Interesting take on why PC games are dying

[Growler67 0]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

http://www.joeuser.com/index.asp?c=1&AID=21895&u=0

 

A lot of what is said makes sense. I have not been a fan of console games, because the limited nature of the products. You only get what comes on the disc. Very few variables and most of the time scripted. However, point made about them working out of the box, instead of HAVING to wait for patches. True they cannot be updated/upgraded with new features and whatnot, but working out of the box is a point that should be taken by developers/publishers.

 

I suppose part of their arguement will be the multiple variables in consumers systems, whereas the consoles are as is (with the exception of external RAM). True, however, minimum specs printed on the box should be just that. If a consumer does not read the box, caviat emptor. If the STATED minimum specs however do NOT run the game, the ball is back in the publishers court.

 

At some point (my hope) is that they get the message. Publish and release a complete product from the start. Release new features/upgrades in the manner currently used to patch things that are broken. The "let's get it out to take advantage of the seasonal commercial climate" philosophy has worn thin on me. I still do not go out to see a movie when it is released. I don't buy into the hype. I wait a month or so and catch an early matinee when kids are in school, so that I can watch in peace and quiet and evaluate it on it's merits (or lack there of).

 

Lot's of BIG PRODUCTION movies that got critical acclaim were piles of toad droppings IMO. Yes I got suckered in. I've been following the meager press snippets since Jane's dropped their A-10 sim and word was released of LOMAC in Dec 2001. I jumped on this one because I was so wanting a great A-10 sim. Now after the second patch and with time running out on a possible third, the sim is only good. It isn't great for me or the Squad I joined. There are still problems. Some, admittedly on the list of known or reported bug on their forum. Just fix it. Either that or release to the press what we can expect without the hype.

 

::steps off soapbox::

[CowboyTodd41 134]

Whoa crazy! I was just about to post this article. Although it might do better in the Project One forums since it specically mentions Strategy First.

[Growler67 0]

But you can see clearly how it can be applicable to "niche market flight sims". I think by now we have heard most of the samy explinations/excuses. Yes I know that this is a subject being beat to death to a certain extent. However, I think it is relevant and pertinent.

[Bard 0]

that's the way it is eh?

 

getting tired of feeling like a flight simmer's money isn't as good as any other genre's players - purely from quality perspective.

 

go oleg go!

 

looks like we'll be playing prop sims for a while longer eh?

[Ruggbutt 45]

I knew Bard couldn't let this one go by.

["Instigator" 0]

I knew Bard couldn't let this one go by.

Well being that they are from the same virtual squadron how could he...?

 

I should have bet some money too.....

 

 

By the way...give it a rest already....GGeeesszzzz!!!!!

 

So now that the 1.02 patch is out..do you guys play Lomac and if so...what callsigns do you 2... (Bard and Growler) go by at HL..?

 

Just curious if all this talking about how bad this game is and still play it....

 

Do you guys think Lomac still blows ..?

 

Are you still not completely satified with the 1.02 and desperatly seeking a 1.03..?

 

How many more bugs have you guys found and want fixed...?

 

Is the 1.02 in your opinion... even worth the $39.99 you 2 paid for..?

 

What's your stand on this issue...the $39.99 issue...

 

 

curious minds like to know...

[Ruggbutt 45]

1.0.2 rocks. Maybe we need to get them up in the air and shoot them down a couple of times. :D

[Cudaguy 0]

hmmmm....looks like some of the "say no evil" types from the Ubi forums are here.

Bard has and has always had a valid point. Just because the Ubi forums only support favorable comments doesn't carry over to Biohaz, thankfully.

 

Me, I bought LOMAC when it first came out. I like it altho I don't play much online. However, lately, I've bought IL2AEP and I've been flying that exclusively in prep for Pacific Fighters later this year. The combination of smooth play with no stutters and the campaign keep my interest. Oh yeah, I'll stop in to LOMAC and fly an A10 mission every now and then but that's just for a little bit.

The writings on the wall for me. LOMAC is going to fade out and eventually be removed from my HD, while I anticipate the IL2AEP CD will have an almost permanent home in my CD player...at least until PF comes out later this year. ;)

 

Cuda

[lexicon 0]

PC games will never die so I don't think any of that will ever be true. PC's will always have more power then consoles. Just look at Far Cry and Doom 3 Xbox can't handle graphics settings as a PC can. And doom 3 on Xbox looks a lot less detailed why settle for a lot less with a console? If any simulation ever comes out with maxed out Graphics they will require the Best PC components so no console apps of this type would be necessary. The cheaper way out will never be the best way to do things.

