WWI flight sim having problems ?

[Panama Red 22]

This was reciently post on another flight sim forum:

 

Original Quote:

"More than that, you can already go and get Albatros D.III which we had recently announced. With such plane we award our three-thousandth buyer of the ROF store" - JON2oo6spb.

 

Comment by another poster:

"Three thousand planes or three thousand customers? Either way, the figure seems low to me, especially if it's planes - some of you have bought all three. Even at best only 3,000 people bought RoF and are prepared/able to by more aircraft?"

[Cameljockey 3]

This is a quote from the RoF website,

"More than that, you can already go and get Albatros D.III which we had recently announced. With such plane we award our three-thousandth buyer of the ROF store - JON2oo6spb."

 

It's hard to tell if he's referring to the 3,000th buyer of the DIII, or the 3,000th buyer at the store. Doesn't really matter either way. I bought the DIII which I like much more than the DVa.

[Tamper 9]

The title of this thread is the understatement of the decade.

 

Yes, RoF is having problems; look around. There are at least as many unhappy as there are "satisifed" customers - and IMHO the 'satisfied' group is becoming more and more desperate as we go. Each patch is received by this group as "Well, they fixed what they could with what they had" or even "Well, let's see what the next patch brings...".

 

Problem is, that's what they said about the last patch. And in some cases, the one before that. And all their blind faith and optimism, in the face of the reality that RoF currently is, it just gets old. Nauseating, even.

 

We (many of the people who actually shelled out for this...this mess) are getting tired of hearing about the 'potential'. We paid for something that we didn't get. And these patches - while in fairness, they do appear to address problems, they miss the mark completely as far as addressing what seems to matter to most of the customers. All the big areas where improvement are needed, which are brought up again and again by fans and detractors alike...well, they didn't get much attention at all, it seems.

 

But, let's wait and see what the next patch does...

 

This patch was 199M; pretty big patch. It had a long, long list of what was fixed. But, in all that, few if any of the real core problems are being addressed.

 

Oh, look, there's a "Labor Day Sale" on RoF...less than $30. How timely. You know, one might interpret that as a further indication that RoF is having problems. Or not. I guess it matters what each individual thinks. I'm sure the 'satisfied' group will find some way to say it's not at all about the problems.

 

But I can tell you this: When things are moving well, you don't usually lower the price. 'Nuff said?

[+Stary 2,426]

And I thought this topic is about RB3D with Turbo.exe

 

3000 online shop Alb DIII buyers? Excuse me, this a joke?

 

Damage modelling? Almost non existent -single shot and you're out.

 

Ragdoll physics? Nice. For first three times.

 

AI? T-800 gunners on Br14, shooting through rear fuselage, hitting your head with every second burst.

 

Campaign? 7 vs 2 canned.

 

Ground battles? Requires ground objects.

 

Ground objects? What are those?

 

Mission Editor? SectorEffectors in DN3D's "Build" were more logical for me.

 

Flight model -too good to be true.

 

Paypal for online store? No.

 

Documentation? Showing pictures of different GUI and set of missions than v1.0 release...*

 

Proper grammar in briefings? Id haz som prublmz, komrade.

 

Quick summary:

 

WW1 experience? Somewhere else.

 

 

(*which makes me suspect this game was ready in complete state long time ago, and now they just take your wallet to unlock already done "new" content)

[JediMaster 451]

I really wanted RoF to prove me wrong. An Il-2 class WWI sim would've been great.

 

It's not always fun when you're right.

[+Stary 2,426]

Maybe the Canvas Knights thing will turn good. But it would require a lot of work to shake off the Sturmovik feel from it. Vide OFF/CFS3 -it took like four years of development for the OBD Team to give us mighty Phase3. Also as I'm not familiar with IL2 modding -is there weapons/guns editor of some kind for it?

 

edit: And completely off topic -is Canvas Knights planned as freeware or payware addon?

Edited September 4, 2009 by Stary

[Panama Red 22]

Canvas Knights as far as I can tell, Freeware.

[Tamper 9]

An interesting "review" has appeared as a link over on 'the other' site:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2168777/video_game_review_the_fall_of_rise.html?cat=15

 

And, of course, the guy who wrote it was promptly attacked by all the crazed denizens who still lack any real objectivity when it comes to an honest review of RoF. Yeah, yeah, brilliant FM, graphics, and so on...gets old after awhile. Those of us who paid for this junk actualy thought we were buying a complete game - not a FM and pretty graphics packaged with nothing else of substance.

 

Gets more interesting by the day.

[JediMaster 451]

Actually, I was going to say it gets LESS interesting.

