing what would even resemble real plane. All that IL-2 CoD have The (BoS) Battle of Stalingrad does not. Worst 44€ i have ever spent. You just can see it from Miles away They just like your money nothing else

Indeed Welcome to the forums purkkafin ..... BoS I think (meaning I'm guessing here) is being made to give everyone a taste of WW2 without pushing any envelopes on computer requirements. In other words not to take anything away from ALL their hard work (assumed by me) this is a middle of the roads game (I hesitate to call it a flight sim) that is meant to be a cash cow with a WW2 flavor. Is this bad? Not necessarily. If a person fly's/plays it and are happy with it or at the very least entertained, then it's good (for them). If not, as with you, then it's a disappointment that you just learned a valuable lesson from. No matter how you dress something up, it may NOT be what you think it is.

I'll state the obvious here, we all have different tastes and view points on nearly everything. This is what makes us individuals. When individuals come together, as we do here on the ATAG forums and share our like interests in something like CloD, then we have something special. Welcome to something special, IL-2 Sturmovik Cliffs of Dover, something VERY special.

Chief

[DUI]

What I hear from squadron mates and read in the forums your opinion seems to be quite extreme and you surely could have put it into more diplomatic words.

If I saw a similar post in the BoS forum I would also man the battlestations and defend the honor of CloD. Of course, as a wise man I just would ignore it. :D

[Katdog5]

Hi

I have expirienced lot of flight sims since warbirds etc and all il-2 series and lot of IL-2 CoD.
Since i bought BoS and and have flow it for 1 night. Its full arcade. Is it real flight simulation. NO never ever. the arcade ai trucks damage you can trow a hit from 500m. no bulletholes. no damage in planes. If your plane gets damaged you can clearly see there is very few polygones in aircrafts or land units all over Like dx9 its it . And there isnt even decent airplane frame desing what would even resemble real plane. All that IL-2 CoD have The (BoS) Battle of Stalingrad does not. Worst 44€ i have ever spent. You just can see it from Miles away They just like your money nothing else

which is why they say they clearly say the damage model is at 60% completed

[implicit A]

Hi every body.
Welcome here purkkafin.

" If I saw a similar post in the BoS forum I would also man the battlestations and defend the honor of CloD"
+10000

Bos is not yet perfect . It's a Work in progress.
but it could be a very great one
FM are maybe not yet perfect, maybe it will be one day (roll rates and so on). landing is a real challenge : I don't know if it's realistic but landing in full real is certainly not arcade.
I've got 20 years of flight sim, and sure BOS is the only one for me where it still difficult for landing and i have to re learn everything. What sort of arcade game should it be ?
For exemple i've just bought DCS P51D yesterday and it's ok for me to start up, fly, and land, in full real. not yet in BOS lagg 3.

MP lapino test map is acardish because it's small, quick, and no objectives except dogfighting.
MP Stalingrad is great ( the biggest made of that place for many other games) but it still only 15mn time counter for beta testing and flight records for devs.

maybe, wait after release, try it again in full real . Anyway i think it's a good work for 60% of développement.

[1lokos]

which is why they say they clearly say the damage model is at 60% completed

I dont whant take part of this "political discussion", but seems remain people unknowingly blinded by the trench of "XX%", :D
a clarification:

From Developer Diary (http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/168-developer-diary/) thread:

DM development? It was 60% on November 9th (2013). (If I remember correctly stated by Loft).

DD #62 (18 April 2014) DM is ready for 90% now. (Zak)

At this date the propellers did not have DM. This was implemented in later EA.
Fire on wing fuel tanks too.
Damage to weapons and external bomb racks are added in the last week EA.
What probable move the DM % completion upper in Dev' scale.

Seems remain small things to do like damage to elevator/rudder cables, aileron rods (like in il-2'46), not sure if planed.

