PDA

View Full Version : BoS info update ???????



Skoshi_Tiger
Jan-10-2013, 23:59
Well there are about 240 posts in the questions thread over at the BoS site and it's been a couple of weeks since the developers have made a comment. Jason was online over the last couple of days, so I thought there might be some news.

No wonder all the posts for the last couple of weeks have been irrelevant.

Bit of a let down really.

Verhängnis
Jan-11-2013, 00:58
Well, we know when there is news, it should be pretty exciting. I imagine for the first few weeks they would have still been in creative mode figuring exactly where BoS and its development would be heading, and laying out ground plans for the project. I imagine we will see something good in the next month. :thumbsup:

Skoshi_Tiger
Jan-11-2013, 05:45
Speak of the Devil!

Hmmm! Slightly underwhelemed by the by todays update.

http://forum.il2sturmovik.net/topic/168-developer-diary/#entry7273

Inclusion of Mods sounds good.


2) What about mods? Do I understand correctly that it will be about the same level as now in the ROF?

Will you be able to create and add mods (maps, aircraft, and machinery) without developers? If so - whether the game built tools to enable / disable mods and the ability to create servers with mods?



We never hindered creativity, contrary we support any initiative. Technically, such a system is ready, simply create your own objects and put them in the game folder. Top models can become official and will be added to the basic set. Of course we are always keeping a close eye for talented people to maybe invite them to our team of developers.


Not sure about Pilot injuries. CoD's not perfect, but I'm not a fan of RoF either.

8) Implementing injured of the pilot will remain the same as in the RoF (very well implemented)? And will the added loss of consciousness, dizziness, temporary loss of vision from a painful shock, and so on?

The base implementation will be the same. But we can improve the system itself as a whole, adding fatigue loads. Later, talk about this in more detail.

Lack of wheathering layer is a concern. (I tend to push the slider to max - I like the Air Warrior look! ;) )


11) Will the visual wear for aircraft (aging textures)? Will the physical deterioration (optional) with the consequences in the form of breakdowns and unreliable work systems?

No. Only if this wear is drawn on the texture of the plane.


Biggest concern is that they don't seam to be worried about detail for ground objects.


19) Will ground equipment have advanced animation (work of suspension, coasting)?

No.

If it's anything like RoF it's going to be awful. For me Eastern front is about being down low and Ground Objects are a major part of the sim. It will also limit what Movie Makers can do. Cod Tanks looked fantastic in action videos!

Most of the rest is abit ho-hum.

Maybe they need a voting system to see what questions the community wants them to answer??

Verhängnis
Jan-11-2013, 11:06
Yeh, the news is a bit underwhelming. They seem to be focusing 'too much' on the flying/dogfight (gameplay) aspect and not on a lot else. This isn't such a bad thing, it should be fun like the original but definitely don't expect detail... I get the impression that they have almost orchestrated this so that the users can add maps and create the ground objects so they don't have to - I wouldn't be surprised if they sold back to us any of the things where the sim will lack in.

I think after CoD, perhaps we should all try to be a bit more open minded about the project but if they manage to create something which takes us back to the feel of the original, it will be a success.


Maybe they need a voting system to see what questions the community wants them to answer??

I had the idea that maybe, if discussions are started among the community, a poll could be made to see what is wanted by the majority - even if as DLC. The only problem is that many will suggest something out of the bounds of reason and the forum could become more divided - as they do a 180 back to the 'we want CoD detail'.

I try not to bother myself or get involved in it all too much - I prefer to wait and see the initial screenshots or test renders. Once we see the aircraft and a cockpit, we can know what to expect for most else... let's just hope it won't be as bland as this news is. Maybe we should be worried that they are taking a step backwards when they say they are returning to IL-2's origins... there's some food for thought.
CoD was too far ahead, let's hope that BoS isn't too far behind.

Old_Canuck
Jan-11-2013, 12:10
....
CoD was too far ahead, let's hope that BoS isn't too far behind.

