Can I rant here?

[+Erik 1,768]

Tailspin - Indio;

 

I understand your frustration ... the goal I'd like to provide is keeping the communication open and flowing. If I can do that we all win because it's obvious with the passion you both share nothing but good can come from it. All is well that ends well, thanks to the both of you for the help.

 

Take care;

[BUFF 8]

And what was particularly different here, was what I considered a very heavy-handed attempt to stifle suggestions about improving the Sim, which went along the lines of "You've been told over and over again that this is a lite sim".

if by that you mean my comment aimed particularly at Stiglr & no-one else:

1) I don't see it as in the least heavy-handed

2) don't you think that after 4 years most people would have realised that his & TK's own views/intentions weren't the same? Indeed several years ago TK flat out told him that about SF P1 & told him not to buy it.

3) Nobody is trying to stifle suggestions but I've said it several times - how you say it is as important as what you say.

& having said it it once if one doesn't get one's way then saying it again next week is unlikely to get a different response.

[Guest IndioBlack]

if by that you mean my comment aimed particularly at Stiglr & no-one else:

1) I don't see it as in the least heavy-handed

2) don't you think that after 4 years most people would have realised that his & TK's own views/intentions weren't the same? Indeed several years ago TK flat out told him that about SF P1 & told him not to buy it.

3) Nobody is trying to stifle suggestions but I've said it several times - how you say it is as important as what you say.

& having said it it once if one doesn't get one's way then saying it again next week is unlikely to get a different response.

 

Yes I do mean your comment "aimed particularly at Stiglr", but which to me seemed generalised.

I refrained from identifying the exact posting, so as not to exacerbate the situation.

 

1. My opinion is different. I did see it as heavy handed.

 

2. No I do not think that. I don't know who Stiglr is, and I have very little contact with TK. I don't know TK's views on Sims, and I have never read about TK telling Stiglr not to buy his Sim. If I had read a response like that, I would have been very shocked, and never forgotten it.

Maybe I should get out more often, or maybe TK's views on Sims should be more accessible. Being "accessible", doesn't mean if you search message boards all over the net and piece certain bits together, you'll get your answer.

 

3. Yes it is very important how you say it. We're all guilty of offending others by not saying things in the right way. I apologise for having done that. I look forward to seeing apologies from some other adults on this forum.

 

I agree with your point of "Having said it once". But then how does that square with you telling people "over and over" again ?

 

There may have been a certain amount of repetition in what I had to say, but only because the responses I received suggested:

 

a) They'd missed the point

b) They were looking for a fight

 

One of the problems of being an expert in any field, is that over time, you may have to repeat things to people who are new to the subject, or are slow learners. The important thing is not to tire, of what to you is repetition, but what to them is new information.

I got the impression that you were angry at having to repeat something that you felt had been said too many times before. That was how I perceived it at the time, even though I may now acknowledge that this may not have been your intention.

[BUFF 8]

2. No I do not think that. I don't know who Stiglr is, and I have very little contact with TK. I don't know TK's views on Sims, and I have never read about TK telling Stiglr not to buy his Sim. If I had read a response like that, I would have been very shocked, and never forgotten it.

Maybe I should get out more often, or maybe TK's views on Sims should be more accessible. Being "accessible", doesn't mean if you search message boards all over the net and piece certain bits together, you'll get your answer.

This whole post is going to come across as a diatribe against Stiglr & it's not meant to because he is as entitled to his opinion as much as anyone but to provide you with some background.

You can probably see from other posters replies in this thread that he is well known, Stiglr has a history on many flightsim forums - he's just been banned again from SimHQ.

His vision of "full real" is seemingly shared by a small minority & importantly not by many developers it seems.

 

Yes it is very important how you say it. We're all guilty of offending others by not saying things in the right way.

I agree & discussions on the internet where you can't gauge tonal & visual clues from the speaker don't make it any easier.

Unfortunately Stiglr either doesn't seem to have learned that, chooses to ignore it or just likes fomenting.

 

I agree with your point of "Having said it once". But then how does that square with you telling people "over and over" again ?

because I haven't been the one telling him that upto now - it is however, starting to get real old for me as well.

From your reply it would seem that if various people incl. the developer had been telling you for weeks, months let alone years that you weren't going to get your demands that you would probably have given it up & gone elsewhere, particularly if you were already involved in the development of another sim?

After 4 years Stiglr is still spouting the same stuff - talk about beating a dead horse.

[Guest Stiglr]

Well it looks like TK said what he will do and not do. I see all sides of this and TK is so close to making his SF and FE series one of the greatest of all time but just can't get my why he is so stubborn in some things. But his word is final, you will have to except it and move on. Not the greatest answer in the world but what can you do?

 

You can continue to post and expose the sim-lite excuse for what it is. That's what boards like this are for. (erm, provided they aren't moderated by Mussolini types who just can't fathom the idea of a dissenting opinion...and I don't mean this board with that comment... ) The developers DO read these comments, or the tenor of them does get through. And finally, they know that if people get irritated enough and stop buying their product, then they really have to rethink their approach.

