For all that is holy, simmers make your voice heard!

Simmers go here:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=6123

Gamers go here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vetEg8J-wcw

:-P

Yes we like clickable cockpits.

X-Plane, DCS & FSX, all have clickable cockpits. Those of us who like clickable cockpits are not taking anything away from those who will not be using them. DCS Blackshark is getting great reviews for having clickable cockpits. The cockpits are already modeled with moving parts with a keypress. All we are asking for is the option to click on it or look at it with TrackIR and hit a button. Otherwise it may be the only simulator without a clickable cockpit.

Do you really think it's in jeopardy because of that thread? Oleg made a forum statement over a year ago that alluded to the fact he was considering NOT modeling clickable pits. Your post makes me lean towards being an advocate of them (though my post in that thread is to the contrary). My reasoning was simply to have the switch-specific application modeled as I would likely have it all mapped to my stick anyway, but your statement regarding radiator position is a perfect case in point. Obviously, on most aircraft you need to cycle through the rad settings to know where it's set (on some of the radials like the corsair, P-47 you can really tell just by looking). This applies to supercharger settings as well as a few others I'm sure.

What do you think can be done to be better heard? Obviously Oleg doesnt look at any forums regularly right now.

The best way to be heard really TB is just to make it, meaning changing the actual cockpit with a minimum of clickables that IL2 pits can provides.. The guys will get use to it and they will see that doesn't interfere with their keys shortcut but it will add more to the Game and lean toward a Simulator. And Oleg would hate to do a step backward in regard of his project by seyeing others that can do it.

Make sens? ;)

My post and title here was a bit dramatic, I admit it!

No TB, I don't think *that thread* has much to do with it, but it's a manifestation of the same IL-2 community perspective that has been voiced many times in the past.

I've posted many times on this issue, listing much of what *I* think about it, and meaning no disrespect to any dedicated IL-2 pilots, I’ve attempted to point out that those who don't already use them really have no solid basis to claim that a functional cockpit interface is useless. Nor is there much validity in the common notion that because one thing is done, that another will have to be neglected.

I know a statistically higher % of IL-2 pilots that would like clickable cockpits very much, but aren't really forum posters. . .the voice of the common posters has already been heard, and all it really says to me is that most of them have never used a sim with a clickable cockpit interface and animated switches, knobs, etc. They also all seem to think that adding a cockpit interface will mean they can't map things to the HOTAS or the keyboard. . . there's no sim I know of that eliminates these options, and it's just not a valid argument against implementing them.

The voice of the dedicated flight sim community doesn't make itself heard, if they aren't flying IL-2 (with it's lack cockpit interface being one of the reasons why), that leaves a pre-selected sample pool of people to ask, people that don't use clickable pits for the most part! It's that community that makes itself heard and claims it's pointless and so there isn't much obvious incentive for him to do it. . .unless he has the foresight to recognize the much larger flight sim community that totally turns its nose up at IL-2, and will continue to do the same for BOB if certain changes aren't made. THAT is what I think is jeopardizing the cockpit interface. . .apathy for IL-2 by the much larger dedicated flight sim community, and ignorance by many already in the IL-2 community to the immersion, functionality, ease of setup, and realistic transitions between aircraft that those of us that fly sims because they are simulations and not just for an aircombat game!

Well, I agree with you.

Honestly, I think most forum posters state their desire to NOT have clickable pits because they think it merely adds development time in an aspect "they" won't really use anyway thus extending the time to release. Silly, but that's my wager. In a true sim, having something like this only makes it better for more people thus bringing more people into the general community from the fringes.

How much development time does it take in any application to make a clickable interface? Tell those opposed to it - not to use the mouse while browsing the net. They were the ones that missed the point of a mouse to begin with. What we are asking for is fairly simple given that the swiches already move. We want hit boxes around the switches. Could we have that instead of an obscure varient of a jet from the Korean war. We are not, and nobody is, asking for rudder pedals controlled with a click or a mouse flight stick *already in the sim. It is the type of thing when someone asks you - what is the key for the bombsight? Dude - click on it. Simple hit boxes around the already animated instruments. At this point we will not see this. Instead what we will see is idiots with gaming consoles. Check it out man I got Nazi planes for X-Box.

BTW- on another topic. Who cares if FSX folds. You can use it for the next 5 years and still not maximize the hardware requirements. I will fly X-Plane again and that sim could use more people. For that matter, after clickable cockpits in FSX, X-Plane and DCS I am not going back to a sim without them. The only exception will be Rise of Flight because there is next to nothing to click on anyway in WWI. Go fight it out with Hitler for another 7 years. I don't want to dick around with hundreds of key commands and HOTAS.

