Ok post your thoughts of RoF here

[Dagger 21]

I am getting ready to review and compare most of the better known WW1 sims, including mods and add-ons that have been available down the years. I would like everyone ot post their thoughts on RoF,or any other WW1 sim for that matter,here so I can get a feel for the thought of the community here for it.

[Slartibartfast 153]

I am getting ready to review and compare most of the better known WW1 sims, including mods and add-ons that have been available down the years. I would like everyone ot post their thoughts on RoF,or any other WW1 sim for that matter,here so I can get a feel for the thought of the community here for it.

Okay first off I do not own ROF... I am an avid Over Flanders Field flyer simply because the work they have done is outstanding it is possibly the most immersive Flight sim I have ever owned and I have been in the Virtual skies since the mid 1980's... You get the entire WW1 experience and its is great fun the Crowd in the OFF forum is outstanding any problems and those guys help out. Graphics are excellent on my PC the only thing missing apart from the cold is the smell of Castor oil... There are guys who could talk about this a lot better than me... Its like owning FSX without the problems and you get to shoot other planes down the depth of detail is amazing you can watch everything from your perch at 10000ft artillery duels the works troops marching who if you fly low enough take shots at you... The skins are amazing on the planes... and considering its based on Combat Flight Sim 3 its just outstanding in every way...

[Gr.Viper 131]

If it's about any WW1 sim, won't the thread be better off in the General WW1?

[ArgonV 2]

I own just about every WW1 sim under the sun.

 

IMO as far as Rise of Flight goes: The graphics, sound, feeling of flight, damage model (However imperfect, nothing else comes close) engine management and on-line action cannot be beat. I just wish the campaign system was there, but a patch is coming soon to rectify that issue. My one last gripe, is the need to be connected to the internet constantly to play more than just "Flynow".

 

Of course, FS-WWI is my brain child... So I will always have deep feelings of love for her the most. ;)

Edited January 6, 2011 by ArgonV

[Mogster 0]

I agree with Argon. While ROF isn't perfect it is coming along nicely. Its still only just over a year old, tbh I'll still regard it as a beta till a few more 2 seaters and the new campaign get released, once they're in place ROF will be an excelent all round product. As it is there's still plenty available to keep me interested though, nothing else has ROFs dynamic damage modelling, gfx and feeling of flight. ROF's able to fill my flightsim needs at the moment.

 

Jason and the 777 dev's seem to be listening to the community and developing ROF in the directions most would want to see it go, good luck to them.

Edited January 15, 2011 by Mogster

[Panama Red 22]

From everything I've read, it appears to be a very good Flight Simulation, as long as you do not mind being "teathered" to the Internet. When they decide to "un-teather" ROF, I will gladly buy a copy, but until then, there are a lot more WW1 flight games that I can play without being "teathered".

[Tamper 9]

First thought: Good thing you're doing this here...some other "forums" are about as objective, where RoF is concerned, as a clothier commenting on a nudist colony.

 

Other thoughts: I have grown into a love/hate relationship with RoF. Up from initially hating it (pre-release) to beginning to appreciate some of it's better points, but then down from realising how far it still is from being complete and/or what it is hyped by it's publisher to be. It does feature a lot of impressive eye-candy (the planes are truly gorgeous), but it starts to become really shallow not too long after that - kind of like that really pretty (yet horribly shallow) girl you probably wanted to hook up with in high school.

 

The damage model is OK, but far from all it's claimed to be. About on par, I would say, with other fare out there today - certainly nothing ground-breaking. Which would be OK, if it weren't heralded as the second coming in their marketing hype.

 

Flight model, I think is fairly impressive, but then who can really say when we're talking about airplanes from almost 100 years ago? Plenty of folks with issues in this area.

 

Campaign mode - almost entirely lacking (though it's supposedly coming soon).

 

Connection requirement - still there, toned down a bit but still too restrictive. Still requires a connection for almost everything.

 

Multi-player - here's a game that claimed from the start to be all about online. Used this point, in fact, to justify much of what is really more about DRM. Yet, to this day, they don't have a dedicated "console" server (like CoD, for example) that doesn't require a separate license and another stout machine to run. Does that sound like it's encouraging online/MP to you? (Me, neither). Plus, the number of servers is genreally pathetic (really), and many of those are locked/private, or run by some of the fanboys at the aforementioned "other" forums. Don't want to be too honest with any of that lot, I can tell you. Lots of cheaters online, too I've noticed (not really the game's fault, in fairness...but disconnecting right before you crash after I shoot you down, so it doesn't count...really?)

 

"Forced" updates - totally suck in my opinion. Even Windows lets me decide, for God's sake.

 

The fact that the producers have gone well out of their way to prevent purchasers from (legitimately) reselling their copy - nearly criminal, in my opinion, and completely unnecessary to treat customers like that. Won't offer a refund, and still generally deny that it's all about making sure no one can by a copy from a private party (it is, let's be honest). Which means they pretty much have your money, too bad if you decide you don't like it once you actually paid for it.

 

Publisher - in my opinion, treats customers poorly and doesn't accept criticism well at all - even constructive criticism. I dislike the fact that so many give them credit for 'listening to the customer' when they do very little of it, in reality. What they actually do is contort things to make it seem as if they're doing everything the customer wants, when it's actually what they knew they'd do anyway.

 

As I said, love/hate. Is it worth it? Everyone has to decide for themselves. I still play the game (and why not? I can't sell it...) and I've actually bought extra planes (Of course I did; wouldn't you know - you have to pay extra for any of the planes that 95% of people are going to want to fly).

 

When RoF was new, I gave it a 6 of 10 (being generous)...now I'd give it a 7 maybe. Still too unfinished to rate an 8, and too many negative parts about it to ever be a 9 (unless there are some major changes, which let's be honest, isn't happening). Some people insisted it was a 10 when first released (in *that* state - you're kidding, right?)...some others say it's a 10 now (so why would the producers need to keep adding anything?). I like to think I'm a lot more objective than that.

 

Regards,

[+777 Studios - Jason 0]

In reponse to Tamper. Sorry I didn't use the Quote function. Too long.

 

First thought: Good thing you're doing this here...some other "forums" are about as objective, where RoF is concerned, as a clothier commenting on a nudist colony.

 

I personally don’t understand this SimHQ vs. CombatAce mentality. It’s really sad for the community in general. People can post what they want where they want. There are plenty of ROF detractors at SimHQ and elsewhere.

Other thoughts: I have grown into a love/hate relationship with RoF. Up from initially hating it (pre-release) to beginning to appreciate some of it's better points, but then down from realising how far it still is from being complete and/or what it is hyped by it's publisher to be. It does feature a lot of impressive eye-candy (the planes are truly gorgeous), but it starts to become really shallow not too long after that - kind of like that really pretty (yet horribly shallow) girl you probably wanted to hook up with in high school.

