PDA

View Full Version : The Demise of DCS WWII: Europe 1944?



O'Donovan
06-24-2016, 12:53 PM
Well, it can be said the definition of vaporware is when nothing is released. Can it also be said to be when the developers pretend to develop parts of a game to keep their playerbase from deserting them?

I was just on the DCS WWII forum. Their FAQ and Backer Update threads were last updated in July of 2014. That means there has been NO real official news for almost two years. It's been almost THREE years since the Kickstarter campaign. Players are complaining the devs are working on a "Strait Nobody Cares About" map rather than the ones promised when the project was placed on Kickstarter (1-Battle of Britain and 2-France). From the looks of the threads, which are mostly about individual aircraft, it appears they're going to "cash shop" the planes to people, one at a time, perhaps without EVER completing the other parts of the game. I posted to their forums, asking about the status of the game and pointing out they should have gotten outside funding a long time ago, to complete the game in a timely manner. I quoted some details about how the IL-2 series was released with over 30 flyable planes, then expanded with updates and sequels. I also mentioned another studio could release a high res WWII sim at any time and totally eliminate their market. My post was deleted within about two minutes and I was issued a completly bogus warning about a rule my post didn't even break. That says more to me than all the posts on their forum.

On the other hand, has anyone checked out the open source sim "Flight Gear?" --->LINK (http://www.flightgear.org/)<--- That might be something members of the community with "mad coding skeelz" can work with. Just a thought.



-Irish

352nd Persecutor
06-25-2016, 12:13 PM
Ooooh, I sure don't welcome that kind of news! I haven't been to the DCS site in several months; there have been aircraft updates and DCS World has been updated, the Nevada map added, but no news that I'm aware of regarding DCS WWII. I'm a Kickstarter contributor and knew going in that there was a risk involved, but that doesn't lessen surprise or disappointment should development stop. The market for hard core combat sims no doubt shrinks every day; the world is dominated by those damnable consoles. Ah well, the Narns will always have their way with us. Such is fate.

wheelsup_cavu
07-30-2016, 11:35 AM
I was concerned when luthier was dropped from the project the scope of the kickstarter project would end up falling far short of its initial funded goals.


Wheels

O'Donovan
08-01-2016, 12:23 AM
I'm a backer of Star Citizen, and I frequently post to their "Other Games" forum. When I posted about the lack of progress on 1944, I was visciously attacked by one of their Kool-Aid drinkers. Since he had ALL the latest information, I let him rant and quietly shot down every point he made. He didn't have one bit of information I hadn't seen, although he DID post an image from their Normandy map.

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/images/newsletter/20160408/Normandy2.jpg

Now, I know 1944 is supposed to be a very high-res game, graphically. I was expecting near photo-realism in their scenery. The ground, roads, buildings, and such in these images look like they were taken from World War II Online, and the graphics engine for that game (WWIIOL) hasn't been upgraded in over ten years. Right click on the image, view it, then expand it to full size to see what I mean. If that's the best they have, after three years, it's a sad day for the DCS devs.



-Irish

352nd Persecutor
08-01-2016, 11:48 AM
I'm a backer of Star Citizen, and I frequently post to their "Other Games" forum. When I posted about the lack of progress on 1944, I was visciously attacked by one of their Kool-Aid drinkers. Since he had ALL the latest information, I let him rant and quietly shot down every point he made. He didn't have one bit of information I hadn't seen, although he DID post an image from their Normandy map.

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/images/newsletter/20160408/Normandy2.jpg

Now, I know 1944 is supposed to be a very high-res game, graphically. I was expecting near photo-realism in their scenery. The ground, roads, buildings, and such in these images look like they were taken from World War II Online, and the graphics engine for that game (WWIIOL) hasn't been upgraded in over ten years. Right click on the image, view it, then expand it to full size to see what I mean. If that's the best they have, after three years, it's a sad day for the DCS devs.



-Irish
Irish, I don't know how far along DCS WWII is and I *hope* it turns out to be what we have imagined it could be, but your suggestion to right-click and expand to full size the image to which you linked in order to see how good it isn't is unfair; after all the image size is only 720x225 pixels. In a world of average screen sizes approximating 1920x1440 the loss of detail in a small image like this one is inevitable.

Regardless, I've never been super-impressed with the map image quality of DCS World; it's okay but far from wonderful. I supposed it would be fair to ask "what is more important, depicting aircraft in flight and combat in high resolution or having a super-beautiful background?" I personally would prefer both, but if I had to choose, I'd ask for the first.

Speaking only for myself, in comparing the graphics in IL-2 (now 15 years old and counting) with CLoD (still struggling to be newer), the difference alone in image quality is not enough to push me to switch; plane sets and an available world in which to engage and entertain is far more critical. Neither CLoD nor DCS World can compare with the richness that the Honorable Old Lady offers. To replace IL-2 both have a LOT of work to do.