:thumbsup:

Sokol1

[startrekmike]

Hi

I have expirienced lot of flight sims since warbirds etc and all il-2 series and lot of IL-2 CoD.
Since i bought BoS and and have flow it for 1 night. Its full arcade. Is it real flight simulation. NO never ever. the arcade ai trucks damage you can trow a hit from 500m. no bulletholes. no damage in planes. If your plane gets damaged you can clearly see there is very few polygones in aircrafts or land units all over Like dx9 its it . And there isnt even decent airplane frame desing what would even resemble real plane. All that IL-2 CoD have The (BoS) Battle of Stalingrad does not. Worst 44€ i have ever spent. You just can see it from Miles away They just like your money nothing else


You have every right to your opinion but I think you could have phrased it in a way that is not so needlessly aggressive.

Geez, just when this sub-forum starts to feel a little friendly to those who actually like BoS, this stuff comes along...

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

I think the OP has put up what I would call an exaggeration.

I have been enjoying Flight Sims since the early 1990's, have tried everything on the market, and I can say quite definitely, BATTLE OF STALINGRAD is NOT the same as a '...cheap arcade game'.

It's actually near the top of a long progression of Flight Sim development, the physics engine, visual design and flight modeling are very advanced.

Is it at the top of the heap? Probably not... but it certainly can't be written off as arcade.

I don't like to see people posting overly negative comments or attacks on any of the currently viable simulations, it is simply shortsighted. All it does is fragment and degrade an already fragmented and declining community.

Developers invest a lot of time and money to create these type of simulations, but they won't continue to do that unless they have a reason to expect a return.

Members of the community making posts like this one are not helpful.

I replied to another thread where a poster characterized CLIFFS OF DOVER as "...not at all true to the laws of physics." Too me that poster, and the OP in this thread are two sides of the same coin. They don't really understand the detail which goes into a modern flight simulation.

All modern sims ARE based on real aerodynamic theory... they are not perfect... it's fundamentally impossible to create a 'perfect' flight simulation, but they do create an environment and a standard of fidelity which should be recognized.

No two game physic's engines are going to be the same, and its up to the individual player to decide which one he prefers, but those same individuals should remember they are making a judgement on a SIMULATION. If you want to experience 100% fidelity, take flying lessons.

Being hypercritical based on a personal opinion is not helpful.

[Ohms]

I would just like to say I have heard many people comment on the correct feeling of flight with reference to these and other computer sims. I am lucky enough to have daily access to two LEVEL D flight sims (Citation II, King Air C90A) which are used by government pilots. Even these multi million boxes on legs provide a close but not exact feeling of flight so complaining about this and that seems a little silly. Yes glaring issues must be pointed out but as others have said nothing will be perfect or exact. Lets just wait until BOS is out to compare it with the current released flight sims out there.

Ohms
P.S I do not own or have flown ROF or BOS.

[LuseKofte]

I find the whole thing a bit drama, clearly calling BOS A bad simulator shows little understanding of what it take to build one.
I currently can not find any use for this Sim, that is my problem. And in my point of view the drama about relativly small issues is rediciolus. In currently state and the way it seems to go, I cannot care less about rollrate since the only thing I do there Are flying alone in my PE 2.
This Sim had a Hauge potential, and to me it fades away. Currently I cannot see any reason for my squadron to use it, I am very dissapointed about that fact, because we felt very ready to leave CLOD.
But it is not a bad simulator, like CLOD it had a helluva potential of growing to be a complete Sim.
Like CLOD it seems to fail. Unlike most of you guys I can't se the fun in that fact

[1lokos]

"Mr.109"? :D

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/7976-i-just-bought-game-no-players-or-very-few-online-so-waste-44/#entry137935

Sokol1

[1lokos]

....I currently can not find any use for this Sim, that is my problem.
... the only thing I do there Are flying alone in my PE 2.
....Unlike most of you guys I can't se the fun in it

You know that you can join (online) in a Expert server and practice ground pound with his Pe-2 - include high altitude level bombing - and get points in stats for ground targets (same of QM) destroyed?
A destroyed ground target now dont re-spawn again in some minutes. You just will not be changing the "history course". :D
Add to this that navigation, e.g. in Stalingrad area map, have now RDF aids making easy do RTB even in overcast. :thumbsup:
And add to all this that in the process you can be bounced be Mk.Mr.X. :devilish:

And you have luck that now he use Bf 109, later probably use FW 190.