 

From my perch, the idea that including an engine on/off toggle, which was a pretty big deal with the early lawnmowers (er, sorry, early fighters) constitutes hard core... that's patently silly. But, I think it goes to the heart of the matter, and readily identifies the lazy, low-fi gamer type as the real problem here. They want everything easy (when it wasn't), they want everything automatic (which it wasn't until very recently) and they want to be able to be an ace instantly (when we know that only a few select and legendary individuals were able to do that). So, they don't want to be bothered with managing their engine... heck, most don't want to be bothered getting altitude (which is a staple of advantage in nearly every era of fligth combat)!!!!

 

WE, collectively, are the reason we don't get fully articulated, accurate flight sims (and mind you, that doesn't necessarily mean they would all be as minutae-ridden as Falcon). We're too selfish: if good modeling makes it too much of a challenge, and means it might take a long time to master the sim... we throw that out in favor of "quick and dumb": whatever gets us turning circles and winning the war singlehandedly inside of 15 minutes, the way John Wayne would.

[+Zurawski 33]

You can continue to post and expose the sim-lite excuse for what it is. That's what boards like this are for. (erm, provided they aren't moderated by Mussolini types who just can't fathom the idea of a dissenting opinion...and I don't mean this board with that comment... ) The developers DO read these comments, or the tenor of them does get through. And finally, they know that if people get irritated enough and stop buying their product, then they really have to rethink their approach.

 

From my perch, the idea that including an engine on/off toggle, which was a pretty big deal with the early lawnmowers (er, sorry, early fighters) constitutes hard core... that's patently silly. But, I think it goes to the heart of the matter, and readily identifies the lazy, low-fi gamer type as the real problem here. They want everything easy (when it wasn't), they want everything automatic (which it wasn't until very recently) and they want to be able to be an ace instantly (when we know that only a few select and legendary individuals were able to do that). So, they don't want to be bothered with managing their engine... heck, most don't want to be bothered getting altitude (which is a staple of advantage in nearly every era of flight combat)!!!!

 

WE, collectively, are the reason we don't get fully articulated, accurate flight sims (and mind you, that doesn't necessarily mean they would all be as minutae-ridden as Falcon). We're too selfish: if good modeling makes it too much of a challenge, and means it might take a long time to master the sim... we throw that out in favor of "quick and dumb": whatever gets us turning circles and winning the war singlehandedly inside of 15 minutes, the way John Wayne would.

 

Your idea of a "perfect sim" is part of the very reason flight sims do not attract the droves of enthusiast as other genres do... The very thought of massaging manifold pressure, managing engine temp and wiping oil off their face after a grueling flight hold absolutely no appeal to the vast majority of gamers.

 

You imply that catering to the potential gamers who would rather "kick the tires and light the fires" is quietly killing the genre? I argue that people like yourself are far more detrimental to the genre.

 

There is absolutely no reason there cannot be both flight sim pilosophys... They go hand-in-hand IMHO... Lite sims will attract more enthusiast into the genre... keeping them fueled with "new blood"... who eventually wish to delve deeper into the intricacies of harder-cored simulations... It's a natural cycle.

 

Man... I appreciate your passion, but if I were a newbie I be scared to death to fly a hard core sim for fear I wasn't flying to your expactations... I'd switch off my PC and fire up my X-box where there is no judgment of my moral fortitude... because everyone can play Smash Bandicoot...

Edited December 12, 2006 by Zurawski

[+Tailspin 3]

Hold on a minute. Having an engine start up by pushing a button in the cockpit of a WWI plane is TOTALLY unrealisitic. These planes didn't have onboard starters.

 

IndioBlack says:

"2. No I do not think that. I don't know who Stiglr is, and I have very little contact with TK. I don't know TK's views on Sims, and I have never read about TK telling Stiglr not to buy his Sim. If I had read a response like that, I would have been very shocked, and never forgotten it.

Maybe I should get out more often, or maybe TK's views on Sims should be more accessible. Being "accessible", doesn't mean if you search message boards all over the net and piece certain bits together, you'll get your answer."

 

I disagree. You will get your answer. I don't know TK and have no contact with him either. But I think I do know TKs views on sims. It can be discerned rather easily from reading his online comments and you don't have to go too far back.

 

"Sim lite" isn't an excuse. It just a different way to make money. Shame on TK for selling out the hardcore market and actually making simming FUN.

[Guest Stiglr]

Your idea of a "perfect sim" is part of the very reason flight sims do not attract the droves of enthusiast as other genres do... The very thought of massaging manifold pressure, managing engine temp and wiping oil off their face after a grueling flight hold absolutely no appeal to the vast majority of gamers.

 

You imply that catering to the potential gamers who would rather "kick the tires and light the fires" is quietly killing the genre? I argue that people like yourself are far more detrimental to the genre.

 

There is absolutely no reason there cannot be both flight sim pilosophys... They go hand-in-hand IMHO... Lite sims will attract more enthusiast into the genre... keeping them fueled with "new blood"... who eventually wish to delve deeper into the intricacies of harder-cored simulations... It's a natural cycle.