+1

III./ZG76_Saipan
Jan-11-2013, 16:14
probably will look like RoF, feel like RoF....RoF with ww2 planes. cant say i am eager for it.

vranac
Jan-11-2013, 16:49
Speak of the Devil!

Hmmm! Slightly underwhelemed by the by todays update.

Biggest concern is that they don't seam to be worried about detail for ground objects.



If it's anything like RoF it's going to be awful. For me Eastern front is about being down low and Ground Objects are a major part of the sim. It will also limit what Movie Makers can do. Cod Tanks looked fantastic in action videos!

Most of the rest is abit ho-hum.

Maybe they need a voting system to see what questions the community wants them to answer??

Unfortunately Skoshi it will be maybe a little better than RoF.They already said that.They will try to sell it to wide number of players( they were mentionig WoTanks a lot as good model).
They have only 13 months to release BoS, those are words from devs.

No many buttons, that kills gameplay in the opinion of devs.

They will have only cannons on the tanks no machine guns.

They don't care about opinions of forum members because that is very low % of their potentional buyers ( maybe right ) and thats from Loft himself.
They have their own vision what is good for business, and maybe they are right.

There was direct question on the new forum, "After all this time except FM and DM you don't give enything more then WT ?"
and Loft answered , "No. But that may be the key."

Don't get me wrong I have no hate for BoS, but I'm pretty shure that they will not improve those things much even in the next sequel if BoS will succeed.
They will just make new maps and models for the next theater.

That is the business plan that 1c preferred over MG plan and in my opinion that is the only reason why CloD engine is canned.

Gorgon14
Jan-11-2013, 17:34
Just a thought and I'm sure it's not a popular one, but if you are blowing the stinking tank apart from a thousand feet in the air, does it really matter if the suspension is moving?

thee_oddball
Jan-11-2013, 18:15
Unfortunately Skoshi it will be maybe a little better than RoF.They already said that.They will try to sell it to wide number of players( they were mentionig WoTanks a lot as good model).
They have only 13 months to release BoS, those are words from devs.

No many buttons, that kills gameplay in the opinion of devs.

They will have only cannons on the tanks no machine guns.

They don't care about opinions of forum members because that is very low % of their potentional buyers ( maybe right ) and thats from Loft himself.
They have their own vision what is good for business, and maybe they are right.

There was direct question on the new forum, "After all this time except FM and DM you don't give enything more then WT ?"
and Loft answered , "No. But that may be the key."

Don't get me wrong I have no hate for BoS, but I'm pretty shure that they will not improve those things much even in the next sequel if BoS will succeed.
They will just make new maps and models for the next theater.

That is the business plan that 1c preferred over MG plan and in my opinion that is the only reason why CloD engine is canned.

^^^this is pretty much it.
BOS will be better than il2/1946 but not as good as CLoD....but the real killer will be if they try a ROF business model....if BOS was as feature rich as CLoD There is a good chance people would except "paying per plane" but i really doubt people will shell out hundreds to replace the planes they have in 1946 if BOS is nothing more than a mild upgrade of 1946.

thee_oddball
Jan-11-2013, 18:19
Just a thought and I'm sure it's not a popular one, but if you are blowing the stinking tank apart from a thousand feet in the air, does it really matter if the suspension is moving?
games are constantly evolving in details,features,depth and playabilty...those that don't fade way :( or wind up in the $9.99 50 game bundle deal :D

Skoshi_Tiger
Jan-11-2013, 19:01
Just a thought and I'm sure it's not a popular one, but if you are blowing the stinking tank apart from a thousand feet in the air, does it really matter if the suspension is moving?