And I do not think you will find a radically different experience than this when the game be officially launched in ~two months.

Sokol1

[LuseKofte]

You know that you can join (online) in a Expert server and practice ground pound with his Pe-2 - include high altitude level bombing - and get points in stats for ground targets (same of QM) destroyed?
A destroyed ground target now dont re-spawn again in some minutes. You just will not be changing the "history course". :D
Add to this that navigation, e.g. in Stalingrad area map, have now RDF aids making easy do RTB even in overcast. :thumbsup:
And add to all this that in the process you can be bounced be Mk.Mr.X. :devilish:

And you have luck that now he use Bf 109, later probably use FW 190.

And I do not think you will find a radically different experience than this when the game be officially launched in ~two months.

Sokol1

Yes I know, I find the map with multiple airfield acceptable, in that one you got a chance to climb to altitude.
For fast fun I actually prefer that, but too many times you cannot fly Red, they are all filled up.
I don't see it as a long term solution, that sim is in need for dedicated servers

[javelina]

now that's what I call a 1st post! :P

[Foul Ole Ron]

Yes I know, I find the map with multiple airfield acceptable, in that one you got a chance to climb to altitude.
For fast fun I actually prefer that, but too many times you cannot fly Red, they are all filled up.
I don't see it as a long term solution, that sim is in need for dedicated servers

It's early access so it's natural that the game isn't displaying it's full depth yet. Once it's fully released with dedicated servers, more complex missions, etc. then it might be more to your taste. In the meantime there's not a huge amount to do for those who mainly like bombing.

For the rest of us who want the sim to succeed and deliver what we were promised by the devs (i.e. a FM for planes as sophisticated as DCS) we'll continue to point out the things which we see as off. You might not care about them but they important to us. Ultimately you'll probably get what you want with the full release so you'll have to suffer listening to us speaking up about what we want.

[LuseKofte]

You see, I care about FM and rollrate, but right now it just not on my priority of worries and consern.
I have absolutely no objections on how the PE 2 act in this game, it pretty much disintegrate when attacked by a fighter, kind of realistic by the books I read of its missions when escorting planes did not show up.
My hopes for this game was not redused by its Lack of complexity and fm, more by it simplifyed bombaim with I find offencive, also the fact they seem not to understand the importance of missions editor.
The progress lately are in my mind showing no ambissions of further development. And based on what I have seen they reduse the numbers of hotas for every update they do.
All this tells me they aim for the easyest way out.
If you look at it this way, turnrate is the lesser of worries

[Foul Ole Ron]

BOS was never going to have a complex bomb sight. They want lots of people to buy and fly the bombers and also be able to hit things pretty easily.

It might be a long way off but VEAO in DCS World are going to be doing the Avro Lancaster - you'll get some complex and accurate bomb sight modelling there I would think. Though realistic bomb sight operation would probably mean mostly unable to hit anything from altitude unless carpet bombed.

[Hood]

Hi

I have expirienced lot of flight sims since warbirds etc and all il-2 series and lot of IL-2 CoD.
Since i bought BoS and and have flow it for 1 night. Its full arcade. Is it real flight simulation. NO never ever. the arcade ai trucks damage you can trow a hit from 500m. no bulletholes. no damage in planes. If your plane gets damaged you can clearly see there is very few polygones in aircrafts or land units all over Like dx9 its it . And there isnt even decent airplane frame desing what would even resemble real plane. All that IL-2 CoD have The (BoS) Battle of Stalingrad does not. Worst 44€ i have ever spent. You just can see it from Miles away They just like your money nothing else

What a prat. For non English speakers - http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=prat .

Colandar, ever thought of putting new forum members on moderation for the first 5 posts. Might save some of this drivel and the inevitable follow-ups (like this one).

Hood

[III./ZG76_Saipan]

All hands to battlestations.





