Author Topic: They're Talking About Us Again (Read 3662 times)

Westy · « **Reply #45 on:** September 17, 2003, 10:39:45 AM »

Too often the words class and matuirty get tossed around by people. Especially when they haven't a clue what they mean.

"But when an aircraft can launch from a field that your bombing and within 10 minutes or so pull up like he's refeuling and kill you with 6 or 7 hits...its crap.

I'd have to agree that would be b.s. if it were the norm in AH but I'm more convinced that the bomber pilot that this happens to just plain sucks or is legally blind.

(no added as would indicate some measure of respect given and I reserve that for those who at least have earned it - even minimally - and will not waste it on anyone who has always talked from between the cheeks of their posterior)

Fishu · « **Reply #46 on:** September 17, 2003, 12:50:28 PM »

MiniD,

LOL, you're downright silly.
I haven't played WWIIOL since april and top of it all I've been dissing it all along since v1.8 and even worse after v1.9

What comes to complaints of AH, does it mean you can only complain of game issues if you're siding for another game?
I wonder what game I sided with back then when AH was newer and I critisized certain issues.
Which of hizookas and .50cals were already back then an issue, nothing that I came up with after the WWIIOL

And no, I don't dis AH players.. I dis certain kinds of people, regardless of the game.

Toad,

Sorry, I still don't know how the volcano thing happened, other than knowing there was a bug with the volcano.
I only became aware of it when the guy ... was it "Jim.." something did it, however never got to know how it exactly worked.
Perhaps you should go to check the time / kill ratio of my 278 kill streak in Fw190A8? it was quite low, definately not something you'd get with volcano. (bugger, they don't show the time per kill score anymore in the stats)
If the volcano bug even existed anymore by then.. cannot remember the timelines anymore.
Besides the fact of flying other planes as well for some and in different sides.

I wonder how you'd excuse my other continuous streaks

Like for example in Dawn of Aces I had 96 kills during 14 flights and 1 death... that wasn't even the best of the streaks in DoA (47), it was just the amount of kills per flight to death ratio.

It's just too bad you've became such an unhonoured person.
You weren't like this back then.

Survival just happened to be my fun back then.

You should ask Kieren, he could probably remember the time he almost cut off my streak by giving a bunch of .50 cals into my A8's bottom, which miraculously didn't break a thing and he got shot down when turning his back at me - sure of the kill.

And from the tour I had 7 kills in a B17G - the guy was wulfie * 7.

and I think it was Widowmkr (or something like that), who cut the tip off my A8 when I shot down his B17, but I managed to land at a field straight ahead.
Got even a screenshot of it somewhere.

Westy · « **Reply #47 on:** September 17, 2003, 01:13:07 PM »

"You should ask Kieren, he could probably remember the time he almost cut off my streak by giving a bunch of .50 cals into my A8's bottom, which miraculously didn't break a thing "

THAT'S UNPOSSIBEL!!! Everyone knows the Aces High "laser" fifties will shred your airplane with only a mere round or two hitting it!!

Gadfly · « **Reply #48 on:** September 17, 2003, 01:14:05 PM »

From 1600 yards at that.......

Westy · « **Reply #49 on:** September 17, 2003, 01:14:51 PM »

..if not more!!!

AKWeav · « **Reply #50 on:** September 17, 2003, 06:14:50 PM »

Heheh, when I posted the link I had no idea it would take off in the direction it did. I was more interested in one post in that thread.

Copy from a ww20l post from the linked thread:

"WG: I see. I don't know if you've had a lot of time to think about this, but after Aces High II is released, what are the next couple of major changes or additions you have in mind.

DA: There's still the same list that's always been there. I mean, after Aces High II is released and stable, we'll be back to adding more aircraft and more items along with it. I've always wanted to get to the "first-person-shooter" stuff. The Aces High II engine supports that really, really well. So that will be one of them. And then we'll be back to submarines. I want both of those in the game."

Here's the hook line that grabbed me: Sounds like they are heading into direct competion with WWIIOL

Gadfly · « **Reply #51 on:** September 17, 2003, 06:57:03 PM »

I don't think so, Weav, for a lot of reasons. Mainly, WWIIOL has aircraft as a sideline, not the main game. Secondly, there are no scripted missions, just a sandbox full of toys. I am excited about AHTOD, though, to me it is in direct competition with IL2.

AKWeav · « **Reply #52 on:** September 18, 2003, 04:40:38 AM »

I don't think so either. But it's interesting that some of them think so.

Westy · « **Reply #53 on:** September 18, 2003, 08:12:58 AM »

"it's interesting that some of them think so."