 

I’m glad you enjoy it more now as we have been working hard to make it better. I’m not sure what you think we hype it to be. I don’t see anything in our descriptions of ROF that are inaccurate. Could you point me to some? If our fans like it, I can’t stop them from singing its praises any more than I can stop you from saying negative things about it.

 

The damage model is OK, but far from all it's claimed to be. About on par, I would say, with other fare out there today - certainly nothing ground-breaking. Which would be OK, if it weren't heralded as the second coming in their marketing hype.<BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"><BR style="mso-special-character: line-break">

 

What have we said that is not what we claimed it to be? It is a progressive damage system where damage is applied to each part which is affected by the environment and stress on the aircraft causing engine stoppage, structural failures and fires to spread or be put out. As far as we know that is the first sim to do that, therefore it is ground-breaking is it not? Are we not allowed to tout what features we think are good?

Flight model, I think is fairly impressive, but then who can really say when we're talking about airplanes from almost 100 years ago? Plenty of folks with issues in this area.

 

This is true for every sim so I agree with you there, but our flight model is different than most others because it is the sum of all parts that make up the aircraft and affect how it flies. Similar to what X-Plane does which I think we can all agree does a very good job of modeling flight. So our FMs are pretty good as real life pilots have told us.

Campaign mode - almost entirely lacking (though it's supposedly coming soon).

 

Our new Career mode is being worked on and will be pretty great from what I see and this was a direct decision made after listening to the community. So to say we don’t head their advice is not accurate. This was also a feature that was rushed due to the previous owner and not the team’s decision. Sometimes you have to do what the boss wants. That person is no longer the boss. So a new Career mode was begun and will be made available to all who own ROF. Although, the current Career system, in our opinion and others that write us say that it isn’t that bad. Is it as cool as it could be? No, will it be much better? Yes.

 

Connection requirement - still there, toned down a bit but still too restrictive. Still requires a connection for almost everything.<BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"><BR style="mso-special-character: line-break">

 

'Almost everything' is not an accurate statement in my opinion and for most pilots they do not need to connect for what they do most with ROF. However, we understand some don’t like this, but most don't know the whole story of why it exists in the first place and why it's not easy to remove. ROF was originally designed as a persistent MMO type product and the initial design as required by the owner was to treat ROF as an MMO where an online connection was part and parcel to the experience. There are certain advantages to that, DRM being only a part of the overall reasoning. Other considerations for such a system were micro-transactions, community building, real-time stat tracking, instant updating, large online battles and unlimited installs on multiple computers. At some point when the development cost for an MMO style product rose to an unacceptable level for the original owner, the decision was made to make it in the standard SP/MP style like other products. Unfortunately, the die had been cast and the underlying fundamental design choice had been made and it was too late to change. Too much time and money had already been spent. The team, seeing the resistance to this system, again which was decided by the original owner, stopped work on other features and found a way to disengage the online connection for 3 of the 5 modes of gameplay without breaking the product. Unfortunately, unhooking the rest of the sim would send the team back to square one developmentally and no one could afford that, especially after the original owner wanted to drop the sim completely. Instead of giving up though, the team decided to carry on with 777 and try to make the best of the situation by keeping their promises and improving the product the best they can with the resources they have. The bottomline is that the online connection is not simply a DRM system meant to frustrate pirates and you.

Multi-player - here's a game that claimed from the start to be all about online. Used this point, in fact, to justify much of what is really more about DRM. Yet, to this day, they don't have a dedicated "console" server (like CoD, for example) that doesn't require a separate license and another stout machine to run. Does that sound like it's encouraging online/MP to you? (Me, neither). Plus, the number of servers is genreally pathetic (really), and many of those are locked/private, or run by some of the fanboys at the aforementioned "other" forums. Don't want to be too honest with any of that lot, I can tell you. Lots of cheaters online, too I've noticed (not really the game's fault, in fairness...but disconnecting right before you crash after I shoot you down, so it doesn't count...really?)

 

So with multiplayer I will say see my previous comment above which explains why it works the way it does at the moment and it is not simply a front for a DRM system. However, our MP is pretty good and those that fly MP seem to enjoy it. We also have an in-game browser system so it is easy to find a server to play on. Is our dedicated server system the best yet? No it’s not. Will we give anyone who asks for a separate Server code so they can host a server? Yes. Sorry it's not up to your standards, maybe in the future it will be.

Also, when the MMO concept was dropped, it was believed based on their personal experience with other sims that the hard-core simmers out there preferred serious Co-Ops. So the MP design was based around a serious Co-Op mode. Well, the community quickly told them that that was an incorrect judgment, so the team went back and created two other modes of Multiplayer. Of which, both allow you to add AI elements, triggers and special functions to the missions just like in SP. Again, this work being done at the communities’ request.

As with any MP server the stronger the host the better the online experience will be. Due to the complexity of our physics, flight models, ballistics and even pilot models a lot of data is transferred between computers, so a decent connection is recommended.

As far as cheaters go, a lot of sims with an online component had cheaters including IL-2. Remember the old PrintScreen cheat? If someone wants to leave the server to not be killed we can’t really help that at the moment.

Also, only a few servers are locked and that’s their right, but the most popular ones are not and function very well and are a lot of fun.

"Forced" updates - totally suck in my opinion. Even Windows lets me decide, for God's sake.

 

This is a difficult item because of the underlying design as I mentioned above. At least with the offline mode you don’t have to update. Also, once it was clear that we needed to have a long series of updates we felt that the hosting of many, many patches by other websites would be confusing to the customer so it actually worked to our advantage to have our easy update system in place. Plus we didn't want folks to wait a year or more for a patch. We also have a Recovery function that will help reset your install in case it somehow got porked without having to re-install the entire product. There are two sides to this coin in our opinion.

The fact that the producers have gone well out of their way to prevent purchasers from (legitimately) reselling their copy - nearly criminal, in my opinion, and completely unnecessary to treat customers like that. Won't offer a refund, and still generally deny that it's all about making sure no one can by a copy from a private party (it is, let's be honest). Which means they pretty much have your money, too bad if you decide you don't like it once you actually paid for it.

 

I’m sorry, but this is not true. As we have always said, you can sell your copy to someone else as long as you give them the login and if that customer has your login info and they contact us we can update the email address so they don’t use the original owners. Just because our system allows for only one retail key-code per copy does not mean we’re not rational about this topic. A fallacy propagated online for no good reason. As far as refunds go, that is between you and the retailer you bought it from. If you bought it from us and it absolutely does not work on your system we will refund your money. If someone is duped into buying a used copy without securing the login info before handing over the money that is not cool, but not our fault and we're not obligated to help that person, but in some cases we already have. Shame on the scam artists! Our system of licensing is really no different than other systems such as Steam. There is no conspiracy here.