Edited July 22, 2004 by lexicon

[Growler67 0]

lexicon:

The cheaper way out IS an option for some the want rock solid gameplay, and not bugginess.

 

Instigator:

I would gladly have payed much more for a product that didn't take the road LOMAC did. The point for me isn't the $39.99 paid for LOMAC, but since you asked: If I knew then that it would be this way 9 months down the road, NO I would not have bought it.

 

Other bugs found so far with v1.02 include missile AI that will not track properly. At 18-20nm I should be able to fire an AIM-120 with about an 80%PK head on. Not have to engage from behind within 1nm to get said kill. AIM-7 should also get kills at 18-20nm, but no. In the last mission I flew with the squad, I had 2 AIM-120's come off the rail and immediately make a hard left turn and begin to descend. I was nose on with my bandit and about 2000 feet below it. At 10nm I lined up an AIM-9 and it came off the rail and immediately headed for the deck. There is still some anomolus AI reaction to being engaged (yes I know the AI cheats). These tests have come not via HL. Internal squad testing where the server hosts the missions and clients connect simultaneously (like a checklist) so that there aren't any wierd thing from the get go. Voice comms are via a third party server so is not a factor in the actual flights.

 

I would not catagorize my wish for LOMAC to be fixed as "desperate". I truly enjoy flying the A-10, but I am running out of patience waiting for what has been hyped since Dec 2001. v1.02 is better than v1.00, but still off the mark for all the expectations and anticipation over the years.

 

I have not flown much on HL for a couple of reasons. Most servers are A2A. That's fine by me but the A-10 is not too well suited for that environment. In the Coop servers I have played in, there are little to no CAPs present and the one or two OPFOR vulchers down you before you can get to the FEBA. Frankly I haven't checked into HL in quite some time, perhaps things have changed.

 

As far as the virtual squadron I chose to join, you can keep your snide remarks to yourself please. I have NEVER said anything about you or yours, thank you.

[Ruggbutt 45]

I have no idea what you're talking about w/your missile problems Growler, I fly every night w/my squadron and get 7 and 120 kills at 20nm all the time. This is w/pilots jinking and dumping chaff/flares. While Bard (and you) have good points (at times) I am not seeing what you're describing. I posted a track I made offline showing 4 slammers kills w/4 slammer shots, but I have many times made the same kinds of kills online at max range. Not only that but unless any of you here have fired a real live 120 at a target it's presumptuous to say that the 120 should be hitting w/in 'x' conditions. I hit at 20nm all the time (missile slider in the middle).

 

I must be playing a different game than you are. Anytime you want a lesson w/the 120's let me know.

 

And Cuda, Bard does have some good points sometimes. You see, his diatribe gets tiring too. You can't comment about LOMAC w/out Bard having to get his "dig" in. So when you're taking sides the least you could do is look at things objectively, while I commented about Bard I've also gone out of my way to test his sound theory in LOMAC. I posted a track so he could examine my experiences w/the slammer (which are different than his). We don't always have to agree on things and we can have issues that annoy each other but we all have something in common.

 

If I have to explain to you what that is you're too far gone, brother.

Edited July 23, 2004 by ruggbutt

[Bard 0]

not sometimes - ALWAYS :P

 

but it's always easier to call someone's arguments 'diatribes' or make other snide comments than it is to actually address the arguments - especially if you know you can't ;)

["Instigator" 0]

I have no idea what you're talking about w/your missile problems Growler, I fly every night w/my squadron and get 7 and 120 kills at 20nm all the time.  This is w/pilots jinking and dumping chaff/flares.  While Bard (and you) have good points (at times) I am not seeing what you're describing.  I posted a track I made offline showing 4 slammers kills w/4 slammer shots, but I have many times made the same kinds of kills online at max range.  Not only that but unless any of you here have fired a real live 120 at a target it's presumptuous to say that the 120 should be hitting w/in 'x' conditions.  I hit at 20nm all the time (missile slider in the middle).

 

I must be playing a different game than you are.  Anytime you want a lesson w/the 120's let me know.

 

And Cuda,  Bard does have some good points sometimes.  You see, his diatribe gets tiring too.  You can't comment about LOMAC w/out Bard having to get his "dig" in.  So when you're taking sides the least you could do is look at things objectively, while I commented about Bard I've also gone out of my way to test his sound theory in LOMAC.  I posted a track so he could examine my experiences w/the slammer (which are different than his). We don't always have to agree on things and we can have issues that annoy each other but we all have something in common. 

 

If I have to explain to you what that is you're too far gone,  brother.