SourSnake 

For my part i'm tired to argue with people or Online Pilots for that matter.. In the new design of a Sim the cockpit have animated 3D objects like nobs, buttons wheels light  etc.. so yes it's easy from a programmer point of view to add this 3D connection to a click. That it is easy now what it is not easy it's to move a big mass of people to accept that this is the future of sim as the track IR was when it first came out well now thinking about it the Joystick and pedals was the same. In that case It's hard for them to understand and accept that they are the ones that are hard to program because many have false ideas and misconceptions of what a real flight or a good immersion is. To me it is them that are a problem..
Now there is the fact that many have different ideas and taste for a flight / combat sim which is good and it is important for developers not to forget everything shouldn’t be hardcore, this is why there are different settings that each of us can set…  and older IL2 pilots could enjoy flying in automatic mode and enjoying the ride like going somewhere with a good ol’ Cadillac and concentrating their mind into something they wish to do in a sim. It is all understandable and it is all possible .
Many Groups/Squads/teams just complain and complain about the same things over and over and this is why I admire Gennadich and what they did and do.. It doesn’t matter if us TUSA won tournament against them in the past .. look how we are and what we stand for today…  They won by far, they are creating  and TUSA still complaining about the Spit/ 109-G2 planes.
Something is missing in the equation and what is missing for the next level is “creation”.

I would be surprised if Oleg or his critical developers has not flown Black Shark.

To experience Black Shark (combat sim) is to know the value of the Clickables in ANY combat sim.  I'd even prefer it in Rise of Flight.  I see all kinds of little handles and things to pull in those WWI cockpits.

I would imagine that it all boils down to the man hours per cockpit, versus the 'scope' of the sim.  So far, all we really have to examine (published, finished sims) are two extreme's, namely Il2 with hundreds of aircraft - and Lock-On (While Black Shark is awesome, it still follows the basic LOMAC formula) with "a few done right".

Both titles suffer at their extemes.  On the one hand, the Ka-50 contains many elements of interaction that is lacking in Il2.  On the other, most obvious when building missions - it's not a full-course meal.  The lack of other flyables is crippling for a broad audience.  

As I was building a Guadcanal mission last night for OC3, on Thrud and team's breathtaking (and it is breath taking) Slot map - picking and choosing aircraft - years etc..., I was reminded of the enormous flexibility in a sim with hundreds of A/C.  There are certainly "warts" which come with that approach.

On the other hand, my experience with B/S and LOMAC reveal the limitations of limited geography and flyable A/C.

I really want clickables in SOW, and hope Oleg pulls it off.

S~

Gunny

I agree with 90% of what you are saying, however there is about 10% that's hitting me like "If the users were more sophisticated, then they would demand improvements like clickable cockpits".


If that's what you were thinking, I'd have to disagree.  I think it's an illusion.  Developers don't really read forums.  Period.  I had dinner with a well known Flight Sim developer here in Austin about six months ago.  When I asked him if he read forums, he laughed.  I also have to admit, when I told him I was an "online flyer", he was immediately skeptical of what I said about anything for a few minutes...

Developers and their teams, put features and capabilities into sims, predominantley based upon what THEY believe to be important.

DCS is a little different in that Matt Wagner is more outgoing, interactive and involved with the "community".  I like what he is doing, but I don't really think it's selling a lot more product.  The quality of the sim, is what is selling BS - but the user has to appreciate that kind of quality.  It will be interesting to see the sales figures for the A-10 add on.

My two cents....

I will go post in the 1c forums when I get a change..

S~

Gunny

Gunny why did you get some new hardware ?  since you know that you can run any sim at high frame rate, i can give you lets say 80 fps in FSX onto your old laptop.. well now how it will look this is an other pronblem,  Did you become more sophisticated? You wanted more from your hardware because you know that your sim will look and feel better with better hardware and mostly because you know that teh Simulation can look or feel better.. now whould you think the same if the quality of your sim would be like your laptop at max out/input ?
Well this is the same ..  You want to make the best and the most details and then other will have the choice to run it at minimum if they wish.

Now saying that dev don't read forum well again your experience is not mine and it's like everywhere many wont and many do, depend of their need and time.

