Its got a name...

[+Dave]

O.K. Probably gonna p@@s alot of people off here. I was really enjoying this thread at first,and I realize I am what some people would consider a newbie. OTH I'm probably older than most of you and did some time in the Infantry(cue the music),so maybe I'm a little more comfortable with being a mushroom(kept in dark, sh@t on),than most of you, too. TK don't have to tell us sh@t. There, I said it. Shoot Me. Nobody here, and Stary was the closest,(why Tomcat), is looking through the correct end of the telescope here. Has TK ever made an SF2 fantasy game? AFIK the answer is a big, fat, no. So, the question none of you are asking is, why,in RL did the Tomcat exist?The short answer is to prevent a Soviet breakout into the North Atlantic by the combined forces of the Soviet Airforce and Navy. Protecting our carrier task forces was a means to this end, not an end in itself. The Soviet strategy was to rush the GIUK gap with a massive quantity of land-based (missle carrying)bomber aircraft and naval surface action groups in as short a time as possible, overwhelm any NATO assets in the area, and cut the vital shipping lanes to the UK. So Lexx, no MiG's based in Scotland, however, a certain UK Phantom DLC? In Scotland? You think? Intruders? Soviet Naval surface action groups? You Think? Multitargetable rader? These things are required to Sim the RL situation both as it was envisioned and asTK has simmed RL before. AS Martin Luthor said, HERE I STAND I CANNOT DO OTHERWISE! You may now let loose with the usual sh@tstorm. Thank you.

 

Shut up noob!!!!! Just kidding......

 

Good post though.

[squid]

 

Edited November 29, 2011 by squid

[+Stary]

 

 

thanks for posting, now I really start to think something's wrong with the WIP shots Tomcat shape

[squid]

now all we need to do is a new SoCal Map w/ Miramar, have ourselves a Top Gun Campaign.

and we already have the MiG-28s and all the aggressors. Working on the helmets as we speak

 

 

thanks for posting, now I really start to think something's wrong with the WIP shots Tomcat shape

i am telling you its the first time i see a TK model having issues

Edited November 29, 2011 by squid

[squid]

and some post-NA DLC preview. I think Lexx has the terrain almost ready

 

 

Edited November 29, 2011 by squid

[+Stary]

that was a good one squid

[JediMaster]

It's true that TK doesn't owe us anything. Well, maybe some gratitude for keeping his series as strong as it is, but that's all. As far as that goes, before a purchase is made no company owes any customer anything. Only after the purchase is there an expectation.

However, marketing is more than just "good word of mouth from those who've bought your stuff before". Those screenshots he puts out are a good step, but for years now that's really ALL he's put out. I don't think he should hire a marketing strategist or any such waste of money (although if there are any marketing school students looking for real-world credit maybe he could work with U of Texas on such a thing? No money changes hands, but he gets free work for giving them a bullet point on a resume), but he should put out better stuff. Maybe a set of 3-views of an AI-only plane from an upcoming release, or better yet shots "in action" where combat occurs like he did a little of for Expansion 1 and 2. A little write-up perhaps on the scenario the campaigns will cover? A text description of the terrain if the actual thing isn't ready to be seen? Such things should be built up as release nears, of course, you don't want it all out too far in advance and have nothing for that final couple of months you're running up to release. It seems here like he got the Tomcat 3D model done long before anything else, and the cockpit itself is likely to be one of the last things done as with the new terrain it's something conspicuously absent from screenshots.

A list of flyables would be great, as I'm sure it will have some previous planes in there. With the game operating around Iceland, F-15As are a must, but I don't expect F-16s. F-4s yes, A-7s...any USN plane at sea in the late 70s of course could be in there, but I know he does have a limit on the number of flyables in one title, although I've never bothered to count and see what that is. Is the F-14 going to be the only NEW flyable not in another SF2 title? That certainly seems the case and would be pretty easy to confirm. He could even say that then throw another in at the last minute if he wanted as a pre-release marketing splash. AI-only planes are nice, but don't have the same appeal as a flyable in that way (special bonus! All 3 Backfire variants to fly against, not just 1 or 2!) so you could just list them all at once. It looks like we might be getting two CVNs (Enterprise and Nimitz), but again he could confirm that. An AI Yak Forger would fit well if he bothers with that part of the Soviet navy.