Hey! If I'm going to be flipping those Tigers with .50cal's I'm going to have to be a lot closer than 1000' ( Joking of course! :) )

But it's not just suspension. I assume by 'coasting' that they mean that the vehicle will have momentum fo that when a vehicle gets hit it will behave in a realistic mannor. From this I infer that the object won't have a proper physic model. I find it unusual that they would have such a detailed physics model for the planes and yet it won't be able to realistically interact with the ground objects. (Might do a test in RoF to see how it looks)

I tend to do a lot of tree/wave top flying in ground attack mode. The Eastern Front is always portrayed as a gritty, dirty, ground war. The behaviour of ground objects, although sutble, still adds to immersion.

All I can say is thank god that it's going to be a winter map, because no matter how good the collision detection with trees would be, the spinning RoF style trees are a complete immersion killer for me.

Personally I really want to get really enthusiastic about this sim (It's the only option that I can see on the horizon for the next few years), but nothing the Dev's have said so far has done that for me yet.

Still there is a lot of time between now and release.

ATAG_Bliss
Jan-11-2013, 19:14
That's the thing. It won't even come close to IL46 - not even in the same league. It will have better graphics, sure, but I don't know one other thing it will surpass it at. The FMB alone in either 46 or Clod is 10x the mission builder in ROF.

I read someone talking about an object they added in the ROF ME that allows you to have explosions (an explosion object I guess lol), and the way it was presented was as if it was something great. I thought about it for a second, then realized the FMB doesn't have an object to manipulate explosions because they actually have objects available to use that actually explode. You don't need to mimic an explosion, just use an explosive object out of the 1000's of bombs, fuel tanks, fuel depots, ammunition, etc., that are available as an object in the 1st place. In IL2COD you can simply just script it in on top of using an object that explodes already in the game.

The biggest thing about IL246/COD is the options - the sandbox if you will. There is no sandbox in ROF. Download the game and look at what settings you have for a server. There is no "dev" console in public ROF, like IL246/COD. For instance, this is a simple list of the most basic server console commands for IL2/COD: http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=Knowledge_Base&op=show&kid=351 None of this exists in ROF. So as a server host, your options are severely limited, making the game severely limited. IL2COD basically uses the same commands/structure of old IL2. There is no console to type in <help, <tl, <gunstats, <obj<blue, etc., with ROF. There is no possible way to add this type of commander to your server. You are stuck with what the devs give you.

You can't even make a campaign with ROF. There is no loading submissions on top of missions. There's no 3rd party online wars or any of that jazz. There's no moving dog fight servers. It's just a very sterile, stale, environment without the ability to have much go on.

You notice how many people asked about the static/AI object limitations? And yet, of course, there was no answer at all. (I'm not surprised)

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but this won't come close to what we can do in old 46, not in mission building, not in campaigns, not in anything other than graphics. The DRM is also terrible. Their master browser streams all the data/statistics from servers, meaning servers have to phone home. If this pipeline gets too much data, you will see server stats disappear in game, then the server crashes. That is one of the reasons, (I can tell you this as an old beta tester for ROF), that the object/plane limitations exist in the game. It can only handle so much, then it craps out. Even worse is all the servers phone home to the same spot. That means if there was ever a day that many people were online in ROF, spread out through a bunch of servers, that the master browser is even more inherent to take a crap even though the typical use of 70 online players and 100 static objects hasn't been met yet.

For the online world, this is a disaster. And a very expensive one at that.

I don't know if anyone else caught it, in one of the early answers by Loft/Han, but they said they will be PM/emailing server hosters what limits to use in a mission. I remember they tried pulling that stunt on me, PM'ing me saying "REDUCE THE NUMBER OF OBJECTS ON YOUR MISSION" it is making ROF look bad etc. They basically went so far as to threaten to take my server key away because one of my missions, with very low amounts of players was crashing the master browser. I had put many objects in there (many for ROF / about 1/4 of what I would use for a Clod/46 mission) because a new version of ROF came out. I wanted to see if any headway was made on the game limitations. And immediately the "runners of the master browser saw it" and started PM'ing me, threating me etc.

