I need some help....is AH a game or a sim?

[Yeager]

I think I may be on my period or something but I have had some epiphanys here as of late:

I have lost a lot of confidence in the application of physics in these FMs.

I actually have started to get this sick feeling that AH is a game first, then a sim.

I am convinced that the guns lethality settings are omni-potent so as to provide that instant gratification so desired by gamers.

I love gamers, I consider gamers great folks and have no ill will against anyone who is a gamer.  Hell, I spent the better part of yesterday trying to game the game (I did not enjoy myself at all).  I am and always will  seek the challenge of accurate simulation above the game on any day!  My frustration
is reaching critical levels here....

I flew WBs because it was a combat simulation first and foremost.  Its reputation as the best online combat flightsim was well deserved.  I stayed away from AW because it was obviously a game with a tad bit of sim thrown in.

Is AH a game?

Does AH intend to compete for the current AW crowd?  With what?  gameplay or accurate physics/ballistics?

Am I out of line?

Yeager

[This message has been edited by Yeager (edited 08-23-2000).]

[AKSeaWulfe]

WB was made by HiTech. Why would he fudge it the second time around?
-SW

[minus]

hehe   another  one who open the EYE  


maybe my english sux but i know what i feel in L-39 :-))))))))))))
and i cant feel it in AH  ((((
but with time This Shot Em UP online  plane looks like packman will mature and become a sim !  i hope ! :-)))
Planes need more Character   !! all they looks like a not a Twin brothers but 32  brothers ? i dont know the corect terminology for this word :-))
HTC give a each plane  it own Roleplay  

[Yeager]

Why would he fudge it the second time around?
====
I have a tremendous amount of respect for EVERYONE at HTC!

I would never suggest anything less than genuine quality and craftmenship from Dale, Doug or anyone at HTC.  All I wonder is whether the focus might be on making a great version of AW to get the income from what is largely accepted as a very, very popular ($$$) game first, simulation second?

I want the emphasis to be sim first, game second.  Not the other way around...

Alas, I see the financial purpose of a game first.  I am a minority in this regard so I am getting bummed.....

Yeager


[This message has been edited by Yeager (edited 08-23-2000).]

[popeye]

game (noun)  An activity providing entertainment or amusement.

simulation (noun)  a. Imitation or representation, as of a potential situation or in experimental testing. b. Representation of the operation or features of one process or system through the use of another

Seems to be a bit of both.    

I would also hate to see AH become another Dweeb Circus, but I think it is a long way from that.  I don't envy HTC the problem of balancing quality, challenge, and customer acceptance, but I'm happy with their course so far.  What makes you think they are changing their focus?

popeye




[This message has been edited by popeye (edited 08-23-2000).]

[Westy]

 What Popeye said.
 But let me ask a question?  "I flew WBs because it was a combat simulation first and foremost. Its reputation as the best online combat flightsim was well deserved."    Has that changed?  When WB's started out were there things WB's had that AH does not now have?

 My take on your post sounds as if you are saying that the old ICI group had brought WWII aircombat-flightsimming two steps forward but that HTC has taken them one step back.
 
 I personaly only see historical events missing but they are gearing up. Otherwise in my opinion HTC has taken WWII aircombat-flightsimming well beyond WB's and any other current sim/game - technically speaking. I do acknolwege that AH (and WB's) is nothing more than what AW had already been and that was aircombat in a free for all arena with special events tossed in for spice.

 The more that folks participate in the "Check Six" type of events and provide feedback, as well as more AH releases that help expand the historical possibilites, along with the terrain builder and the Jokers Low scenario group I forsee AH just getting better.

 I think AH is a great sim with good gameplay. If it was just a sim I could just fly somthing techically overwelming off-line I imagine.

  -Westy
 

[This message has been edited by Westy (edited 08-23-2000).]

[Apache]

Just a thought Yeager. Remember in WB when all you heard at times was the guns weren't strong enough, that they weren't realistic? I do. Then it went the other way for a while. Now I think there is a lethality question again in WB. Is there really a happy medium or is it our perception?

------------------
Apache
=XO= VMF-323 Death Rattlers
VMF 323 Death Rattlers Web Site

[Yeager]

saying that the old ICI group had brought WWII aircombat-flightsimming two steps forward but that HTC has taken them one step back.
====
No,  these guys are leaders not followers.
Whateber they do, they will do exceedingly well.....I just wonder if Im slowly becoming extinct, or if Im just wagging out?

Needless to say Im frustrated by the way these FMs are performing.  How reversals are so friggin rare and altitude and speed are so damned overbearing in their necessity. Frustrated by the lethality of cannons and a feeling overall that the ballistics are just too damned sweet.  Frustrated by many, many things, including myself.