So TK just needs marketing help, but his approach seems to be even when people ASK him about features he super-secret-squirrels it away instead of promoting it. I mean, wasn't he the one who said sales of Exp 1 and 2 weren't what he'd hoped? I can tell ya, there was nothing wrong with the product (as they were the first new content for the SF2 series aside from a couple of things thrown in to the re-releases), and if your product is good and reasonably priced, and you don't have a ton of competition (no doubt there, he's got a corner of the flight sim market to himself, small as it is), the 3rd leg is marketing your product and that's his Achilles heel.

[column5]

These things are required to Sim the RL situation both as it was envisioned and asTK has simmed RL before.

 

This is where your argument runs into a problem, in my opinion. TK has consistently overlooked real-life features that would, as you say, be "required to sim the RL situation" in past games. Off the top of my head, the DIANE feature of the original flyable A-6 in WoV comes to mind. That would seem to be as important to the A-6 doing its real-life job as the AWG-9 features are to the F-14. He also steadfastly refuses to remove the gun pods from the Navy F-4 default loadouts despite the fact that they were practically never carried. On a larger scale, the 60% scale maps effectively eliminate fuel from ever being a concern in a mission, thus removing one of a pilot's biggest real-life worries.

 

My point is that just because something appears to be essential to simulate real-life does not mean TK will include it.

[+Julhelm]

Can't afford marketing. Everybody knows you need to be big like Activision to do that.

[+hgbn]

This is where your argument runs into a problem, in my opinion. TK has consistently overlooked real-life features that would, as you say, be "required to sim the RL situation" in past games. Off the top of my head, the DIANE feature of the original flyable A-6 in WoV comes to mind. That would seem to be as important to the A-6 doing its real-life job as the AWG-9 features are to the F-14.

 

My point is that just because something appears to be essential to simulate real-life does not mean TK will include it.

 

But he did remove the A-6 as flyable for very same reason in SF2V

[Gr.Viper]

He also steadfastly refuses to remove the gun pods from the Navy F-4 default loadouts despite the fact that they were practically never carried.

And despite his model of the cannon being so jam-prone, that after a burst the gun pod turns into a drag pod.

[Murphy'S]

on topic

 

[+76.IAP-Blackbird]

I have read somewhere, TK gave us a fantastic playground, where you can fly from the wright brothers flyer, to the F-35 and not only sghtseeing but combat missions ..

 

I like to have a more complex sim, but ... that is a true fact and the reason why we all are here .. we forget this sometimes

 

Im out enjoing SF2 ;)

[Gr.Viper]

TK rewired community page of the website. Now it has links to FB, twitter, G+ and forums.

 

The pic above in higher res http://twitpic.com/7ln7ej/full

Edited November 29, 2011 by Gr.Viper

[column5]

I have read somewhere, TK gave us a fantastic playground, where you can fly from the wright brothers flyer, to the F-35 and not only sghtseeing but combat missions ...

 

It was groundbreaking nine years ago. Less so now. How many times do you want to fly the same mission against the same Comm Building? <-- That was a joke for the old-timers.

[column5]

But he did remove the A-6 as flyable for very same reason in SF2V

 

That only supports my point: if he would rather remove an important aircraft than model its key system then we can't assume that the key systems of the F-14 will be modeled.

[MigBuster]

I'm just going to buy it for the floating seagoing Comms building targets

[+Dave]

It was groundbreaking nine years ago. Less so now. How many times do you want to fly the same mission against the same Comm Building? <-- That was a joke for the old-timers.

 

you mean the GODDAMNEVILCOMMBUILDING.....

 

Where is sparko when you need him?

[+Brain32]

GODDAMNEVILCOMMBUILDING.....

LOL yeah that's the real designation :D

[+Typhoid]

you mean the GODDAMNEVILCOMMBUILDING.....

 

Where is sparko when you need him?

 

I finally just nuked the $#@^^ thing!!

 

[+Stary]

oldtimers should know that

[+Brain32]

Well on a more postive note, since the introduction of the mission editor, I don't longer go commbuilding hunting

I mean I must admit that yesterday I even selected the GODDAMNEVILCOMMBUILDING as the target, I missed the poor lil' fecker

[+Dave]

Did someone say....NUKE? You all know what happens when I test a nuke.......

 

Also can soneone upload that pic to here I can't see it?

[Gr.Viper]

You do know that Comm building takes one perfectly arched ballistic Sidewinder to kill?

 

Also can soneone upload that pic to here I can't see it?

This one?

[Guest Pfunk]

I've been told by my editor the minute this thing drops, I'm to clear the deck of any other articles and focus my entire attention on this one game.

 

Like so many others here, I am concerned about the staleness creeping in, so we'll have to see what happens.

 

I want to reiterate how attractive the external model of the Mirage Factory F-14A is.