Are you making a lot of bullsh** assumptions here? Adapted? Meaning what? They all like it now? Or they all have grown to accept the fact that it wont change and decided to get used to it?
Adapted, as in
'adapted', Mugz. Did the MA numbers wane? Did the customer base shrink? Did
'too much realism' hurt the company?
The latter doesn't necessarily mean that all are satisfied. Neither does it mean any further refinement of the "DM"/"Gunnery" wouldn't be the proverbial straw that brakes the camels back either.
Obviously it seems the world's got plenty of camels that seem to bear lot heavier loads than some others.
After all...most IL2 players i have known over the past 3 years are now playing AH exclusively. Bet many Ah2 players can say the same.
That's funny. Because, on the flip side most people I know who start out with IL-2 would not even take a glance at AH2 - why should they waste their time on an 'inferior' product? Everytime I recommend AH to a friend, he would go,
"oh geez, looks like fun. But really, I got IL-2/FB and that's enough for me.. I mean, it's more real".
If you think it isn't possible for HTC to Upgrade its self outa business...think again.
Did I say that? Where?
I never said anything even remotely close with the stuff you're putting in my mouth. What I did mention, is how some knee-jerking AH pom-pom boys would do anything to make up excuses for AH being actually inferior in some specific (and very important) components of the game compared to some of its contendors, most specifically IL-2/FB.
The AH DM is lacking, and they somehow come up with the bullshi* that AH is an online game so it can't 'calculate' as many factors as a packaged game. Then they come up with justifications that a 'non-realistic' DM is actually some kind of business strategy to keep the 'gameplay' value high. Just the same way how they tried the same approach when they realized the refined gunnery modelling lowered their personal scores, and try to smother it with justifications that it would kill the game, which ofcourse, turned out to be totally untrue.
Well I call it baloney.
Never did I criticize HTC for not having a better DM. All I did was state the facts as it is - no more, no less; 1) AH DM is lacking, and 2) IL-2/FB did come up with a very convincing example of advanced DM that AH.
After the higher percentile of new Ah2 subscribers are of the younger (Duke Nukem) generation. If they cant shoot at something and see watermelon blow up...they wont hang around for long.
This is where the 'old flight-sim vets' got it all wrong. Heck, I'd even go so far as to say that it's basically an arrogant assumption that the only people who has any right to judge what kind of amount of realism is suited to games, will always be 'old vets'.
It's a blind and foolish assumption spread around people who've been playing flight-sims for a long time. Those opinions are usually from the 'old vet people' - the guys who were interested in WW2 flight sims even before there were 'graphic cards' or 'color monitors'. The guys used to the 'traditional style' of gameplay that dates back to AW, progresses through WB, and ends up in AH.
They're so used to the limitations in realism and 'gameplay concessions', which existed due to the fact that game technology wasn't advanced enough to come up with something better, that they mistakenly begin to think such limitations are the only thing suited for the status quo.
Well wake up.
It's a new era now. We've got young people playing computer games who weren't even born yet when AW first existed. These people are totally uninfluenced by the 'tradition', and what we think is right for simulations.
They have totally different standards in the game that interest them, compared to the waning old generation who started out with meager 'text-based flight sims'. They thrive on graphcal detail and level of addictive realism. To them WW2 is something more than half a century ago - with the only means of interacting with such history is through books, media, and games - the more real it is, the more they love it.
While the 'old guys' would just cringe their faces at the thought of 'boring' take-offs and landings, the young people like it the more difficult it is. They go to internet forums asking how one can land 109s perfectly without destroying their landing gears. People post manifold and RPM settings in the boards for specific landing procedures and stuff.
In short, the opinion that more realism would tick off the new generations is basically false. The only people that are ticked off by more realism is the 'old guys'. The younger kids,
they love it. Restrictive head angles, no ammo counters, no 'combat trimming', manual engine operations, flicking magnetos and mixture levers, etc etc.. the 'young people' have absolutely no problems with it.
Face it - the 'old vets' are the past. There's a new paradigm in town, and IL-2/FB was a slap to the faces of some people who thought AH was always the only single pioneer in WW2 aerial combat simulation.
What it did was show us where the next generation of WW2 aerial combat simulations was going. The only question is will AH head in the same direction, or become just another 'has been', like the fate AW and WB walked.
Wonder what the Hit% and Kill%/totals are Post new Dm compared to Pre DM?
I personally know many, at least 10 or better players who have spent much less time in AH2 since the new DM/gunnery change. Its the same ole comment (I cant hit watermelon anymore) and the dissappear, not to be seen online again for several months. Many of them in fact, frequent the Message Boards here at HTC.
Welcome to evolution.
If they can't adapt, they go extinct.