So I'm here to tell you. I would buy this in a heartbeat, a New York minute, pre-order right now if it was comparable to 46 with better graphics. Cause 46 is simply amazing. But I'm sorry to tell you, this will be a huge down grade from 46, and a century back in time from what's possible in IL2COD. I'm not trying to bash anything, but that's the truth.

I, like others, will wait and see. But as it stands right now, and the answers we've been giving, this does not look promising at all.

vranac
Jan-11-2013, 20:16
That's the thing. It won't even come close to IL46 - not even in the same league. It will have better graphics, sure, but I don't know one other thing it will surpass it at. The FMB alone in either 46 or Clod is 10x the mission builder in ROF.

I read someone talking about an object they added in the ROF ME that allows you to have explosions (an explosion object I guess lol), and the way it was presented was as if it was something great. I thought about it for a second, then realized the FMB doesn't have an object to manipulate explosions because they actually have objects available to use that actually explode. You don't need to mimic an explosion, just use an explosive object out of the 1000's of bombs, fuel tanks, fuel depots, ammunition, etc., that are available as an object in the 1st place. In IL2COD you can simply just script it in on top of using an object that explodes already in the game.

The biggest thing about IL246/COD is the options - the sandbox if you will. There is no sandbox in ROF. Download the game and look at what settings you have for a server. There is no "dev" console in public ROF, like IL246/COD. For instance, this is a simple list of the most basic server console commands for IL2/COD: http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=Knowledge_Base&op=show&kid=351 None of this exists in ROF. So as a server host, your options are severely limited, making the game severely limited. IL2COD basically uses the same commands/structure of old IL2. There is no console to type in <help, <tl, <gunstats, <obj<blue, etc., with ROF. There is no possible way to add this type of commander to your server. You are stuck with what the devs give you.

You can't even make a campaign with ROF. There is no loading submissions on top of missions. There's no 3rd party online wars or any of that jazz. There's no moving dog fight servers. It's just a very sterile, stale, environment without the ability to have much go on.

You notice how many people asked about the static/AI object limitations? And yet, of course, there was no answer at all. (I'm not surprised)

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but this won't come close to what we can do in old 46, not in mission building, not in campaigns, not in anything other than graphics. The DRM is also terrible. Their master browser streams all the data/statistics from servers, meaning servers have to phone home. If this pipeline gets too much data, you will see server stats disappear in game, then the server crashes. That is one of the reasons, (I can tell you this as an old beta tester for ROF), that the object/plane limitations exist in the game. It can only handle so much, then it craps out. Even worse is all the servers phone home to the same spot. That means if there was ever a day that many people were online in ROF, spread out through a bunch of servers, that the master browser is even more inherent to take a crap even though the typical use of 70 online players and 100 static objects hasn't been met yet.

For the online world, this is a disaster. And a very expensive one at that.



So I'm here to tell you. I would buy this in a heartbeat, a New York minute, pre-order right now if it was comparable to 46 with better graphics. Cause 46 is simply amazing. But I'm sorry to tell you, this will be a huge down grade from 46, and a century back in time from what's possible in IL2COD. I'm not trying to bash anything, but that's the truth.

I, like others, will wait and see. But as it stands right now, and the answers we've been giving, this does not look promising at all.

Yes I'm also interested in online wars but that is not possible in that engine. And it won't be possible in BoS because of the engine limitations, devs said that, maybe in the future
if many of you buy this we will think about that.

There was big thread on the Russian side of the forum about that, and it just disappeared, no fights there , just " we had that in the old il2 " No! " But why ?"
No thread :)

Probably that is good PR some of the guys was asking from the CloD team :)

thee_oddball
Jan-11-2013, 20:42
That's the thing. It won't even come close to IL46 - not even in the same league. It will have better graphics, sure, but I don't know one other thing it will surpass it at. The FMB alone in either 46 or Clod is 10x the mission builder in ROF.