:popcorn2:

LOL, good one.

[ATAG_Snapper]

What a prat. For non English speakers - http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=prat .

Colandar, ever thought of putting new forum members on moderation for the first 5 posts. Might save some of this drivel and the inevitable follow-ups (like this one).

Hood

You may disagree with the OP and you're welcome to say why. This thread came very close to be being closed since the OP was, IMHO, bashing another flight sim. However, the other forum members took this as an opportunity to explain to the OP -- for the benefit of those possibly considering the purchase of BoS -- why they, as experienced flight simmers, believed the OP to be wrong. Until now, no one has resorted to attacking the OP.

You, however, have chosen to break this forum's rules by openly attacking the OP with name calling. Please do not do that again.

[LuseKofte]

BOS was never going to have a complex bomb sight. They want lots of people to buy and fly the bombers and also be able to hit things pretty easily.

It might be a long way off but VEAO in DCS World are going to be doing the Avro Lancaster - you'll get some complex and accurate bomb sight modelling there I would think. Though realistic bomb sight operation would probably mean mostly unable to hit anything from altitude unless carpet bombed.

I disagree totally, when I bought it song the first. The idea by this Sim was based on a true IL 2 series
IL 2 is the same as CLOD but more difficult since you dont have a true autopilot.
Based on the hotas in the first dl we Where led to believe that apart from the noen clickable pits you could and should have the same degree of realism, to me clickable pits is a waste of time, I dont use it
Other than that, my expetation isnt let down in terms of the Il2 and PE 2 for those I gladly pay the money.

Snapper you would look at it differently if that was said against TF

[ATAG_Colander]

Snapper you would look at it differently if that was said against TF

In TF defense and why I think it can not be compared at all...
TF does not have the source code of the game or even dedicated developers.

[startrekmike]

In TF defense and why I think it can not be compared at all...
TF does not have the source code of the game or even dedicated developers.


I think what he was getting at is that Snapper's response to the OP's first post was perhaps more mild because it was directed at BoS and not TF/CloD.

I will not express my opinion on the matter because that is how one gets in trouble but that is perhaps what he was getting at.

[LuseKofte]

Your right Colander, that was a unfair remark , I am sorry

[Tvrdi]

BOS is not even close to arcade...but does it have better fm than CLOD or dcs? IMHO, nope. I realized that BOS creators doesnt even want to excell in fm but in other things...marketing driven sim which targets both, warthunder and midcore part of old il2 pilots cant be really compared with next generation CLOD engine much less new dcs engine (europe44 etc) and its military simulator level of quality...

[1lokos]

... and midcore part of old il2 pilots

What is a expressive part of "il-2 community" and did not like of CloD "complexity"* (some did not like without having tested) .

* What at release was more confusion than complexity. :)

At current stage Bo$ is a good game with a big with a chance to succeed.

In this preview a new insight about the SP Campaign - the Achilles heel of the project (IMO) - more important at the release than one FMB.

http://www.onrpg.com/articles/editorial/il-2-sturmovik-battle-of-stalingrad-press-preview/

Sokol1

[ATAG_Snapper]

I think what he was getting at is that Snapper's response to the OP's first post was perhaps more mild because it was directed at BoS and not TF/CloD.

I will not express my opinion on the matter because that is how one gets in trouble but that is perhaps what he was getting at.

Absolutely. It would be fair and accurate to say that I would be far, far more prone to get my knickers in a knot over a direct attack on TF than on BoS.

I've been AFK a lot today, so Colander was here first and addressed the OP. If I had been here first I would have closed this thread and then, as Colander did, I would have cautioned the OP to make his second post here a little less extreme. But if I had done all that then we would have missed out on all the nifty subsequent posts.....so there ya go. Colander handled this better than I would've.

I do not agree with the OP's opinion, my views are pretty much the same as what Buzzsaw expressed. However, we cannot and will not accept name-calling between forum members. Everyone here, I trust, knows that.