Right..

 

 

What He said..... ;)

[*BtS*$y$t£M=M= 0]

Consoles will always be second best to the PC, The PC is far more versitile for games than a console, Consoles are made specifically for games, the hardware of a console does not vary from user to user, the bugs can be sorted and game released. Easy. PC's are like humans they vary user to user, getting a game to work for every PC in the world is a hard task, its like buying trousers that are a univaersla fit but are a bit too big for you, so youi take them in a bit, the same is with a patch. The PC will always be around, its upgradable, interchangable, A console isnt, the new technology is released a new console is needed, out goes the old console, with a PC remove the old bit replace it with the new bit. I have not read the article, lol but hey, this is all i have to say in the matter.

 

Just my two cents

[Ruggbutt 45]

but it's always easier to call someone's arguments 'diatribes' or make other snide comments than it is to actually address the arguments - especially if you know you can't ;)

Well, I have addressed several of your arguments. You are correct about sound causing an fps hit, but then again thats true w/every computer game. Then you stated the AMRAAM's are taking a huge lead pursuit course and they aren't effective. They're going to the point in space where TWS has 'calculated' they would be. So I posted a track for you to view. Then you stated that it's different online. Which it isn't, I get the same results on or offline. I've found that the AI fired missiles typically approach a "perfect" firing solution. Online there is more room for error w/human pilots.

 

I have no grudge against you and spent an hour and a half preparing findings for you to make your case w/the sound issue. I don't begrudge anyone the facts to make their case. Sometimes your posts come off sounding as you are still neck deep in the 'F4 v LOMAC' debate. This damages your credibility. If you are going to discuss facts emotion has no place in that debate. And it seems every chance you get you have to add just one more 'dig' when LOMAC is concerned. You'd think me the bastard if I started showing up on your F4 forums and posting about every annoying issue w/F4 (and believe me there are quite a few).

 

Sometimes you refuse to listen to what others are saying Bard. Maybe a little more open-mindedness would work for everyone, and to everyone's advantage.

[Bard 0]

stated that it was different?

 

dude - here's the train of thought ok.

 

1 - our squad - that's MULTIPLE people who have been there and witnessed the wierdness first hand. so - it's NOT a group fantasy.

 

2 - you are seeing something else

 

so, instead of assuming you are a liar or an arse - i believe that what you say is how you've experienced it.

 

so - that means there's a difference.

 

now - to find out WHAT made it different, you compare the variables. lots are going to be the same, but some things that brought about the conditions MUST be different.

 

see - thats how computers work - if the same piece of software behaves in two different manners it is because something is DIFFERENT.

 

you might see the point by now - when i say "there's something different" it's because there MUST be something different. it's all part of fixing stuff that don't work.

 

haven't finished your whole post yet ;) there may be things i disagree with - but we can figure out why that is too.

 

dude - i don't not listen to what others are saying, i go through possibilities. i've seen people be dead wrong about what i said because they've not read what i have said. they've missed words here and there, concepts, or understanding.

 

if i don't agree it's not because i am not listening, it's because i don't agree, and there's a reason that i don't agree.

 

lol go ahead and drop into the f4 forum - i don't mind - you know why? because even though there's bugs, our squad can do what we want to do with it, and that is large scale co-op in a running war in a realistic threat environment. as someone that contributed what, 2 or 3 years of his spare time to it's progress i know what falcon lacks.

Edited July 24, 2004 by Bard

[Ruggbutt 45]

Maybe you and yours are trying to operate LOMAC the same way you operate F4. All I know is I can do what I say w/the slammers, if you or yours can't maybe it's time to relearn the weapons system. I posted a track for you to watch to prove what I said, did you watch it?

 

As far as dropping by the F4 forums to slag the game: I'm not a troll and I have better things to do.

[Crusty 0]

Consoles will always be second best to the PC, The PC is far more versitile for games than a console, Consoles are made specifically for games, the hardware of a console does not vary from user to user, the bugs can be sorted and game released. Easy. PC's are like humans they vary user to user, getting a game to work for every PC in the world is a hard task, its like buying trousers that are a univaersla fit but are a bit too big for you, so youi take them in a bit, the same is with a patch. The PC will always be around, its upgradable, interchangable, A console isnt, the new technology is released a new console is needed, out goes the old console, with a PC remove the old bit replace it with the new bit. I have not read the article, lol but hey, this is all i have to say in the matter.

 

Just my two cents

Hmmm, interseting take, but the thing is, some times the "bit" that needs upgrading costs more than a complete console machine

 

hasta banana...Crusty