Just my opinion.

O'Donovan
08-02-2016, 02:13 AM
Irish, I don't know how far along DCS WWII is and I *hope* it turns out to be what we have imagined it could be, but your suggestion to right-click and expand to full size the image to which you linked in order to see how good it isn't is unfair; after all the image size is only 720x225 pixels. In a world of average screen sizes approximating 1920x1440 the loss of detail in a small image like this one is inevitable.

It's not the detail in the picture. Look at the textures. Those are low poly count buildings that are no better than in WWIIOL or some of the Microsoft sims from ten years ago. Then look at the same type of shot from a modern commercial airline flight sim. The difference in the building textures and landscape is startling.


Regardless, I've never been super-impressed with the map image quality of DCS World; it's okay but far from wonderful. I supposed it would be fair to ask "what is more important, depicting aircraft in flight and combat in high resolution or having a super-beautiful background?" I personally would prefer both, but if I had to choose, I'd ask for the first.

Absolutely, but if they were just going to deliver "average" or below average scenery, why are the maps taking so long? They're years overdue.


Speaking only for myself, in comparing the graphics in IL-2 (now 15 years old and counting) with CLoD (still struggling to be newer), the difference alone in image quality is not enough to push me to switch; plane sets and an available world in which to engage and entertain is far more critical. Neither CLoD nor DCS World can compare with the richness that the Honorable Old Lady offers. To replace IL-2 both have a LOT of work to do.

Just my opinion.

As someone who is a SERIOUS simulator pilot and who plays the game as much and for as long as you have, yours should be considered an expert opinion. Just sayin'. :)



-Irish

O'Donovan
03-11-2017, 11:52 PM
Well, the trailer is out for the Normandy map.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2iXhl1lIU0

I noticed there seems to be no actual gameplay footage, only cinematics generated with the game engine. I am somewhat disappointed to see it labeled "available now for pre-purchase" since the map itself was supposed to be part of the completed game which was to be a free download and FtP with one plane. That is directly from the Kickstarter campaign. I think everyone should raise a HUGE stink that ED is going to sell the map that was promised as free, during the Kickstarter. For ED, it's still nothing more than a cash grab, same as with the planes they're selling one at a time instead of putting together into a playable game. They poor-mouth about how tough it is to complete the game, then they drop one item at a time, for maximum profits with minimum effort.

I also hate when people on some forums try to defend Eagle Dynamics (ED). "Oh, they took it over when Luthier (Ilya Shevchenko) ran off. They're completing it out of the goodness of their hearts." I call BS on that one. As a DCS game, it was always the primary responsibility of the company who owns the intellectual property rights to the DCS series, and that's The Fighter Collection, parent company of ED.

I assign "blame" (responsibility) as follows:

The Fighter Collection/Eagle Dynamics/Igor Tishin 65%
Ilya (Luthier) Shevchenko/RRG Studios 25%
Oleg Maddox/Maddox: 1C Games 10%

The only reason I limit Oleg Maddox's blame to 10% is because of what a mess he made of Cliffs of Dover (CloD). If the others trusted him with more than minimal responsibility for the DCS title, I blame it on them rather than him. :) Truthfully, if ED really wanted to finish the game, all they would have to do is farm it out to 1C. 1C is a HUGE company with over 700 employees and 10,000 business partners. It would take them no time at all, relatively speaking, to complete the game, given their resources. Yes, they would have to be watched like a hawk, to make sure they didn't make another CloD-style muck up of it, but they DO have the ability to do it right, if properly motivated and supervised.

Given the agreement between Team Fusion and 1C to work on CloD, that may be THE way to go with sims, from this point forward. I would lay real money down that they're going to put out a product that will kick ED's arse and sell it at a much more reasonable price. Moving from "the 1946 pack" to the expanded and improved CloD could become the logical progression, leaving DCS WWII in the dust where, frankly, it belongs.



Just my $.02... ;)

-Irish

wheelsup_cavu
03-14-2017, 06:31 PM
The Fighter Collection/Eagle Dynamics/Igor Tishin 65%
Ilya (Luthier) Shevchenko/RRG Studios 25%
Oleg Maddox/Maddox: 1C Games 10%

-Irish

1C:Maddox Games was long dead before the DCS WWII kickstarter was started.
http://www.giantbomb.com/1c-maddox-games/3010-1218/

The company was founded by Oleg Maddox in 1992 and created several first person shooters, which were primarily distributed within Europe. In 1999, after the release of MadSpace, they were acquired by 1C Company, renamed 1C:Maddox Games and shifted their focus to flight simulators, most notably the IL-2 Sturmovik series.

In 2009, following the release of IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover, the studio was shuttered by 1C.