Yeager

[Pyro]

Semantics.  The answer to your question lies in your definitions.  To me, it's obvious that AH is a game.  It's played for entertainment.  I don't know of any computer combat "sim" that isn't a game, sims are just a genre of computer games.  How far the fidelity is pushed is a different matter.  Where do we stand on this?  Both sides actually.  We want the planes to behave as realistically as we can make them.  OTOH, we really don't care about trying to model or make people learn a 20 step sequence just to start their engine.  

As to what the specific issues you have about the physics, I don't know as you don't mention them.  If this is not something we strive to get accurate, I wish I knew about that last month because we've spent a tedious month studying the most boring technical research and doing more math than a math major during finals.  And we're still not done.  That's a huge chunk of development time for us and it's not exactly fun work.

As to lethality, I can't change what you believe as to the why's.  As to whether you think its correct or not is going to based on your own expectations.  I find it ironic how in WB, by their admission, they've turned down lethality substantially from where they believe it is realistic for gameplay reasons.  Yet here you are railing on us for having high lethality to appeal to a gamer crowd.  

The reality is, higher lethality does not appeal to a gamer crowd.  It makes the game a lot harder to learn as you have very little margin of error and your life expectancy is lowered considerably.  It's why in the old WB easy arenas, there was reduced lethality, not increased.  Another thing I find ironic are those who refer to our high lethality is "Quakelike".  In those games, it may take an entire clip of ammo from point blank to bring a guy down.  Have these people actually ever played quake or do they really believe that it should take multiple clips from point blank to kill a person?

Overall lethality is real easy to change and can be done at any time.  Yet we've never changed overall lethality.  Why do you suppose that is?  It's not that we're against making changes.  

Lastly, the development philosophy that created WB is the same one behind AH.



------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

[minus]

pyro , nobady critic on quality of works :-) not me i just  and maybe others say the nubers can be not inaf if u use data and data u must model air humydity, air teperature . , diferent terain create difernt hot air colums and milion of other litle things , so To many numbers to be realyze  , and when u compare performance data of all planes in same category ( fighter for example , the diference is it only on last 2 digits well ,maybe in combination of all data it make some diference betwen planes  but not inaf significative Diference to Give a real charakter to a plane

HTC made a Big job !!!! i Whine but probably never will live the game :--)))))))
apropo  more heads, more ideas , and no idea are nut , only need a corect time to be realizable :-))))

AH is great and 1 day will be even greater , We hope all :-))

[maximus13]

 In FPS shooters I can kill most opponenets with 1 or 2 shots.  AH lethality is way too high, 2 bullets and boom there goes your stabs.....

[Yeager]

Pyro,

Dont let me get you all huffy!

Your post is honest, welcomed by me and as usual, widens and restores my sometimes faltering perspective.  I needed that and I offer you my personal thanks.

Now please get rid of the F4U1C, cut that extra pair of balls off the 190A5 and put them BACK on the P51D (wink :~)

Yeager

[Kirin]

maximus: in arcarde like FPS (Q3,UT) you need clips of ammo to shoot down your opponent - talking guns and rifles, not the BFGs!!! In REALISTIC "shooters" like R6 or DeusEx you need 1 clear shot, preferably aiming at a very sensible area, to disable your opponent.

As for AH - how many 20mm shells you think will a plane take before it looses vital parts? If lethality is too high for you fly the c202 for a while and you'll have your go! I agree with Pyro that low lethality is much more arcade like and will attract lots more "gamers" - e.g. FighterAce. Planes with good armour can take some beating and more than once I made it home in a totally shot up plane - but I dont expect to survive from a direct hit of a F4U-1C or A8 with full gun package. Try the 30s on the G10 once very good lethality but very hard to hit with - that's fun - and that what it's supposed to be!!!

In ACM it's about getting a good position for a snapshot not saddling up on a opponent. Those guns were deadly and are here in AH! Personally I find AH the most mature sim there is out there. Although it takes some time to learn it, it offers hundred of hours filled with fun! The FM just feels right - there might be discussions on the FMs of certain planes but that are details and who knows what's right anyway??? I love AH the way it is and can hardly imagine how it will develope - hey, any whereabouts on v1.04???  

As the mainstream sims tend to be more and more arcarde like to cover a greater segment of potential customers AH stands its ground as one of the few realistic sims that need to be learned in theory and praxis - I "happily" (   )pay my 30 bucks for that kind of entertainment!


Kirin

[Pyro]

I don't mean to come across as huffy.  But we have spent a lot of time and effort working on these things.  It's not what I consider fun work and I don't even have to deal with the programming side of it.  It does sound like you'll like the changes though.



------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

[Vulcan]

I think question is easily answered, look at all the newbies that have trouble getting to grips with AH.

If it were a game then Joe Quake would be in here en masse.