 

Publisher - in my opinion, treats customers poorly and doesn't accept criticism well at all - even constructive criticism. I dislike the fact that so many give them credit for 'listening to the customer' when they do very little of it, in reality. What they actually do is contort things to make it seem as if they're doing everything the customer wants, when it's actually what they knew they'd do anyway.

 

So, I do participate in the forums and 777 Studios is no longer just the publisher, but the owner and developer as well. It’s funny how you can go from a simple member of the community who ran a squadron in IL-2 to the business end of the genre and all of a sudden you are a villain because you rebut comments which you don’t think are fair or people who personally insult you time and time again. Also, I don’t think being a customer gives you the right to distort the truth about our product or insult me personally. I will speak and exercise my right to free speech just as you do. However, I have learned that there are those in the online community that prefer the developer be anonymous and not interact with the community and just sit back and let the negative comments fly no matter how inaccurate or inflammatory they may be. Before I was involved in development and sales I always thought the opposite was true because waiting around for the all mighty developer to take a few moments to talk the community really sucked. I think maybe the community has changed over time.

I also don’t see an attempt to twist things to look as if we are doing things for the community where we really aren’t. Can you give me an example? We’re not disingenuous like that. We have a wish list a mile long of items long that the community would like to have. Some items we built, we indeed planned and we said so, some items were planned, but due to community response we upped it in priority or built from scratch. The community does have an effect on what we do and when, even if we can’t get to every single request when he or she wants us to. Prioritizing features and scheduling time to make features and eventually discarding features due to time restraints, budget shortfalls, personnel skills and even design decisions is part of the PC game development process. We’re no different. See Ilya Shevchenko’s comments about feature freezing CoD due to release schedules. Are they going to get hammered like we did and be accused of not giving the community everything they want and deserve at launch? Are they going to be accused of not listening and then accused of faking listening when features were already planned ahead of time? Launching a sim is a perilous business turns out and you can’t please everyone.

As I said, love/hate. Is it worth it? Everyone has to decide for themselves. I still play the game (and why not? I can't sell it...) and I've actually bought extra planes (Of course I did; wouldn't you know - you have to pay extra for any of the planes that 95% of people are going to want to fly).

 

I’m glad you still play ROF as I think it’s worth yours and others’ time. And if we had millions of dollars we could just give everything away, but unfortunately we can’t as we all have families to feed. No one is getting rich off of ROF. It would be nice, but not happening. Everyone involved really is a group dedicated to the hobby. We’ve said no to organizations that wanted to work with us who only to make money and strip out the soul of what we have worked so hard on in the name of the all-mighty dollar or euro.

When RoF was new, I gave it a 6 of 10 (being generous)...now I'd give it a 7 maybe. Still too unfinished to rate an 8, and too many negative parts about it to ever be a 9 (unless there are some major changes, which let's be honest, isn't happening). Some people insisted it was a 10 when first released (in *that* state - you're kidding, right?)...some others say it's a 10 now (so why would the producers need to keep adding anything?). I like to think I'm a lot more objective than that.

 

Then we’re making progress. We have never said ROF is a 10 or the greatest of all time. Other fans may say that, but we don’t. We really like what we have accomplished in some departments and acknowledge other parts are not perfect. I think our track record of frequent and regular updates proves that.

And before you tell me to buzz off, I want to say that I respond to posts like this because I think some of your comments were unfair and inaccurate. You will obviously disagree, but I make posts like this for the others who may read your post and decide they should not be open to owning ROF. I feel that when some things are put in proper context they might be a little less harsh on these forums when they see something they might not like and consider owning ROF. We feel this in turn leads to a healthier discussion overall. We don’t mind honest critiques and we get plenty of it on this site, SimHQ and the official ROF forum. I just want them to be fair and not laced with a vitriolic or sarcastic tone and include charged language. And that goes for me too, which I am not always perfect at. This genre doesn’t need it.

We’ll keep trying to make ROF better for you.

 

Regards,

Jason

[Tamper 9]

Jason,

 

Well, I won't tell you to buzz off...quite the contrary, actually. I'm genuinely impressed and appreciative that you took the time to respond.

 

Your response was probably the most detailed, specific, and objective that I think I've ever heard from you. I am sure we don't agree on all points; this is the nature of opinions (which were solicited in this thread and claimed as my own throughout my post). Much of what I said remains my opinion as stated.

 

But I have to say you just ratcheted up my opinion - for whatever it's worth - by a mile. Don't know why it took my writing my honest opinion here to get such a response, but I'll certainly take it for what it's worth. The "other" forum locks and deletes threads like it's going out of style - and while it may be their 'right' to do so, it just plain makes them look guilty of censorship and obvious bias. I can assure you, if I had written there what I have here - word for word, it would've been deleted within hours (if that).

 

Incidentally, so we're clear, none of what I wrote is (intended to be) a personal attack on you. I feel it is expressed simply as a customer's frustration with an enterprise. Much as you likely feel you "are 777" (and rightfully so), my complaints are directed at the entity, not the individual. Saying "You're ugly" is a personal insult - saying that you (as the enterprise) have not treated customers well in my opinion is an expression of my experience with your company's handling of it's clients. If I've personally insulted you, then I apologize. But you might consider this constructive criticism, in it's own right.

 

To respond to one question of yours, regarding the Damage Model: What have we said that is not what we claimed it to be?

On the 777 website, there appears the claim "The detailed damage model leaves no room for error." To be accurate, there have been numerous demonstrated errors in the damage model, from planes flying with damage which would make flight impossible, to certain parts of the aircraft that are not affected by damage as other parts are, to planes that have an intact fuselage after 'augering in'. To me, advanced DM or otherwise, it's the same sort of stuff other sims have suffered from forever. WIthout getting to an argument about it - maybe you could just consider being a little more accurate in the marketing language?

 

I wasn't aware you would allow email accounts to be 'reset' for logins - it has come up, and I believe I have a record of a public posting to the effect that it would not be done "without good reason"[sic]. I am fairly certain it was stated that it wouldn't be done just because someone wanted to sell a copy. (I'll have to look back over the saved texts I kept)

 

Regardless; now, if you're clarifiyng this policy to include "I want to sell my copy" as a "good reason" for needing the email changed, I will forever cease from claiming otherwise. And move a mark from the minus to the plus column in favor of RoF.

 

Is that, in fact, what you're saying?

I also wasn't aware that you would give 'server-only' code to anyone who asked. Can you direct me to where this is stated? Again, I am certain it's been asked before, but did not get the answer you gave above.