Wheels

352nd_Deacon
03-14-2017, 07:18 PM
The Normandy map will be released before the end of May this year. All indications are that it will be released some time before that. It is already in alpha stage and some of the "official" contributors to the forum are keeping the rest of us up to date on the progress. I've been following DCS forums every day for some time. As a kickstarter contributor, I have the map and the WWII asset pack coming free of charge.
I have all WWII planes from DCS and I feel that the planes are closer to actual flight characteristics of the real things than the planes of IL2. That's not to say that I plan to abandon IL2 but I am one of the "testers" for the 352nd just as I was a long time ago when we investigated IL2 while we were still flying CFS.

O'Donovan
03-15-2017, 11:27 PM
1C:Maddox Games was long dead before the DCS WWII kickstarter was started.
http://www.giantbomb.com/1c-maddox-games/3010-1218/

Err, no. 1C is alive and well and releasing games constantly.

http://www.1cpublishing.eu/

They're on the team for Battle of Stalingrad, Battle of Moscow, and Battle of Kuban. I'm sure they wouldn't go for working on DCS at this point, since they're so heavily involved in the competition. Still, back in the day, it would have been a possibility.


The Normandy map will be released before the end of May this year. All indications are that it will be released some time before that. It is already in alpha stage and some of the "official" contributors to the forum are keeping the rest of us up to date on the progress. I've been following DCS forums every day for some time. As a kickstarter contributor, I have the map and the WWII asset pack coming free of charge.

Deacon:
"As a kickstarter contributor, I have the map..."

Kickstarter:
"DCS WWII: Europe 1944 will also distribute via a free-to-play model, with the core game available as a free download! That means that a supporter of ANY level will be able to fly and enjoy this game!"

"Landscape:


Normandy. Area of the historical D-Day Invasion, as well as the extensive preparation and follow-up battles."



And, the cash grab continues. Instead of part of a FtP game, the map is now a cash asset, just like everything else to them.



-Irish

wheelsup_cavu
03-16-2017, 11:17 PM
Err, no. 1C is alive and well and releasing games constantly.

http://www.1cpublishing.eu/

They're on the team for Battle of Stalingrad, Battle of Moscow, and Battle of Kuban. I'm sure they wouldn't go for working on DCS at this point, since they're so heavily involved in the competition. Still, back in the day, it would have been a possibility.

-Irish
1C and 1C:Maddox Games are not the same entity. Just like the partnership between 1C and 777 Studios that created 1C Games Studios (https://www.linkedin.com/company/1c-game-studios) are not the same entity. Once those studios are closed the principles of those satellite studios are no longer responsible for anything done to or with their work by 1C.


Wheels

O'Donovan
03-17-2017, 01:45 AM
1C and 1C:Maddox Games are not the same entity. Just like the partnership between 1C and 777 Studios that created 1C Games Studios (https://www.linkedin.com/company/1c-game-studios) are not the same entity. Once those studios are closed the principles of those satellite studios are no longer responsible for anything done to or with their work by 1C.


Please note that I said, "Truthfully, if ED really wanted to finish the game, all they would have to do is farm it out to 1C." Notice, I didn't mention Maddox at all. As far as 1C and 1C: Maddox not being the same entity, don't believe it. Once 1C bought Maddox Games, it became part of them. Closing 1C: Maddox is as simple as changing the name on the door. All the assets remain the same and 1C can then proceed, with all the same talent, into new ventures. They wash their hands of the bad publicity while operating as usual. It's the same thing "Infinite Games Publishing" did with Mechwarrior Online. They totally mucked it up, then "sold" it to Piranha Games Incorporated. The only thing is, Piranha was the same company; same people and all. IGP was a shell company/subsidiary, built to take the fall, should things go wrong. Even the initials are the same, just reversed, so IGP=PGI. It's pretty common in the game industry to keep going, with a different name, after a disaster. For example, "spinoffs" of PGI have been known as Infinite Games Publishing, Jarhead Games, and Rabbit Hole Interactive, at different times in the past 15+ years. They're the same people, just running different scams.



-Irish

wheelsup_cavu
03-19-2017, 04:20 PM
Please note that I said, "Truthfully, if ED really wanted to finish the game, all they would have to do is farm it out to 1C." Notice, I didn't mention Maddox at all. As far as 1C and 1C: Maddox not being the same entity, don't believe it. Once 1C bought Maddox Games, it became part of them. Closing 1C: Maddox is as simple as changing the name on the door. All the assets remain the same and 1C can then proceed, with all the same talent, into new ventures. They wash their hands of the bad publicity while operating as usual. It's the same thing "Infinite Games Publishing" did with Mechwarrior Online. They totally mucked it up, then "sold" it to Piranha Games Incorporated. The only thing is, Piranha was the same company; same people and all. IGP was a shell company/subsidiary, built to take the fall, should things go wrong. Even the initials are the same, just reversed, so IGP=PGI. It's pretty common in the game industry to keep going, with a different name, after a disaster. For example, "spinoffs" of PGI have been known as Infinite Games Publishing, Jarhead Games, and Rabbit Hole Interactive, at different times in the past 15+ years. They're the same people, just running different scams.