I read someone talking about an object they added in the ROF ME that allows you to have explosions (an explosion object I guess lol), and the way it was presented was as if it was something great. I thought about it for a second, then realized the FMB doesn't have an object to manipulate explosions because they actually have objects available to use that actually explode. You don't need to mimic an explosion, just use an explosive object out of the 1000's of bombs, fuel tanks, fuel depots, ammunition, etc., that are available as an object in the 1st place. In IL2COD you can simply just script it in on top of using an object that explodes already in the game.

The biggest thing about IL246/COD is the options - the sandbox if you will. There is no sandbox in ROF. Download the game and look at what settings you have for a server. There is no "dev" console in public ROF, like IL246/COD. For instance, this is a simple list of the most basic server console commands for IL2/COD: http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=Knowledge_Base&op=show&kid=351 None of this exists in ROF. So as a server host, your options are severely limited, making the game severely limited. IL2COD basically uses the same commands/structure of old IL2. There is no console to type in <help, <tl, <gunstats, <obj<blue, etc., with ROF. There is no possible way to add this type of commander to your server. You are stuck with what the devs give you.

You can't even make a campaign with ROF. There is no loading submissions on top of missions. There's no 3rd party online wars or any of that jazz. There's no moving dog fight servers. It's just a very sterile, stale, environment without the ability to have much go on.

You notice how many people asked about the static/AI object limitations? And yet, of course, there was no answer at all. (I'm not surprised)

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but this won't come close to what we can do in old 46, not in mission building, not in campaigns, not in anything other than graphics. The DRM is also terrible. Their master browser streams all the data/statistics from servers, meaning servers have to phone home. If this pipeline gets too much data, you will see server stats disappear in game, then the server crashes. That is one of the reasons, (I can tell you this as an old beta tester for ROF), that the object/plane limitations exist in the game. It can only handle so much, then it craps out. Even worse is all the servers phone home to the same spot. That means if there was ever a day that many people were online in ROF, spread out through a bunch of servers, that the master browser is even more inherent to take a crap even though the typical use of 70 online players and 100 static objects hasn't been met yet.

For the online world, this is a disaster. And a very expensive one at that.

I don't know if anyone else caught it, in one of the early answers by Loft/Han, but they said they will be PM/emailing server hosters what limits to use in a mission. I remember they tried pulling that stunt on me, PM'ing me saying "REDUCE THE NUMBER OF OBJECTS ON YOUR MISSION" it is making ROF look bad etc. They basically went so far as to threaten to take my server key away because one of my missions, with very low amounts of players was crashing the master browser. I had put many objects in there (many for ROF / about 1/4 of what I would use for a Clod/46 mission) because a new version of ROF came out. I wanted to see if any headway was made on the game limitations. And immediately the "runners of the master browser saw it" and started PM'ing me, threating me etc.

So I'm here to tell you. I would buy this in a heartbeat, a New York minute, pre-order right now if it was comparable to 46 with better graphics. Cause 46 is simply amazing. But I'm sorry to tell you, this will be a huge down grade from 46, and a century back in time from what's possible in IL2COD. I'm not trying to bash anything, but that's the truth.

I, like others, will wait and see. But as it stands right now, and the answers we've been giving, this does not look promising at all.

nice post bliss, that tank video they showed is very nice....now let me see that video with 100 of those tanks firing at each other while being mauled my ground attack aircraft....that would make me a believer.

$5 says had you posted this at the official BOS site it would have been locked or deleted within an hour:D

thee_oddball
Jan-11-2013, 20:45
Yes I'm also interested in online wars but that is not possible in that engine. And it won't be possible in BoS because of the engine limitations, devs said that, maybe in the future
if many of you buy this we will think about that.

There was big thread on the Russian side of the forum about that, and it just disappeared, no fights there , just " we had that in the old il2 " No! " But why ?"
No thread :)

Probably that is good PR some of the guys was asking from the CloD team :)


one must take care....or the evil flying monkeys will be dispatched from 777 tower...not to worry though...i don't think too many can be in the air at the same time:-P

ATAG_Bliss
Jan-11-2013, 20:55
nice post bliss, that tank video they showed is very nice....now let me see that video with 100 of those tanks firing at each other while being mauled my ground attack aircraft....that would make me a believer.