 

If it winds up that the things you touched on above are as you say, it would certainly raise opinion(s) a lot - not just mine, trust me. I believe there are many out there "on the fence" who might be similarly convinced, if these things are true.

 

RoF has indeed come along - it is good, and it is getting better. I never said I wouldn't recommend it (I would), and a 7 from me is pretty damned good - you could count on one hand the games from all time that I thought honestly rated an 8; even fewer get a 9. 10 is reserved for maybe 1 or 2 games I've ever played (and they're actually really like 9.5's). And, shouldn't that be the way, incidentally? How many games could actually be said to be 'above any improvement'? At least with me you know that if you're in the 7+ range, you're in some fairly decent company.

 

But there's always been this list of annoyances. A "recommendation" to a friend or colleague to buy this game is just another opinion - and I can't very well recommend something to another person without giving what I believe to be 'the whole truth', including the unpopular bits.

 

Once again, thank you for the response. It does actually go a long way toward changing my opinion, and probably will for others - which I'm sure is important to you (as the enterprise).

 

Regards,

Edited January 26, 2011 by Tamper

[JediMaster 451]

I'm sure Jason doesn't intend RoF to be the single product that 777 releases, so perception of the company is important above and beyond RoF's sales.

 

RoF went from being "that nice-looking WWI sim I'll never get" to "that WWI sim I'll get at some point when I have more time" due to the updates and positive attitude of 777. Now granted to them someone who says they won't buy is no different to someone who says they will because in both cases the product hasn't been bought, but I'm sure it's always better in the long run to have a potential customer that will talk kindly about your product to an avowed never-customer who talks down about it.

 

While I never recall seeing before that the original RoF business model was to be an MMO, and in fact I thought I saw an early interview pre-777's involvement denying it, many including myself did suspect it from the way things seemed to be setup. There was nothing wrong with that except perhaps that flight simmers and MMO players tend to overlap only slightly. I myself haven't played an MMO since WWII Online's debut in 2001! I played it for a few months while it was free and when it went pay-to-play I stopped because frankly the game wasn't up to par. Before that, I think Air Warrior was it for me!

 

So, it's good to see RoF is continuing to grow because the WWI market is pretty much a 2-horse show now with RoF on the "pro" side and OFF on the "amateur/mod" side. TK did FE and FE2, but it's obvious that's not his focus and I have doubts we'll see more in that area.

[ArgonV 2]

I too wasn't aware that one could get the e-mail associated with the account switched over at the request of 777 Studio support. I don't think it was that way until 777 Studios took over (Before you had to give up the e-mail if you gave/sold the game) and that was that. Good to know!

 

Also, interesting to hear about that the dedicated "console" server software can be requested. However, I was never under the assumption anything less that a super beefy machine was needed to run it. ;)

[+777 Studios - Jason 0]

In response to Tamper again.

 

Well, I won't tell you to buzz off...quite the contrary, actually. I'm genuinely impressed and appreciative that you took the time to respond.

 

Your response was probably the most detailed, specific, and objective that I think I've ever heard from you. I am sure we don't agree on all points; this is the nature of opinions (which were solicited in this thread and claimed as my own throughout my post). Much of what I said remains my opinion as stated.

 

I’m sorry you have not seen many of my direct responses to folks who ask questions about ROF or the status of updates on our website or SimHQ. There are some people who go out of their way to try and push our buttons and embarrass us as their own special hobby. Some of my responses to these known professional complainers are short and curt because they are a broken record and regardless of what I say they don’t believe me. Unfortunately some other person may come along and see the one comment where I call a professional complainer annoying and they decide I am the jerk. That’s the chance I take by engaging the public and why a lot of developers don’t, but I feel it’s important to interact with the community. 99.9% of my posts are polite and informative and serve to help our customers understand what we are up to. You also don’t see the angry and vulgar emails I receive from so called sim fans who call us thieves and crooks because of design decisions we make or because we don’t change something to their liking. It gets very old very quickly. It really is just a game in the end and I wish some people would take a chill pill or if you don’t like our product move along and don’t try to spoil it for others who may like it.

 

But I have to say you just ratcheted up my opinion - for whatever it's worth - by a mile. Don't know why it took my writing my honest opinion here to get such a response, but I'll certainly take it for what it's worth. The "other" forum locks and deletes threads like it's going out of style - and while it may be their 'right' to do so, it just plain makes them look guilty of censorship and obvious bias. I can assure you, if I had written there what I have here - word for word, it would've been deleted within hours (if that).

 

From what I know of how the other forum runs, personal attacks are not allowed and many threads have crossed their line when either I or someone else was attacked ad hominem. I would assume this forum is the same way as is the official ROF forum. Your thread would not have been deleted or locked for simply critiquing ROF’s features. However, as most threads go they often veer off course and it is additional comments that get the thread locked. Each forum has their own rules and members and I don’t typically come here because I did not feel ROF got a fair shake at this website whenever I read comments from members and whenever I did try to participate I felt very unwelcome so I stopped.

Incidentally, so we're clear, none of what I wrote is (intended to be) a personal attack on you. I feel it is expressed simply as a customer's frustration with an enterprise. Much as you likely feel you "are 777" (and rightfully so), my complaints are directed at the entity, not the individual. Saying "You're ugly" is a personal insult - saying that you (as the enterprise) have not treated customers well in my opinion is an expression of my experience with your company's handling of it's clients. If I've personally insulted you, then I apologize. But you might consider this constructive criticism, in it's own right.

 

Again, I must point you to the thousands of posts on all the forums that critique ROF in every single way possible. We take criticism every single day. To us, constructive criticism is making a post about something and letting it be. Posting 50 times on the same topic even after we have acknowledged your opinion, but may disagree or can’t get to it right away is badgering and not being constructive.

 

To respond to one question of yours, regarding the Damage Model: What have we said that is not what we claimed it to be?

On the 777 website, there appears the claim "The detailed damage model leaves no room for error." To be accurate, there have been numerous demonstrated errors in the damage model, from planes flying with damage which would make flight impossible, to certain parts of the aircraft that are not affected by damage as other parts are, to planes that have an intact fuselage after 'augering in'. To me, advanced DM or otherwise, it's the same sort of stuff other sims have suffered from forever. WIthout getting to an argument about it - maybe you could just consider being a little more accurate in the marketing language?