 

I'm beginning to wonder if these "crazed denizens" as you call them are operating out of a sense of blind faith. They pinned their hopes on this title, they paid good money for it, it HAS to end up better than it is right now, doesn't it? So HOW DARE YOU try and cast aspersions on it! If you do, and people listen, they won't get enough sales! Not enough sales = lack of development time to turn the thing into what they had hoped it would be. So it's in their own best interest to suppress any negative feedback on the game and drum up as many sales as possible so that the investment they already made will be justified!

[Thomas H 0]

http://www.gameplanet.co.nz/pc/games/159340.Rise-of-Flight/reviews/133545.Rise-of-Flight/

[Tamper 9]

JM - couldn't have said it better myself. You are exactly, totally, 100% spot-on. Well, except for in my case :) I bought RoF - but not only am I not in denial like most of the denizens, I also at this point could give a rat's rear if it ever turns into what it should've been to begin with. I don't wish any evil on RoF or the devs, and if all the 'potential' we keep hearing about finally blossoms, great.

 

But I'll not spend another dime of my money to support it, until they show some real progress with the needed improvements (and I'm sorry, denizens, but the couple of forced patches so far aren't very convincing). And, yes, until such time as I see delivery on (at least some of) the potential, I will continue my 'negative reviews' as I see fit. Maybe neoqb should be considering that they reap what they sow. People - including the reviewer that started all this - are not required to be flattering in their opinions.

 

And Thomas, I do appreciate the well-written review. Yours is written very well, no doubt. And you've really attempted to be objective, that's good.

 

But you're just far, far too kind. 8 of 10? Really? Can't speak for others, but this is what's become of peoples' inherent tendency to overrate. Everything is always 8 or 9 of 10...anything that's a 7 is absolute crap, according to this scale, because no one says a 7 or less. It's just not a very accurate scale when even the worst games are reviewed consistently in the 7+ range. Now, me - some of my all-time favorites rate an 8, maybe 9. I don't think anyone's ever seen a true 10 - 10 meaning there is absolutely NO ROOM for improvement, none. Think about it. Sure, maybe some 9.5's out there...but anything that's truly perfect? I think not.

 

So, to try and keep the scale accurate, I'd say RoF rates maybe a 5 or 6 in it's present state (and 6 is being generous). Sorry, folks, no points here for "potential". Deliver on it, then you'll get the points.

[+Stary 2,426]

I'd rate solid 4*

 

Dude, soo many times I started the ROF launcher, checked for updates, and then cancelled.

 

Sorry, folks, no points here for "potential". Deliver on it, then you'll get the points.

 

Spot on, Tamper.

 

There is no room for potential there IMO. From "Wings of Honour" interview with NeoQb, they're already thinking about modern sim.

Seems the Devs already abandoned this project, just releasing those extra planes, which itself isn't that bad idea.

 

*Where using my own rating system "Strike Fighters 2" series would have 7, "Whirlwind of Vietnam" 2 and "Il2:1946" strong 8.

[Thomas H 0]

Tamper, I'm not the reviewer. I just felt the need to balance things a little bit.

 

There's a number of issues Neoqb has to deal with if they wanna be successful. Resolving the stutter issues, introducing a dogfight mode (with a respawning option), chat functionality etc, etc.

 

But... the flight modeling, the very foundation of a great WWI sim is imho nothing less than marvellous. I've never before felt that feeling of actually being in the aircraft. The sensation of altitude is also greatly modelled, the wind and turbulence effects are almost breathtaking. The very much needed engine management on most of the entente aircrafts also adds to the whole experience.

 

I don't like DRM and I don't want to pay for each and every aircraft I wanna possess but if that's what's needed in order to keep Neoqb in business, I'll keep on with those irritating micro payments...

 

Some weeks ago I wrote on the RoF forum that the premature release probably was based on two reasons: Lack of funds & the need to go gold before BoB does. It was never commented by Neoqb.

 

Thomas

[Panama Red 22]

Thomas H:

What you are describing is a good flight simulator, not a good flight game. RoF sounds like nothing more than M$'s Flight X set in a WW1 setting. I think most people on the other hand prefer flight games like OFF, FE, or RB3D which is why the WW1 flight games are played far more than your described flight simulator.

[Tamper 9]

Thomas - I stand corrected; you have my apology. I did assume you had written that - which, as I said, was well-written. But then, there are plenty of 8/10 'reviews' of RoF if you want to believe them. I don't know if you can accurately call that "balance".

 

And, as I pointed out: Few people can honestly give this an 8 of 10 if they're being truly objective.

 

PR - another well-taken point, and one that is shared by others as well. I think flight simulators are great - that's actually what I worked on in the Navy (the real kind; not computer games). And my experience further illustrates your point: A flight sim is not necessarily a game. Obviously, I know the difference; I bought (or thought I did) a game.