$5 says had you posted this at the official BOS site it would have been locked or deleted within an hour:D


I'm not even gonna register there. The threads asking the same stuff in ROF get deleted (criticisms/concerns of the game). It even happened on the private beta forums. It's quite clear the same attitude has been put forth on the new forums as well.

Until I see something worth posting, a feature, a non-limitation, etc., I have no questions or comments to ask. Anything I did ask would probably get deleted in the 1st place. I bet it will run great and look nice, but that only goes so far. Gotta have immersion and I'm not about to take 20 steps back and piecemeal buying planes, parts, weapon mods, gauges, scarves or w/e to go backward. I will continue to play the real IL2 titles until something "better" comes along. Not the opposite.

HolyGrail
Jan-12-2013, 08:24
+ 1oooooo :thumbsup:

Skoshi_Tiger
Jan-13-2013, 01:28
Sad really!

They show us this as a teaser

16) Is it possible in the future the introduction of a controlled ground vehicles / ships?



Technically, yes. But now we are ready to only talk only the present. To implement these ideas need substantial funding and significantly larger staff and a longer period of production. It all depends on how popular our project is. The more users willing to pick it up, the more possibilities we will have in the future.



Sometimes we run experiments in the team, what would happen if we did ... Tanks. Here is a short video of the experiment. It shows that any technology - is only a tool, with which you can create a great deal and that it will depend on the authors and the audience for which it is intended.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGwJtUZpAb8&feature=player_embedded




It must be hard keeping the programmers and modelers on track when they waste their time on "tests" like that. Hope the poor SOB wasn't sacked for trying something new!

But then again we all know we have to be 'realistic' with our expectations!

II/JG53_Otto
Jan-13-2013, 08:25
I share your optimism, or lack of it. :doh: I see this as a game that should attract cattle, who must be ready to open their wallet and let it be milked in small addons all the time. Not a Sim made by devs who is burning for make great and real WW2 aviation.

A Lot of replies whit "maybe in future." Then maybe in future we will bye it, when its up for todays standard.

Cheers

thee_oddball
Jan-13-2013, 11:24
Sad really!

They show us this as a teaser


It must be hard keeping the programmers and modelers on track when they waste their time on "tests" like that. Hope the poor SOB wasn't sacked for trying something new!

But then again we all know we have to be 'realistic' with our expectations!

We are "realistic" skoshi...we have read and the dev diary and understood the direction 777 is going in with BOS and it does not look all that promising.
The tank video is pure propaganda....if the DN (do nothing :devilish:) is engine is capable of so mush what have they been waiting for? the game is 3.5 years old already... why have they not come out with ROF II that adds a robust ground war component to the franchise or at least fix the object issue with the current version...

Here is a really nice video....the difference being this is coming out this year (sooner than later i hope) . I salivate at the thought of the IL2 franchise using the A3 engine, they had to delay release because they went from physics 2 engine upto 3 :):) look at the video imagine a flight sim made from it .


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bz9mIgaBmU8

ATAG_Snapper
Jan-13-2013, 12:40
Wow! :stunned:

That was a fascinating 7 minutes. Huge potential there! :thumbsup:

ATAG_Slipstream
Jan-13-2013, 13:21
Amazing stuff.

That's the thing with sandbox style games, its the way forward to the future, and defines the men from the boys!

Skoshi_Tiger
Jan-13-2013, 20:40
We are "realistic" skoshi...

I agree with you 100% oddball, (thats why I put the realistic in quotes maybe I should have used a :RollEyes: )

The last release of CoD proves that the detail of 3D models, the terrain, the flight models, the action of vehicles, the ability to create mission scripts are all very realistic and achieveable. These are only a few of the things that makes CoD so special.