 

If your wing takes damage and you don’t nurse it back to base easy enough you most likely die. To us, that means no room for error. And it’s a computer simulation, not real life, if people expect every single factor to be calculated by the CPU as nature does it they’re in for a big disappointment. Believe me when I say our marketing is modest and just highlights the sims coolest features. I’m glad you realize that every sim has a tradeoff and limitations when it comes to the damage model, but please hold other sims to the exact standard you hold ours to if our description is not accurate in your opinion. Also, the word “error” is used incorrectly when analyzing sims. There are limits to the engine or algorithms that can be used due to CPU or Memory limitations which sometimes can lead to a difference in how something performs in the game and not in real-life. You will find this is every single sim ever made or will be made. A true error would be that we say something is supposed to work this way and it does not. Fuselages not disintegrating into a million pieces upon impact with the ground is a limitation and not an error. We get emails every day from users who enjoy our DM and claim it is the very best they have ever seen. So for some, ROF is leaps beyond their wildest dreams. These are the customers that give us the strength to not give up and keep going.

 

I wasn't aware you would allow email accounts to be 'reset' for logins - it has come up, and I believe I have a record of a public posting to the effect that it would not be done "without good reason"[sic]. I am fairly certain it was stated that it wouldn't be done just because someone wanted to sell a copy. (I'll have to look back over the saved texts I kept)

 

Regardless; now, if you're clarifiyng this policy to include "I want to sell my copy" as a "good reason" for needing the email changed, I will forever cease from claiming otherwise. And move a mark from the minus to the plus column in favor of RoF.

 

Is that, in fact, what you're saying?

 

This is what I have just said and we have already done so for customers. So, again, yes we will as long as the new owner contacts our customer service. However, there are thieves out there who have tried to obtain User Account info for ROF players so we have to have some process of vetting legitimate requests.

I also wasn't aware that you would give 'server-only' code to anyone who asked. Can you direct me to where this is stated? Again, I am certain it's been asked before, but did not get the answer you gave above.

 

We’ve made it clear on our comments that if you want to run a server you can request a code to run your Dserver with and we will provide you with one. Just send your request to our customer service email. I don’t have the link off hand. This has been done many times already and is nothing new for ROF.

And you don’t need a server code to run a MP mission. All you need to do is fire up ROF with your existing code. However, some people want to run a server and fly the mission not using the server machine and with an extra code we allow you to do that. All we ask is that you contact us and ask for one, we don’t want it being abused.

If it winds up that the things you touched on above are as you say, it would certainly raise opinion(s) a lot - not just mine, trust me. I believe there are many out there "on the fence" who might be similarly convinced, if these things are true.

 

I am the President of the company that owns ROF. I don’t purposely make false statements about ROF. 777 has owned ROF for 6 months so I cannot speak for everything that was said or decided before then by others on the team, but what I say now is gospel. For anyone who visits and reads the official forum or reads our News updates they know all this already. Some have chosen to keep a closed mind and write-off ROF because we do some things differently or because they don’t like my participation in the forums or they simple don’t read our forum to get the straight scoop. It’s really a bummer because their impression of us and ROF is wrong.

RoF has indeed come along - it is good, and it is getting better. I never said I wouldn't recommend it (I would), and a 7 from me is pretty damned good - you could count on one hand the games from all time that I thought honestly rated an 8; even fewer get a 9. 10 is reserved for maybe 1 or 2 games I've ever played (and they're actually really like 9.5's). And, shouldn't that be the way, incidentally? How many games could actually be said to be 'above any improvement'? At least with me you know that if you're in the 7+ range, you're in some fairly decent company.<BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"><BR style="mso-special-character: line-break">

 

I’m glad you like ROF and we feel ROF is better than what we feel some give us credit for. All we ask for are accurate comments and not hate filled or irrational. I hope my comments have straightened out a few things for you and others. And even then, some will continue their campaign against ROF because we simply do some things differently. And sometimes this is needed to push a genre forward. Such is the PC game universe I guess. The more it happens though, the less participation you will have by folks like me.

 

But there's always been this list of annoyances. A "recommendation" to a friend or colleague to buy this game is just another opinion - and I can't very well recommend something to another person without giving what I believe to be 'the whole truth', including the unpopular bits.

 

Once again, thank you for the response. It does actually go a long way toward changing my opinion, and probably will for others - which I'm sure is important to you (as the enterprise).

 

I am always around and responding to questions is nothing new for me, but I usually do it on the official ROF forum nowadays. Too much scattered information only causes problems as we see here.

 

Anyways, nice talking to you Tamper.

 

Jason

[+777 Studios - Jason 0]

I too wasn't aware that one could get the e-mail associated with the account switched over at the request of 777 Studio support. I don't think it was that way until 777 Studios took over (Before you had to give up the e-mail if you gave/sold the game) and that was that. Good to know!

 

Also, interesting to hear about that the dedicated "console" server software can be requested. However, I was never under the assumption anything less that a super beefy machine was needed to run it. ;)

 

 

Argon,

 

Every user already has the software to run an ROF server with our little Dserver app that ships with the game. What I'm talking about is an extra code/account that you can use to run a server on one machine and fly in it on another. We do this for folks who take the time to host a permanent server for ROF. We've always done this.

 

You also don't need a super beefy machine to host a nice gathering of ROF flyers. Not 60+ folks, but a dozen or more on an average machine is always possible. Of course the usual bit about hardware and connection speed affecting performance still applies so your mileage may vary.

 

Jason

[Wodin 0]

Something not quite right here...Dagger asked for people's opinions on RoF as he is doing a review...I would of thought that it was directed at customers..I feel that Jason should have stayed out of this thread to be honest....it was a fact finding mission by Dagger not a Q & A for 777. I think maybe Jason should just chill out a little not feel that he has to defend his game constantly...people will either like it or not and nothing Jason could say will change that.

 

I bought the game a couple of months ago and have a few extra planes....I also feel that it looks superb...I love the DM but sometimes it looks like the wings are made from tin also I've seen photos of planes from WW1 that had hit the deck from a great height and there is just a mangled mess, nothing like the way the planes hit the dirt in RoF, get that sorted and have the flames spread over the plane and for the flames to destroy the fabric then you have a ground breaking DM! It flies very well which is another of it's strong points.

 

However it's not a full game. If you don't fly multi player I can't see anyone spending hours playing it. I dip in and out for the odd flight whilst I concentrate on OFF which as a WW1 experience is far ahead of RoF. The graphics don't mean squat in the end when your fully immersed with your campaign pilot. The butterflies once you get a pilot who has won a couple of medals and has a fair few kills and beats the 17 hour mark just can't be beaten.

 

I do see RoF as a work in progress. I look forward to the new career mode. I would like to see an overhaul of the terrain and clouds they just don't look right at all. Fly OFF when it's overcast with those massive clouds and dark threatening sky and it's so full of Drama.Those clouds dwarf you and your Bus so you feel your in a massive world.

 

Give me the Planes from RoF and everything else from OFF....that will do me.

[ArgonV 2]

IMO I think in order to do a review, it's best to have the facts straight. I think Jason was simply trying to set them straight.