-Irish

Actually you did mention Oleg when placing the blame.

Oleg Maddox/Maddox: 1C Games 10%
His company and its assets belonged to 1C so it had nothing to do with this project.

Oleg on the other hand was more personally involved than I initially remembered when I went back and viewed some of the Kickstarter videos on Ilya's YouTube channel.


Wheels

O'Donovan
03-19-2017, 06:02 PM
I mentioned him in the post about DCS WWII failing. Then I specifically left him OUT of the picture when I said ED could contract with 1C to finish DCS WWII. 1C is a major game company with a large number of success stories. They actually translate a large number (about half?) of all English language titles into Russian, for sale over there. On the other hand, Oleg Maddox seems to be a liability rather than an asset, when trying to do something the right way (at least when CloD is concerned).

I do have a question, though. I've seen the "mods" mentioned regarding 1946 and I know you say you use Forgotten Battles. As they use the same game engine, and use what appear to be the same mods, are they pretty much the same thing, at this point?


EDIT:

His company and its assets belonged to 1C so it had nothing to do with this project.

Yeah, that was a booboo on my part. He had already separated from 1C by that time. Mea culpa. It was him and him alone. That would have made it all the more logical to turn the game over to 1C to be completed, truth be told. ;)


EDIT of the edit:
Strangely enough, 1C still has a page on their website for 1C: Maddox Games. Look what I found.

http://maddox.1c.ru/

...and the translation: LINK (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fmaddox.1c.ru%2F&edit-text=&act=url)



-Irish

352nd Persecutor
03-22-2017, 11:03 AM
Irish,

As IL-2 evolved from its initial release it became, from IL-2 Sturmovik, to IL-2 Forgotten Battles and Ace Expansion Pack. Somewhere along the line (been years, I've forgotten the details) a separate version of the game was released called "IL-2 Pacific fighters". That version was absorbed into the game in a subsequent update and the game became "IL-2 Forgotten Battles, Ace Expansion Pack, and Pacific Fighters Merged", the version numbers having an "m" added, i.e., 4.10m. At every update, which happened frequently and generally did not carry with it an additional charge (Pacific Fighters did require a purchase) the game engine remained unchanged.

From the outset to the present day the game engine has never changed. When the file encryption was broken and mods became possible, various portions of the game were able to be tweaked, for better or for worse, but the game engine itself remains original.

After Maddox and 1c, at whatever positions they had relative to one another (and I don't care, one way or another), left the game to go on to other ventures, a modding group (Team Dedalus) took over "unofficial" updates to the game. I believe TD has now received Maddox's blessing (for all I know it has always had Oleg's blessing) and is creating "official" updates. The game is currently at 4.13 with 4.14 coming shortly (it may actually be out now, as I think about it).

As a squad we are sticking with 4.12 because the mod package we use, HSFX, has not and apparently will not be updated to work with newer versions. Mods are great but they definitely have a downside for squadron play; they alter the game and unless everyone is using the same game version and mods, the game from user to user, pilot to pilot, is not the same. There was a strong feeling, at the time mods were first available, that modding the game would ruin it for multiplayer use. That feeling was well founded, but packages like HSFX helped keep the game playable as multi-player.

Say or think what you will about DCS, but if you've ever flown one of their aircraft you immediately recognize that the flight models and aircraft characteristics are getting more detailed and "realistic". Flying a P-51 in DCS is a much different experience than flying one in IL-2 or, for that matter, in Flight Simulator X. By different I mean more evolved, less arcade-like. When CFS 1 came out, M$ proudly announced that the P-51 flight model was "historically accurate", saying actual P-51 pilots verified its accuracy. At the time, that was probably correct, or close to being, given the programming knowledge and hardware capabilities of the era. When IL-2 came out the flight models of all the aircraft were, and still are, vastly different and superior to what M$ had offered. Which was real? Hell, I don't know, but why does it matter? Each is, after all, a game providing a virtual experience and enjoyment of what we each imagine it must have been like to pilot one of those aircraft.

I see DCS as a clear evolutionary development of the better sims that came before it. Programming these offering must be, has to be, difficult and expensive. There's no such thing as a free lunch, we've been told, although the web has conditioned us to think everything should be free. Critics are a dime a dozen, and some of them are actually right, but in the final analysis I believe the results are best measured by the degree of enjoyment each user can experience.

I'm looking forward to where DCS WWII goes. I am also willing to be patient to let the developers take their time to get it right. I hope they do; others haven't.