 

Man... I appreciate your passion, but if I were a newbie I be scared to death to fly a hard core sim for fear I wasn't flying to your expactations... I'd switch off my PC and fire up my X-box where there is no judgment of my moral fortitude... because everyone can play Smash Bandicoot...

 

Zur, you sell people too short. It is NOT too much to ask to "manage your engine" with a few keyboard strokes. It's part of the challenge.

 

I feel it's the expectation of the usual flight simmer that's at the core of this problem. As for "attracting the droves", there's another totally unrealistic assumption: that flight sims will EVER, EHVAH, rival the Dooms, Quakes and PacMans of this world for popularity and unit sales. Flight sims, by their very nature, and the fact that, if they're at all realistic (even including what we might regard as arcade), will require far more effort on the part of the player than a pure "gamer" is usually willing to put in. There is no way any flight sim will ever appear on the same Top 5 sales list with a console title or FPS fantasy or shoot 'em up. That expectation, that pipe dream, especially in the minds of sim producers or distributors is a big reason the genre is seen as a "failure".

 

And yes, catering to the gamer philosophy most surely means the death of flight simming. Because, to get it down to the level of a casual gamer, it de facto CANNOT be realistic, probably can't be historical (all that pesky realism getting in the way of stupid fun and all... ) and can't really even be a SIMULATION of anything.

 

One question for you, Zur: have you played a sim where you actually did have to manage manifold pressure, engine temperature to any kind of realistic degree? If so, describe how that affected your gameplay and your enjoyment. I'd be interested to hear what you thought, if you've had that experience.

 

I do it all the time, and it certainly doesn't add "a lot" of effort or detract from the fun; in fact, I find it ADDS to the immersion, and gives me a certain level of ability to gain an edge in later combats against guys who are in the habit of always roaring around at "full everything"... we meet 20 minutes into our sorties and my engine's "warm" while his is threatening to boil over. He has to watch his temps and try to cool down while we fight; meanwhile, I calmly close my gills (which I had open during the flight to contact) and know my engines good for a 5 - 10 minute stretch of full power and flaps closed.

[bernard 0]

I dunno......

 

all this debate out Thirdwire sims...

 

All I can say is that I've probably played this series more than any other individual sim I own, the limitations of the game engine can be frustrating at times but then again, if it wasn't a great overall concept, why would I always be playing it?

 

I think when people talk about "the perfect sim" or present wish lists to TK they are banging their heads against a brick wall. There will never be a perfect sim and rather than continuously demand things, we should occaisonally take a moment to reflect on the fact that if it wasn't for the open architecture around which TK has built the series we wouldn't be on these forums know and all the hundreds of mods and stuff from the community would not have been made.

 

All I can say is be thankful for what you've got.

 

I never ever thougth I'd be hurling nuclear tipped Genie rockets at a swarm of Tu-16s from an F-106. It's not what the game is, it's what you make of it.

Edited December 12, 2006 by bernard

[Guest MGonzales]

What about DID's EF2000 or TAW, are they Sim-Lite ?

 

 

IMO, yes and no. They were developed in the mid-to-late '90s, so some areas (i.e. FMs) seem arcade by today’s standards.

 

They did have some high-end features though...

 

 

 

 

And TAW added even more like an ACMI player.

 

I'd like to one day see Strike Fighters evolve to become more like the DID sims, not taking everything so seriously but giving us lots of features (even if not in the cockpit), along with more offline atmosphere and game play (in the case of DID, those manual supplementing Strategy Guides in the above pic are 400+ pages and are better than a Prima Guide, IMO).

 

I applaud TK for sticking to his guns, even if I don't always agree with him on what features sim-lite should have.

 

P.S. You once commented on this board that the F-22 in TAW was as stealthy as a B-52. Nah, it's VERY stealthily in the right configuration. This was a problem with the previous ADF though, corrected for TAW and maybe patched for ADF.

 

I have the Eurofighter and Raptor covered now (I took the community's advice and moved on), but I'm still waiting for a F-117 campaign in SF, and I did enjoy your previous comments on the subject. Meanwhile, SF gives me some of the other eras I'm missing.

--

 

 

Mark

Edited December 12, 2006 by MGonzales

[Guest MGonzales]

One more thing. Having read TK's last comments on this (now locked) thread...

 

http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.p...30&start=32

 

...I'm pretty sure that TAW helped to put DID (a team of about 30) out of business. I sure don't want to see that happen to TW and that's why I support them with my comments and my wallet, to encourage progress with the SF series, regardless how slowly it comes (for me).

 

I wonder if TK is going to put up another "What to do next?" poll? I voted "modern" on the last one, which lost to WWI. No problem, I'll vote "modern" again and will probably lose to WWII this time. But no complaining from me, I'll just keep voting until my turn gets here. :)

--

 

 

Mark

[+Tailspin 3]

Thanks Mark. Another good indication of where TK stands and why.

[+Dave 2,320]

And on that note lets end it here as well. I think there is nothing more to add to it. Great discussion though.