[Tamper 9]

ArgonV - although your input is obviously welcome and respected, I don't think that Jason's responses to my posts could be counted as any more 'factual' than my remarks are. Are we to accept that everything from his perspective is fact, just because he owns 777? If anything, he's motivated to lean toward the positive (one of my biggest complaints - not about Jason, mind you, but about most 'pro-ROF' USERS - is a lack of objectivity).

 

I, on the other hand, stand to gain or lose absolutely nothing by expressing an honest opinion.

 

I'm not saying Jason hasn't helped clear the air here on a few subjects - and (as I said) I'm grateful. But I did also say much of what I said remains my opinion as stated originally. I chose not to argue the individual points about DMs and so on, simply out of a sense of civility - as Jason is obviously trying to "rise above" (no pun intended). I do believe he's got as much right as anyone to speak up, and it's good to hear both sides - but (let's be totally honest), some of what he says is nothing more than his opinion, just as mine is...mine :)

 

(Jason - I do apologize for referring to you as if you're not here - I mean nothing by it, just replying to Argon)

 

So - with all due respect, and if you please, let's not label one perspective in it's entirety as "setting the facts straight" while by inference we cast others as perhaps not factual. Again, this is the very nature of opinions; they are usually held strongly and seldom without at least some bias.

 

Thanks, mate.

[Venator 0]

I'm curious. The OP says a review of all WWI sims, yet the title of the thread is specific about RoF, and specifically mentions RoF (and no others) in the body of the post. I can certainly see why 777 responded, it looks to be an "odd" post to me and has certainly gone in a different direction than where I assumed it was meant to go. If I may ask, is this a personal review or has it been "commissioned" by a host?

Back to the OP, if you are truly soliciting opinions and not a personal diatribe. I flew Red Baron back in early 90's (was it that long ago?) but missed out on the golden era while in grad school (probably wouldn't have gotten my PhD otherwise).

 

I got back into WWI sims with First Eagles which by all accounts is a fine sim-lite. If you want quick no nonsense action this is the one for you, but not in an arcadish way either, it has very nice scaleable player features. Runs well on almost all systems, has a good flight model with stalls and spins, looks good on higher end rigs with some of the 3rd party mods which are great (I believe the most types of aircraft available in ANY WWI sim) from a solid 3rd party community. Yes, since OFF and RoF came out TK likely sees FE as a loosing interest, but he still supports it. The sim was meant to modded, is relatively simple to mod, and that is its greatest attraction IMHO. You can make it look and behave how you want it to, no begging devs -- do it yourself!

 

OFF: I started with OFF2 and then OFF3 as well as HiTR. Yes, it has a very detailed campaign system, and the front is 'alive', yet when you see your wingmates go in for a flaming Burton they show back up next mission. I have an aging (going on 5 years now) PCI-e quad core system with some upgrades, but back when OFF3 came out it was still very powerful. I could never get OFF3 to run at its best (though mostly 3 and 4 on sliders), and forget HiTR which was a slide show when more than 10 planes were in the air towards the end of the war. The sim flight engine is a one-core wonder. I should have asked for my money back, but I didn't because the devs tried to help and they seem like an sincere bunch of guys with an honest mission. I had some fun with it, the aircraft and sound is very fine but the flight model is limited by CFS3 (AH! There's the rub!), stalls and spins are awkward at best. The sky has corners, the rivers and roads run straight make angled turns and go nowhere... Never felt that I was in an airplane, though it played very well down low with the trees and houses, which is a definite asset to any WWI sim. Unless CFS3 is abandoned this will always be its achilles heal, and there is rumour of alternatives.

 

RoF: After my experience with OFF I took a big gamble by purchasing RoF ICE this summer. After a near heart-stopping initial issue where it would only run on one core on Win7 x64, I got it running on all 4 cores most grfx features maxed out. Remember, that's a 4 year old system I speak of. Up until patch 1.016 I was thoroughly enjoying a very immersive environment, with curvaceous rivers that look like rivers that glint in the sunlight, and except for some minor shimmer at the horizon when below say 1000 feet. I can navigate by the map only, now that's immersion! However, now that clouds throw shadows after 1.016 (which currently cannot be turned off AFAIK) performance has degraded. It appears to me that the quality of the texture draw distance has closed in also. Most people acknowledge these issues unless you have a monster rig. There are not enough plane types, but that improves little by little. I couldn't imagine what it was like to buy and fly this sim in the earliest days, I certainly avoided it. The DRM is not as intrusive as most make out. With Patrick Wilson's 3rd party campaign (which can be flown totally offline) you can have the skies filled with patrols, bombing runs, escorts, etc. I HAVE spent hours with RoF, it is not one-dimensional at all, but like any other sim it has pros and cons, though it pushes the envelop in many areas and these differences make up for it. The damage model is not perfect, but second to none. People nit pick about crashes (I have about propeller damage on other airplanes) but as mentioned, the world is a very complex place.

 

There are a few other WWI sims but I have not tried them. I can't believe that they're trying to make a payware WWI expansion for IL2. The market seems saturated with good established titles, and the dev pics I've seen are, um, less than I expected.

Edited January 27, 2011 by Venator

[Wodin 0]

Apparently reading the RoF forums (I'm Woden over there) I may have come across as rude...that wasn't my intention. I didn't know jason had been invited to this discussion. Also I fee that worrying to much over what people on forums say about your game and coming in to justify it all the time will be counter productive. People have opinions after playing a game and no amount of developer comments will change them. I understand RoF has come in for critisism since release and maybe the developers have become a little to sensitive to it. They have a demo out and that should be enough to sell the game to some one. I have RoF and I agree with a lot of tampers comments. Though the game is a WiP so it will have issues.

 

I use Pats generator and it improves the SP experience. However it is still very limited. I also stand by my comments that RoF lacks depth. Yes the rivers look great but my opinion isn't as good as OFF and it will have immersion IF your the type who enjoys non combat flight sims, ones where its all about flying the plane not about being a pilot in WW1. Thats not saying it isn't enjoyable and the flight and plane graphics\DM aren't top notch. It just doesn't stand up as a SP game at present. If it did then there would be no need for a new career mode. On the other hand I would also suggest people buu it as where it is good it is outstanding and with the promise of more SP goodness and more planes it will become a damn fine sim allround.

 

Finally I have OFF and HitR and have a mediocre system compared to rigs these days and my sliders rand between four and five (excpet clouds that are at one and are still in my opinion more dramatic and realistic looking than the cotton wool balls of RoF), and I can have shed loads of planes flying where as RoF starts to struggle with 30.

 

Oh one last thing I really didn't feel that Tampers comments were either hate filled or irrational....infact how do you judge irrational? If someone doesn't agree with your opinion then you could say they are being irrational...also someone with a vested interest in something could also be biased and irrational aswell. I think hate filled posts do require an answer and should be dealt with on any forum...irrational is subjective and I do hope your not censoring posts that don't agree with your ideas as you see them as being irrational.