A pilot while getting his license should perform tasks and have a pilot knowledge... you cannot ask a pilot to fly any plane and without the plane knowledge and without touching buttons/pedals/ joystic of his cockpit. So yes More sophisticated pilots/more sophisticated sim.
Il2 is a Quake and instead to have a Gun if front of teh monitor it's a cockpit... The hard is to understand this and when this is understood less arguments and more fun will take place but for now there is a separation because many got more sophisticated with also a sight of more sophisticated sim..

well i hope this make some kind of sens ;)

Now for the sales... well there are some elite to push some sales.. ideas.. products... Michelin tires wins races in formula one.... this will give some good points for selling purpose and technology .. to less demanding market..  airplane tubing/ brakes etcc.. for motorcycles and now cars..  space shuttle parts cars etc etc...............

My motorcycle have 6 gears i can go to 200 MPH..i can go 65 mph on 6 gear as well ... but i can use and stay on  the second gear if i wish and get a speeding ticket...

If i need my frame rate to hit 100 fps and i know that it is possible by overclocking or adding a Video card..... i will do the tweak....
now the Simulation... we know that the engine can do good things and flying with 6 DOF is great, but the choice of the sim is limited but you know that it is posible well the sim get hacked... so yes their is a demand for more.....

Gunny, it may be a little before your time, but Oleg absolutely did read the forums, and USED to be an active participant. Heck, I've flown with and against him multiple times. The guy used to be really devoted to this sim community in a way that was pretty unique! That is evident to anyone who has been there for what must be hundreds of patches and updates and such which were either free, or cheap enough to be minimal profit items.

As a beta tester in this sim I also would get emails from Oleg about checking things that people in forums complained about. . .even if we all agreed that the way it was is the more realistic way, Oleg wanted to *please* the community that made itself heard!!!!!!!! At first I appreciated and respected that, but I grew to hate it. The number of people that post that actually have concerns about the overall sim vs their own favorite plane, that have facts or experience to base their statements on are becoming less and less. I'm not talking about things like how many rounds the p-51 should have. . .that stuff is perfect for the community at large to point out. The frustrating thing for me was things like flight dynamics at the edge of the envelope (where most pilots have never actually been – even with thousands of hours). . .a high percent of people in this community simply do not want to have to contend with torque, p-factor, spiraling slipstream, adverse yaw, CEM etc. . .they *say* they do. . .but if they get glimpses of it, they complain. After seeing this countless times, and being in a very tangible position of being asked to help an improved version of the sim go backa  few steps just as it was getting exciting was just really frustrating, and made me giving my time to that task over the years feel rather like a waste of time. I also stopped posting in the forums for much the same reason.

I’m scared that you might be right King. .  .that in five years I’ll still just be using FSX, and all the other dinosaurs will be sitting in a box in storage. Sims are like real world aviation. . .an endangered species. . .one that we’d do better to take a proactive stance at supporting, lest we all end up playing Grand Theaft Auto XXII and such.

Revolution happens ... same as hacking.

But now we know that here we can do 3D change FM, make new planes, make new Terrains make new missions make new everything.....

Take a "flying birds team" it's creativity power and passion and they will drop from the skies and become sheeps dreaming or complain about birds..

X-BOX gaming it's like communism...  well and there is so much more implicated mass population psychology involved that some elite are doing as a capitalism.. We need a revolution the sheep need to stand up and learn how to fly again..

One time TUSA make a stand from the crowd and started to create some advanced ideas...but this stopped and became a clan on the whole what this word can support and i would smear a Gennadich into TUSA face and mine everytime
.. TUSA is my own faillure.........

Oleg was, is different.  To that I agree, to a point.  Still, no evidence that he did anything he did not believe in himself.  That's my point.

I'm not saying "give up and die", I never do - but, it's one thing to "soldier on" in long desperate causes, and another one entirely to have emotional expectations that might never be met.  One get's weary of the "up and down" in sim expectations.

My little way of alleviating it.

I'll got now and work on the 4.09 maps.  They are gorgeous, a huge improvment - and most importantly, REAL.

S~

Gunny

Gunny please answer my question....read the posts please..... :)         ..OMG did i say this things out loud....YYyyyeaaaaaas!!! 

I've seen plenty, in many of his emails to the beta folks he would state that he thought things were better in the previous version but since the community had issues with something that we, or those of us that agreed with them,  should to look at it in the beta, which was a compromise between what Oleg wanted it to be, and what he thought the community wanted. . .and this was despite his cited feelings that no change should be made.

Some of my beta report responses to him were things like "I agree that no change should be made."

This is why I do not go to the forums.
Damn it now I got my panties in a bunch.  >:(

Yeah me too, mine are in a bunch and I'm not sure why :)

Which part didn't I answer Gozr? 