[startrekmike]

Absolutely. It would be fair and accurate to say that I would be far, far more prone to get my knickers in a knot over a direct attack on TF than on BoS.

I've been AFK a lot today, so Colander was here first and addressed the OP. If I had been here first I would have closed this thread and then, as Colander did, I would have cautioned the OP to make his second post here a little less extreme. But if I had done all that then we would have missed out on all the nifty subsequent posts.....so there ya go. Colander handled this better than I would've.

I do not agree with the OP's opinion, my views are pretty much the same as what Buzzsaw expressed. However, we cannot and will not accept name-calling between forum members. Everyone here, I trust, knows that.


Yeah, I mean, I suppose I would get my knickers in a knot (to borrow your expression) over any direct attack on any flight sim dev at this point, that is perhaps why I have been keeping my time on flight sim forums overall at a minimum.

It was a bummer to see such a topic pop up after what seemed like a pretty nice stretch where there was no real hostility or negativity going on (for the most part).

I don't envy your position as a moderator in this case.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Yeh, it's "damned if you do, damned if you don't" at times. LOL

I want ALL the PC-based flight combat sims to do well. Collectively we're such a niche item compared to the huge games out there. I see War Thunder, with all its great eye and ear candy, as a huge recruiting base for sims like Clod, BoS, and DCS. And I see lots of migration between sims. I don't own BoS (yet), but I do have DCS World modules on my hard drive and RoF, too. It's great being able to flip back and forth between them; each has its own challenges, as you know. If BoS and DCS market the hell out of their sims -- and they will -- this will bring more new players into the genre which ultimately will benefit Clod. Win win for everyone.

[AKA_Recon]

... but hey, it might actually be *fun*... we all know about *fun* right ?

Let's have fun - an escape from the harsh realities of life for awhile , to fly with fellow virtual pilots... (bullet holes or not lol)

Keep it fun - and great post by Buzz above - 100% agree with you!

[LuseKofte]

For my sake, I did not even comming on first post, it is not possible to take it seriously.
It is based on false accusation even bordering to untruth.
It cannot be regarded as a opinion, since the author obviously had to know he based his statement on a number of obvious lies.
But in my expirience, and obviously his he was aiming for som cheap points and knew he would get away with it.

[Lymark]

BOS may not be as good as we were expecting in its release. But I'm pretty sure that the community is going to make a lot of mods and turns it to something like TF mod.

[gavagai]

BOS may not be as good as we were expecting in its release. But I'm pretty sure that the community is going to make a lot of mods and turns it to something like TF mod.

I think there's a good reason why that hasn't happened yet with RoF. For example, in RoF all of the flight model parameters are stashed away in binary library files and the .exe. You can view or edit things with a hex editor, but you cannot tell what does what. There is a 99% chance that it is the same way with BoS, too.

[Tvrdi]

At current stage Bo$ is a good game with a big with a chance to succeed.
Sokol1

Nope. Its a comical "simulation" of ww2 planes. Look at the roll rates of all planes, then that "funky" rudder on 109...look at the insulting bad cockpits (198 and FW190)....What they care for is look and marketing....and to rush and sale more and more planes....their target audence is clearly midcore simmers and warthunder audience....dudes who enjoy old modded il2, modded COD and DCS should avoid this half arcade.

[gavagai]

Now the Fw 190 stonewalling begins: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/8318-dear-devs-i-need-some-confirmations-please/#entry140536


Instead of all this negativty, would it be possible for those having found inacuracies with the Fw190 3D model or FM to explain preciselly what these innacuracies are, and to back these finding with documents/photos, etc that can be used to verify the claims and eventually make the corrections?

As if precise explanations are not what users have been posting since the moment the 190 was released...or rather, since the old days of Il-2. They will not listen.

[1lokos]

At current stage Bo$ is a good game with a big with a chance to succeed.


Nope. Its a comical "simulation" of ww2 planes. Look at the roll rates of all planes, then that "funky" rudder on 109...look at the insulting bad cockpits (198 and FW190)....What they care for is look and marketing....and to rush and sale more and more planes....their target audence is clearly midcore simmers and warthunder audience....dudes who enjoy old modded il2, modded COD and DCS should avoid this half arcade.