Edited January 28, 2011 by Wodin

[Dagger 21]

OK guys, Jason was invited here to answer questions, I think he has done a great job. The fact he is here answering questions should show he is trying hard to let folks know 777 Studios is hard at work fixing this sim.

NOW I will say this if you have a problem with Jason or anybody from 777 studios posting on this or any other thread, PM me and we'll "talk" about it.

As to why I changed the way I was going to do this from a comparison to a straight review is I don't own OFF, and to be honest I won't own it because it is based on CFS 3 which I hated, so to be fair I decided to change directions.

Edited January 28, 2011 by Dagger

[Tamper 9]

Wodin,

 

Not to get too far off track here, but your last paragraph sums it up nicely for me. It's far too easy for someone defending their own product - and therefore, naturally biased - to dismiss anyone who disagrees as irrational, hateful, personally insulting...but this is the common tactic. If the comments can be classified as hateful or personal attack, you see, then they have no place on the fora, and can be easily justified as warranting dismissal (and censoring).

 

As I explained above, I don't feel anything I've said is a 'personal attack' , insult, or anything else besides an honest opinion. And I have observed that, over on the 'other' forum, if you don't agree with the folks who think RoF is the second coming, you will be ridiculed, accused of personal attack and insult, which in turn warrants the censorship that is bound to befall your comments.

 

This, in fact, leads to my other observation (that criticism isn't received well). Instead of responding directly to the comments and treating them as valid, they are often dismissed, ignored or even censored. Entire threads locked or deleted. The response is always positive and helpful, as long as you're not asking tough questions and pointing out obvious flaws. 95% of those who think RoF is fantastic don't ever ask tough questions or point out obvious flaws - this is because they don't see anything wrong, themselves (which is only their opinion).

 

And yes, they get courteous and helpful responses all the time over there.

 

But, someone whose opinion tends to be more critical (more honest, more objective) - even when their criticism is absolutely spot on - is obviously being insulting, personally attacking someone, only on the forum to "troll"...whatever. Basically, if we find a reason the criticism is out of line, then we don't have to respond to the criticism itself directly. I think it's called 'deflection'; if you turn the discussion in to "What's wrong with the person who made the comments", then you completely deflect the discussion from the comments themselves.

 

And, unfortunately - in my observations - 95% of these criticisms, while they may be accurate, are met with a brick wall of hostility and "You're just a troll", "You never liked RoF anyway and never will", or any one of a million other ways to move the discussion away from the actual comment and criticisms themselves. As an added bonus, this means anyone who disagrees with the 'fanboys' also earns the distinction of being a troublemaker, so that their comments *never* get proper responses from that point forward. We don't have to respond to you, because we already declared you a troublemaker.

 

All this is terribly unfortunate, because the product - any product - stands to improve much more from the comments of those who are willing to address the shortcomings, than it will if we only pay attention to the "Everything's fine" crowd. No one ever improved if they didn't feel they needed to improve.

 

A brief response to Venator: I believe the OP asked for thoughts on RoF, and then expanded that to "OR any other sim"...this means the OP doesn't limit the discussion to RoF, but also doesn't require any discussion of any other sim. It is not necessary, in other words, to 'validate' one's response by including comments on any other sim. So it's perfectly OK, in my interpretation, to discuss only RoF, or to include discussion of other sims. Neither is required, as it is stated by the OP. No real conspiracy here, no 'diatribe', just someone who opened a conversation about something and left it open.

 

Finally, for the record: I said earlier that I think Jason has as much right to speak up here as anyone. I just don't think that his being in charge of 777 makes his comments anymore factual than anyone else's; rather, they would be every motivation to be biased (only human, after all). And it's perfectly OK, so long as you understand that it 'is what it is'.

Edited January 28, 2011 by Tamper

[Wodin 0]

Dagger,

 

I honestly believe Tamper and myself are being civil here. Part of my post has been quoted over at RoF as some kind of rude insult and typical of Combat Ace forum users....well thats strange as though I've been a member for awhile I only really started posting the last couple of weeks. There really does seem to be a siege mentality going on with regards to this sim. I've only just noticed it to be honest...first clue was a thread over at RoF which was obviously someone who was dissatisfied with the sim had his post deleted and Troll put in it's place. As a newbie to the RoF forum and knowing how other forums operate i.e Matrix games I found this rather severe, though I thought maybe he was using bad language or something. So I haven't really thought about it since until now. Some people are their own worse enemy. I understand the want to defend your product but I feel it can give out a bad impression if you censor or dismiss anyones opinion who might not agree with your own or doesn't heap praises upon your sim. I honestly feel however irrational you think their comments are you should ignore them....let the Demo do the talking and if they aren't convinced so be it, don't worry about it and don't worry about what they maybe saying on forums...as no one has ever convinced me not to buy a game because of what they said on a forum...I will try the demo or just buy outright. I have read a post by Jason himself about people having issues with him....again I thought nothing of it...but I can see that IF he is censoring on the forum page and dismissing anything negative comments he will start to get peoples back up. So again if I was him I'd stay off the forums (obviously not RoF's) and only post IF someone has a question or any new stuff being done or being released i.e patches\planes. It strikes me that being so pro active on all the forums may not necessarly be a good thing.

 

I do hope I haven't upset anyone nor come across as rude...again these are just observations from over the last few weeks and some advice for Jason and reasons why people may end up having issues.

 

One last thing...I will support Jason\777 and RoF as I'm a WW1 obsessive and I can see a damn fine Sim in the making. My hat goes off to them for making it in the first place. I do appreciate what has been done so far. Keep up the great work.

Edited January 28, 2011 by Wodin

[JediMaster 451]

Watch any 24 hrs news network and you can see how easily one person's fact can be seen as an opinion by someone else, and vice versa. I've seen WAY too many opinions and speculations out there repeated as if they were facts because of a miscommunication in the retelling.

 

Naturally the head of any company is going to put a positive spin on their product, whatever it is. If they are caught outright lying about it, though, that will ruin their credibility and you know they don't want that. You can't talk about "facts" when it comes to statements like "most accurate damage model" because like most things it consists of several aspects and which ones the developers saw as critical not every customer will agree on. The "fact" would be "contains a damage model that takes variables X, Y, and Z into account". Now if a customer believes that the impact of Z should be lesser or greater than the devs saw it, that doesn't invalidate the work that went into it. It's a design decision and you either take it or leave it.