1) I want clickable cockpits and think they are as important as you do...
2) Looks like I might disagree (not totally sure) with you and Eco on how much Oleg pays attention to forum posts by the average vitual pilot.  I can readily admit, however that Eco and you have had contact with Oleg over the years, and I haven't so I may be too negative.
3) TUSA has absolutely nothing to do with this thread.
4) I bought my new system because:
     a) Old one was too slow
     b) Black shark would be more fun at higher frame rates and I'd like to add a 2nd monitor perhaps
     c) Great price-performance time
     d) assumption that Rise of Flight and Storm of War would have at least the same software footprint as Black Shark

I think you are trying to convince me of something, but I'm not sure quite what it is.  If I could figure it out, maybe we could come to consensus....

I feel a little foolish discussing things when I'm not sure what we are disagreeing about.

S~

Gunny 

Choices Gunny but i know you would agree

Think why it would be more fun to have better frame rate or seeing more details in the sim ? etc.. with new hardware ... well this is the answer of why we need more complexity into a sim Gunny. it's the same.. good to have the choices

I agree with you 1000 %.  Somewhere along the thread, it seems to me that you got the idea I did not agree with these improvements. 

I will be very, very happy if SOW and ROF have clickable cockpits, for example.  If they are not there upon installing the software package, I'm not going to throw the software away, however.  I'll just sigh and say, "too bad".

I've already posted my opinions over at 1C.  In one thread I cannot find anymore and today:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?p=67117&posted=1#post67117 (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?p=67117&posted=1#post67117)

BTW - here's my post from a long time ago - early in the 1C forums history.  I still believe this.....
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?s=af575083f31ddc6b829d291f7581a677&t=2923 (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?s=af575083f31ddc6b829d291f7581a677&t=2923)

If any of you have not figured it out yet, the 1C forums is NOT the place for anything about SOW (note that it's an Il2 forum) other than screenshots and an occasional note from Oleg (which is the ONLY reason to go over there - and that information is in a sticky).

Unless your Eco, that is.  It is entirely possible that if you were on the beta team in the past, Oleg could have those messages picked out and forwarded to him.  Gozr, you've exchanged email with Oleg in the past - therefore maybe he listens to you too, I don't know.

Look, if some folks would actually read their posts after posting, they might find that they say the same thing over, and over, and over again.  I see many posters over at 1C forums that way.  Why would Oleg need to read the forum to see what they have to say? 

S~

Gunny

Yes agree Gunny..

Those are valid points Gunny, and the very ones I thought years ago when Oleg still did actually respond to people in forums. . .it's plain to see why he would not do that anymore, with the sheer number of throw away posts. The point that you and I don't seem to have agreed on is my understanding that Oleg does have his feelers out there monitoring community consensus (as much as there is such a thing) and that community is by and large that which posts in the forums. I'm not saying Oleg is reading that thread or these forums anymore - I hope he doesn't because it would no doubt be really frustrating. Despite that, he's always paid some attention to the majority voice, and some of the runner-ups, and unless he's fully re-invented himself as someone different, I'm confident that if there was a stronger contingent of the forum community that valued things like a cockpit interface, that one would appear down the road. That doesn’t mean I’m writing a post hoping Oleg reads it, I’d send an email if my goal was to talk to him about my opinion.

OK time to fly a bit you choose, for fun we can go and fly il2 a bit 409 or Lockon SU25 since you guys like good FM or some ride on BS or even a little travel in FSX with a P47 ala "Black Shark" or a Spit or even this great WW1 gennadich plane just to get ready!!!!.... Condor? damit i'm a patch behind!!!! grrrrr

or if you don't lets built a MOD... ;)

Go try 4.09bm1 mod Sedan 1940 map on OC3 and tell me what you don't like about it :)

1 map on the rotation I have to work on, but I've run out of time.....  it's the Bir Hachiem map...

I've been editing these maps all weekend.  I think the two that are best are this Sedan 1940 and the new "Slot" map mission I finished tweaking yesterday.


S~

Gunny

http://www.gozr.net/iocl/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=287

Doesn't sound good:

When working on a [Combat Simulator] how do you solve the issue for [Sim vs game] for this type of product: do not go to the arcade and simplified to avoid caring for the creation of a simulator for pilots, where each button and the toggle switch was responsible for clicks mouse?