That's why I said game and not "simulation". :D
We know that their financial success is in "gamers", not in "simmers" - and might fail due to lack of sufficient "WT" content... :)

I know a lot of il-2 "widows" - who run away of il-2'46 MOD "Babel" and CloD confu... ops. "complexity" - that now are happy with BoS "simple" model (easy to install, automatic update, "easy" to set - minus the Controls, write in "Greek" :D - and to use, eye candy models, "Hollywood" visual damage...). The true is their proportion is higher than ones that accept CloD "as is" and those who has hope in DCS. :whacky:

BTW - I too have some hope in DCS - already "buy" three planes - but don't want only a nice "new "Mustangs" over Kuban", I want a proper "WWII scenery" or I'll also end "run away" from him ... :thumbsup:

The "Bo$" thing get boring after blow some train again and again... No interest in "Fw 190 over Stalingrad" MP Airquake - personally I prefer a Ju-52... but we know, who would fly it?
Don't open this game anymore unless for do the updates. Awaiting the final "Alpha 99%" ...

Sokol1

[dburne]

I got to hand it to purkkafin ( OP).
He signed up over at BOS forum to make 1 post ( similar to this), and signed up here on ATAG and made 1 post.

Both threads, have sure gotten a lot of traction... from his hit and run tactic.

In some aspects, BOS looks very nice, in others , not so nice.
Obviously their opting for a much larger target audience than the " hard corers" can provide - heck they even admitted that on their forums, if they had to make it on just the more serious hard core flight simmers, they would fail.
Hence why the CGI trailers, the way they are marketing the product.

It will definitely fall somewhere between, Cliffs of Dover and War Thunder. It will be interested to see how large an audience it does get after release.

I keep waiting for them to add in some SP content to the EA, have not even launched BOS in about 5 weeks. Way too much SP fun for me to be had in Cliffs TF4.3

[gavagai]

heck they even admitted that on their forums, if they had to make it on just the more serious hard core flight simmers, they would fail.

Seeing that their product does not convince many hard core simmers to buy it, that doesn't surprise me at all.

[Hood]

Gosh so many whiners for a game that isn't finished or released yet.

I wonder what the difference is between a game and a simulator and a combat simulator? Clickable cockpits?

I remember that Holy Grail of flight sims, IL2, being awful on release until a lot was fixed and then its potential was released via HSFX etc.

Whiners rule in this forum I think.

Hood

[Tvrdi]

Seeing that their product does not convince many hard core simmers to buy it, that doesn't surprise me at all.

If the game will be the same regarding FM and some other stuff I will sell my BOS account. One third of selling price will go to support ATAG server. Im already regreting I didnt pledge more for DCS Europe 44 instead od investing in that BOS cra*.

[LuseKofte]

I love the hollywood damage models , its a nice change. I have given up my initial hopes for this game. Now I am looking for what to do with it.
In this section I will not find that, this section is as grey and sad as the ruins in Stalingrad.

[Tvrdi]

Hell yeah FW190 damage model is hillarious. I shot of its wings completely in one short burst every single time i fired on that thing. It falls apart like paper plane. What a joke.

[requiem]

Hell yeah FW190 damage model is hillarious. I shot of its wings completely in one short burst every single time i fired on that thing. It falls apart like paper plane. What a joke.

It does feel a bit too easy to rip things off...I wonder if Gav's reduced lethality mod can be translated to BoS :)

[Hood]

Hell yeah FW190 damage model is hillarious. I shot of its wings completely in one short burst every single time i fired on that thing. It falls apart like paper plane. What a joke.



It's crazy isn't it - amazing that a newly just released plane isn't perfect in all respects. Must confess I'm trying to think of a single plane in any sim that was perfect on release.

Hood

[ATAG_Snapper]

I think it's fair to say this thread has run its course.

Thanks to everyone for contributing. Can't wait to see what the OP's next post will be on this forum! :goofy