 

I take far more issue with things like Il-2's claim of "most accurate WWII FMs you can find" and then every other patch changed said FMs to a noticeable degree. So, has it been made MORE accurate? If so, then it wasn't that accurate before was it? Ditto the AI issues. People would point out notable flaws in the enemy AI and the only response was "who's done it better?" That's sort of like saying "less people die from eating our food than any other local restaurant"...you can be better than the others and still have lots of room for improvement! Let's face it, though, most people aren't great communicators. What they mean to write may not be what others perceive when they read it because they were too brief or too rambling, so one side is offended his criticism isn't being listened to while the other is offended by their perceived tone of the criticism or perhaps its inaccuracy. Both sides have reasonable points but don't hear the other's because they get defensive.

 

As for the perception that this forum was anti-ROF, I think that was the natural consequence of people on other forums talking about it in a negative manner getting their posts deleted or banned and then coming here. What else will happen but said persons will feel MORE negative because of their voice being silenced, justified or not. There weren't as many pro-ROF people because I guess most of them stayed at those other sites. So if you get say 5 people talking amongst themselves about what they don't like, that can give a misleading view.

 

We draw the line at personal attacks, but I think some places err too far on the "we all should play nice together" theory and disallow comments that they FEEL will invite personal attacks LATER. In other words, proactive control...a little bit like the cops arresting a guy who looks suspicious as he walks in to the gun shop, not even waiting for him to buy a gun let alone commit a crime just because people who looked/acted like him in the past would. Legitimate concerns are allowed as along as the posters don't go over the top with rhetoric. We can't control if someone is posting the same thing on other sites 1000 times, we can only control what is allowed here and I don't think it's ever gotten beyond what I could simply call "negative".

[Dagger 21]

Guys, I posted over on the RoF forums also, First I have an issue with telling a game OWNER and developer, that he shouldn't answer questions on a thread. I actually have a BIG problem with that. I don't care if you don't like this sim, that's each persons opinion and they are welcome to it. If you have constructive criticism offer it in a polite way, if anybody on any board feels they have to flame a game, or insult someone for liking, not liking, or having a different opinion of something I will step in.

The WW1 sim community is a VERY SMALL part of the flight sim community, and while there are fewer and fewer flight sims period, having a company release one based on WW1 is something the WW1 community as a whole should be head over heels about. I am not talking making a mod for a game that is 5-10 years old, but a completely new sim based on a completely new game engine, and offering continued support, I mean come on guys, there is no other sim that has the backing of the developer and owner as this one has shown. 16 updates and still working on more, name one that has done anything close to that.

Like I said if you don't like, don't buy it, and if you did, you have seen just an e-mail will get the account switched. Sell it and move on, don't just complain and flame. If you have a question, post it as just that a question, NOT well this sim sucks because it doesn't have this or that. Don't say well this sim sucks because the sim I fly has this or that and this one doesn't. Ask your question, be polite, then wait for an answer.

I don't see any other sim owners, or sim developers posting and answering questions on many boards Having one come here and answer questions is a nice touch, and I personally think it shows that 777 Studios and Jason are making an effort to correct a product that was broken when it was released.

I am not trying to make anybody like a sim, nor will I try, I feel the same should work both ways. Feel free to post problems, feel free to post things you think should be worked on, or included. BUT be polite.That goes for any sim, not just RoF, not just the WW1 community, but everyone on combatace.

I personally would love to see every WW1 sim, mod or add-on, succeed, grow and bring more folks into simming in this time period.

I can't speak for anybody other than myself on this but we need to come together, work together, and try to keep flight sims and WW1 sims coming. Make combatace a place where everyone knows they will find a good place to come and answer questions, or ask them. If you don't think we should cover ALL WW1 sims, then we are all in trouble, that's like saying combatace should only cover a select few sims and no others because we don't like the others.

Oh and one more thing, Jason, is a stand up guy, and you take what he says as correct. he is speaking as a game owner, and while yes he is here defending his product, he is also answering questions folks might have and trying to show how far things have come, and how far they are going. Will we delete threads that ask questions, or threads that have a person asking about a problem, NO we won't problems don't go away by a simple key stroke, I am sure jason and his team need to know if there's a problem. Let them know, I am sure they want ot know if there's a problem with their product.

Edited January 28, 2011 by Dagger

[Venator 0]

Dagger, I did not notice that you were a moderator here when I questioned the direction of the thread (and unfortunately used 'diatribe') and for that I apologize. At one time or another we've all read between the lines.

 

It is rather curious, and unfortunate, that these 'camps' have developed surrounding the various WWI sims. "The sim I support is the best, your sim sucks so you must as well!" You see it all in every single forum, this defensive lashing out against dissenting opinions. As mentioned, we WWI simmers certainly must be a small group, especially when compared to other games/genres, and should instead be working to the benefit of all. Maybe this would make a more interesting article, although much tougher to write... maybe I'm just naive or idealistic...

 

In my post I discussed my personal experiences and opinions with several of the more recent offerings. My personal perspective is unique (it has to be by definition), and what I appreciate/want is different than someone else. I've honestly enjoyed all of them for one reason or another simply because I love WWI simming. In the end all of them become somewhat repetitive and can be boring, so it is good to move on to one of my backup titles even if only briefly. Then I remember what I loved about them. So far for me RoF has shown itself to be less prone to boredom perhaps because the aircraft are so unique in their handling characteristics. I take a new aircraft on to study, start up a new campaign with Pat's generator which is admittedly still a work in progress, but does a good job thus far. I truly hope that the new official single player campaign will make a wonderful difference and attract more people to the sim. There is so much potential with a new game engine that is so very well coded.

[Dagger 21]

The only way the WW1 community can continue to even be on any developers radar is to come together. You are right in that there can be no division between us. Just because 1 group thinks their sim, or mod, or whatever is best can cause damage that ripples though the entire community. Not only does it hurt WW1 sims, but sims in general.

I have been a member here when it was biohazcentral, and been on staff for way to long to remember, and when WE and yes I mean the community that is combatace, attack someone, or voice a completely negitive opinion and not give anyone a chance to answer it reflects on combatace as a whole. You know the one bad apple saying. Folks our WW1 forum has a reputation for being open to only 1 sim, and I won't tolerate that. I want combatace to be one of the first places folks come ot check on all things flight sim related.

While we won't silence anybody, we not tolerate personal attacks on anybody, nor will we tolerate folks trashing someones work just because they don't like it compared to the one they like.

Folks I have talked personally to Jason, and I can tell you he is a stand up with a passion for HIS title. I do not feel he would say something, or even suggest something wasn't fact. His dedication to this sim is something I haven't seen or heard for along time from not only a developer, or publisher, but even an owner. So form now on, I don't care which"camp"you are in, do not trash anybody, or any title, period.

Instead put the energy into helping build combatace and it's WW1 community into some place folks want to come to and post.