 

Now, I've already heard it hashed out that RoF was actually intended to be a sim not a game....yeah, right. That's just more rationale from the delusional, trying to justify the complete lack of any real (working) game features. Guarantee you it was hyped as a game. Not only that, but - if RoF isn't 'trying' to be a gme, then why bother with all the (obviously poorly-executed) attempts at 'game' features??

 

I think it's pretty clear that RoF wasn't intended to be strictly a great simulator; the market for WW1 flight enthusiasts is limited enough as it is...why limit it further by making a simulation that only appeals to actual pilots (i.e. too difficult to play and enjoy)?

 

Every "simulation" game I know of has always had some form of departure from reality for the sake of playability; the truly great ones strike a near-balance between being 'real' and being 'fun'. Some even have comment about this in the developers notes in the documentation; something to the effect of "We know that (insert historically inaccurate 'feature' here), but we decided to add it, to make the gaming experience more enjoyable".

 

While RoF is definitely way up on the 'real' scale, it has almost completely failed on the 'fun' scale. And, just as in your distinction, PR - I think that's where it's playing poorly (no pun intended).

[JediMaster 451]

I don't have time for a sim that's not fun, bottom line. To those who say "being a true sim IS the fun"...hooray for you. Don't be surprised almost no one else feels that way, though.

[Thomas H 0]

If I were to rate RoF at it's present stage I'd give it a solid 6.5 :-)

 

I'm an all out simracer/aviator, hell I don't even use icon's when flying online. All out hardcore sim mode is what makes it for me. For the same reason netKar Pro is just about the only racingsimulation I willing to spend seat time in. I do however realize the necessity for dynamic campaigns and similar features in RoF to make the sim more appealing to the more casual pc-aviator and those who want some kind of storyline. I don't mind if people want to fly with simple physics as long as I don't have to.

 

For the casual aviator First Eagles is imho the sim to aim for. The number of different aircraft, the wonderful sceneries (thanks scary) and the accessibility makes it the given choice for that category. I myselt want more, I want the whole fairytale...

 

Thomas

[+Stary 2,426]

Thomas,

 

All your points are valid, and I agree 100%. I don't fly MP, never intended to do so (last time around 1998) but in SP I allways turn the icons/aircraft indicators off if it's possible. The only problem, not on this forum, but other ones, are those "run away noob" snobs pretending the full hardcore mode is the only right way to fly. We have real life pilots here, who like "lite" sims like First Eagles, because of the fun factor.

 

ROF with shipping costed me 54 bucks. And for that price I'd like to have some playability from single player campaign, even maybe receive a medal at it's progress. But I run ROF for "Russian Rulette" and 3rd party quick mission generator flights now, if ever.

 

It's still a game. Simulators costs hundreds of thousands in RL.

[+sinbad 27]

I was on the Beta team for ROF. I decided to wait to buy. It seems that was the correct decision.

 

I rarely do MP.

 

I continue to focus on FE.

[+Stary 2,426]

There's new update for ROF. Adding Sop. Dolphin and Pfalz D.XII (both ugly and tough) aswell as few fixes. Nothing really new in this forced 200mb+ update, the only thing I noticed is the framerates went up a little bit on my system.

[Panama Red 22]

I noticed that they have had at least 2 outages on the RoF servers (without prior notice from the developers), which prevented anybody from playing RoF. This really raised some people ire because they could not play a game that they paid good money for and the Rof DRM leaves them at the mercy of the developers servers.

 

The other interesting thing is that the number of negative comments are continuing to rise so much on the RoF forums that even the die hard RoF's are complaining about the negative feelings that more and more people are having about the game.

[+Stary 2,426]

Panama,

 

Indeed, even some of the SimHQ formerly very enthusiastic members are turning away from ROF.

 

I think it's the unfinished release mixed with Neoqb completely not understanding of the simmers expectations that will sadly cause ROF to fall in few months. I run this sim once a while, and such wish them success in providing us with polished finished top quality product, but they're doing everything to prevent it. The updates (BTW I hate forced updates, bad memories from Red Orchestra and Steam) are revolving around new planes only. There was no single update to the core. No reqested MP fixes, not a single SP fix, none. And as more and more former ROF enthusiasts declare they won't buy any new planes anymore, Neoqb may end up simply not having founds for critical service patches.

[rotagen 0]

Gee, maybe thats because many are like me and found the sim to be pretty much a waste of money, since the hardware requirements are so steep. And the mission builder is intolerably complicated. And the multiplayer servers have few people and require long boring flights to get anywhere near enemy aircraft.

 

Everything about ROF is overbearing and time-consuming. While I like the sim/realism aspects as much as anyone else, sometimes I want a little action and variety, and I don't care if the screen looks perfect, its all about options.

 

Every decision they made alienated a huge portion of the gaming population, and combat flight sim enthusiasts are a tiny portion of that to start with.