I find it hard even trying to get back into '46 after experiencing CoD. ( I loved the original series from the release of Pacific fighters and flew it exclusively up until COD.) It just seams so dated now. I just can't seam to get excited looking at the little info we've seen about BoS and feeling like we're going backwards.


I doubt I've seen one of the BoS developer update where I haven't had a sinking feeling in my gut and have muttered "Oh God!" - yet you look at the comments in the descussion thread and there are people rolling over and pleading for the Devs to give it to them!

I went on youtube the other day to look up the early video of tanks that Luthier released for a comparison.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHc04iRFFwA

The first thing I noticed was that the second "Top Comment" is by knob complaining about implementing too many features while there was bugs to fix. It's a top comment because 6 people voted it up. It was made 10 months ago, who knows how long ago it recieved that ranking. But it's the first thing people would read when they got onto the page and they probably would stop looking at that point.

(I voted it down of course and put a few comments in - too little too late I know :( )

anyway rambled enough ...

Thanks for the video, That is looking very good!
Cheers!

thee_oddball
Jan-13-2013, 22:47
I agree with you 100% oddball, (thats why I put the realistic in quotes maybe I should have used a :RollEyes: )

The last release of CoD proves that the detail of 3D models, the terrain, the flight models, the action of vehicles, the ability to create mission scripts are all very realistic and achieveable. These are only a few of the things that makes CoD so special.

I find it hard even trying to get back into '46 after experiencing CoD. ( I loved the original series from the release of Pacific fighters and flew it exclusively up until COD.) It just seams so dated now. I just can't seam to get excited looking at the little info we've seen about BoS and feeling like we're going backwards.


I doubt I've seen one of the BoS developer update where I haven't had a sinking feeling in my gut and have muttered "Oh God!" - yet you look at the comments in the descussion thread and there are people rolling over and pleading for the Devs to give it to them!

I went on youtube the other day to look up the early video of tanks that Luthier released for a comparison.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHc04iRFFwA

The first thing I noticed was that the second "Top Comment" is by knob complaining about implementing too many features while there was bugs to fix. It's a top comment because 6 people voted it up. It was made 10 months ago, who knows how long ago it recieved that ranking. But it's the first thing people would read when they got onto the page and they probably would stop looking at that point.

(I voted it down of course and put a few comments in - too little too late I know :( )

anyway rambled enough ...

Thanks for the video, That is looking very good!
Cheers!

it is really amazing and sad to think what a cash cow that engine could have been .....:(

TheVino3
Jan-16-2013, 02:55
Looking at that controllable vehicles video by luthier is a real flashback to what the banana forum used to be like...and can still be

Skoshi half your comments were "spam" or had "too many negative votes"

...:goofy

It shows that the people who watch that video are all just knee-jerking halfwits who try to run CloD on old bomb computers, and then complain when it doesnt work well for them.
CloD in its current state is perfectly adequate, there are severe limitations but its nothing to cry about - I enjoy every minute and it runs like a dream for the most part.

If it wasnt for the impatient Luddites...who knows

Skoshi_Tiger
Jan-16-2013, 04:53
Looking at that controllable vehicles video by luthier is a real flashback to what the banana forum used to be like...and can still be

Skoshi half your comments were "spam" or had "too many negative votes"

...:goofy

It shows that the people who watch that video are all just knee-jerking halfwits who try to run CloD on old bomb computers, and then complain when it doesnt work well for them.
CloD in its current state is perfectly adequate, there are severe limitations but its nothing to cry about - I enjoy every minute and it runs like a dream for the most part.

If it wasnt for the impatient Luddites...who knows

LoL

Thanks for the heads up Vino!




Cheers!

TheVino3
Jan-17-2013, 05:53
I should actually rephrase


the people who watch that video

to "a good portion of the CloD community", the video doesnt have much to do with it but it brings out peoples grudge against the game