Just: Considering the vast experience of communication with users all over the world. But the main principle is: Everyone wants to fly in an airplane, modeled the most approximate to the actual prototype, but all the buttons and levers, all the more so by the mouse - that's not all you need. In our experience of the past, even real pilots are not so interesting. And if you are interested, then at once - to try. Then it will be turned off in options, as one of my friends airman, «for the benefit of enjoying the flight, not masochism preparing to fly».

from: http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fspread-wings.ru%2Findex.php%3Foption%3Dcom_content%26task%3Dview%26id%3D154%26Itemid%3D1&sl=ru&tl=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8


Bummer - they said the same thing about wind and wind socks. . .I really love Oleg's game, but why they insist on building it for the lowest common denominator is beyond me. . . maybe so there can be a follow up sim that will finally be complete???  :'(

I'm going to re-read that another 15 times (already tried at least 6), before I'll be sure deep inside my brain what he's saying.
So far it does seem like he's saying "real pilots don't want this, and folks will just turn it off anyway".
"All the more so by the mouse".

Of course, the mod folks will have to have something to do once SOW comes out - so maybe they'll hack it early  ;D

Please tell me more about the wind and wind socks part - I thought we were getting dynamic, range dependent air mass?

Thanks

Gunny

About the wind and wind socks, that was an old discussion, but it went the same way. . .in the forums all the air quake guys were shouting about that nobody cared about having wind, and therefore they didn’t care about wind socks, or weather systems in general. . . they wanted the Tempest or the Spitfire or whatever. The sad thing is that our OC3 used to have different weather and time of day settings and many players would just leave. . .none of these guys have a clue how the other half lives. . .those that do appreciate a true flight sim, who crank the weather up to minimums for the challenge of it. Of course that was also why TX-OC3 made an indellible mark on some members of the community. . .but most of them lost their niche as the air quake crowd slowly dominated online play, and the types of missions and settings that could be found on HL. Those guys still send messages to us here, or post sometimes in the forums about the years ago when they could find good servers on HL, but haven't bothered to fly IL-2 for years. I guess I'm just the sort of person that cares about stuff like that.

As for the cockpit interface yes, he thinks nobody cares about it, and those that do would just try it once. He might be right about much of the vocal IL-2 community, but he's 100% wrong about the flight sim community at large. . .anyone can see that if they look at the top selling product addons for MSFS, and the nature of what is done in those sims. Alternatively, take a look at Black Shark that has spawned a new game interface system for touchscreen type control on any monitor, look at all the X-Plane and FS2004/FSX people that purchased BlackShark after seeing the clips and videos that folks like me were putting out there on other websites (and then when I state my feelings on it in the IL-2 forums some try to suggest that I hate Oleg's sim because I want it to be easier to market to the rest of the sim world, and of course I also want the benefits for myself!!!)

Obviously we aren't going to be shooting CATIII ILS approaches in BOB, but those same pilots are the ones that own every WOP aircraft at 40 bucks each. . . MANY would come to BOB if it could be lauded as a legitimate flight sim and not just a combat game, I don't care how many times someone like El or whoever that tagtaken guy is say different, the proof is in the proverbial pudding. . .IL-s is a serious fringe title compared to the rest of the genre, and these little things, like realistic atmospherics, systems management, and aircraft interface are critical aspects of that other community. . .I'll make due either way, but I think I'll be done advocating the sim line to the rest of the flight sim and pilot community if it seems like I'm the only one that cares to support it in that other realm.

[Rant off/]

Well that was my Say always and always for PROWAR , HISTORIA and NormandieNiemen server, teh problem is that even our mates were not too queen of weather , turbulences etc.. so it took sometime i fought for a best ambiance you could get into a server and Historia/NN was the only server that provided this i place my heavy word here "Here" ;) for me to be able to fly with a certain quality i had to make it my way and many others understood what is the benefit to have some nice maps missions into a sim that simulate more the reality..  it took many years for them to get it.. like i say if you want to move up you have to take care or the weakest to make everyone mov up.. make sens ? I agree 1000% with Eco.

Now OC3 has the opportunity to get up, people in Spit and 109 are tired of the same things, they really need now some eastern etc.. OC3 can pick up many pilots that want more from their Sim. OC3 can also use my names if it need it.. NN/HISTORIA.

OC3 need some good poster/flyer/signatures..
OC3 need also Admins ( In sim  )
OC3 need a good plan of attack.
OC3 need to invite

Lets see on comms.

G

Here's a more fluid translation posted at M4T by Gamekeeper:

http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=ForumsPro&file=viewtopic&t=5921

Quite a bit more detail there and a couple other things I noticed. First, there's a statement in there about using the SoW engine to develope a WWI sim at a later date (a little competition there either from or for the RoF guys  :o )

"So you should probably not expect to fly Soviet planes immediately after BoB"
:( what a bummer ..