Because for a large portion of the player base over there WWIIO is thier first online game. In thier eyes WWIIO was first, everything else came after and is of course a WWIIO "wannabee."

BTW, I will be curious as to how WWIIO will handle the six view in aircraft like the up and coming P39 as well as the Typhoon, 190 or bubble top P47 and P51's.
From what I understand the six view just doesn't exist in WWIIO due to that intitial, short sighted frenzy for "realism." Like the illthought out "Gauge view" (although I think part of it was to save players form a larger FPS loss in the stock forward view). So essentially right now any "unit" you spawn in (soldier, truck, gun boat or airplane) you're able to get a close 5 or 7 o'clock view at best but in thier passion to eliminate the "6" view they forgot to model the pilot/driver/soldier/gun crews ability to twist thier torso and turn thier neck. (But wow! They spent a lot of time and resources modelling a useless graphics gimic like moving control stick and levers!

)

CRS Killer · « **Reply #54 on:** September 18, 2003, 11:58:25 AM »

Actually Westy the pilots in wwiiol do rotate their torso, they do move their head out to the side, and the viewpoint is as close to the canopy as is possble without positioning the pilots skull outside the glass.

At least that's how it was designed and the spit I and 109 set up and carefully measured. The later planes should be that way too unless mistakes were made.

And canopies are produced in actual scale, which defines what you can see in a forward view. Instrument view was added so you could get a better look, as we try to use realistic instrument size and location and accurate scale and head position which means they will not all be in forward view with a 90^ FOV. Especially things like trim wheels etc. Some guages are even in the right/left views if that's where they were in the real aircraft.

Maybe we should have gone with generic guages, and just positioned them so they would all be in view in every plane? Maybe we should allow custom head positioning where you can place your head 6" through the cockpit glass or into the gun sight in front of you? But we decided not to.

SOB · « **Reply #55 on:** September 18, 2003, 12:15:30 PM »

I don't know about whether head positioning allows for anything past the canopy, but I enjoy it. I think the view system in AH is the best thing out there to date and one of the best things about the game itself. I'm not a big fan of the generic gauges though, and would love to see historically accurate gauges (in placement, design, and language), but that's definitely not a deal breaker for me.

Rutilant · « **Reply #56 on:** September 18, 2003, 12:17:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by CRS Killer
Actually Westy the pilots in wwiiol do rotate their torso, they do move their head out to the side, and the viewpoint is as close to the canopy as is possble without positioning the pilots skull outside the glass.

At least that's how it was designed and the spit I and 109 set up and carefully measured. The later planes should be that way too unless mistakes were made.

And canopies are produced in actual scale, which defines what you can see in a forward view. Instrument view was added so you could get a better look, as we try to use realistic instrument size and location and accurate scale and head position which means they will not all be in forward view with a 90^ FOV. Especially things like trim wheels etc. Some guages are even in the right/left views if that's where they were in the real aircraft.

Maybe we should have gone with generic guages, and just positioned them so they would all be in view in every plane? Maybe we should allow custom head positioning where you can place your head 6" through the cockpit glass or into the gun sight in front of you? But we decided not to.

There's your hardcase right there

Toad · « **Reply #57 on:** September 18, 2003, 01:07:47 PM »

Hiya Killer!

Long time, no see. This is the "Killer" that is a principal in CRS, right?

Are you guys going to open up your boards to presently non-subscribed members?

Thanks!

Gadfly · « **Reply #58 on:** September 18, 2003, 01:09:29 PM »

How do you know he doesn't play AH?

Westy · « **Reply #59 on:** September 18, 2003, 01:30:34 PM »

"There's you HC"

That's not HC. Neither HC nor any of the other fan-bois would impersonate him or any other CRS employee to post here IMO.

"Are you guys going to open up your boards to presently non-subscribed members? "

lol. Yeah right. I'll hold my breath! Watch....

CRS_Killer I'll concede that what WWIIO has 5 and 7 oclock views that are pretty close to realistic for the aircraft with a fuselage like the Spit and 109. The view is a close approximation of the end of any torso and neck motions but WWIIO does not in any way model "movement" beyond that one forever fixed angle view.
And while AH may have too generous a view in some of the aircraft I'd much rather have it that way than have no movement at all. The explanation given was it's a compromise for the lack of rear view mirrors and the inability to model on a PC monitor the encompassing view and peripheral vision that pilots had. While I still think that some need to adjusted I would rather live with the few excesses than go backward a decade to fixed compass point views from a decade ago. The old "head nailed to a pivoting board" system, ala AW, WB's and WWIIO, just doesn't come close to any semblence of realism any more (for me). I do give CRS a "wtg" on not modelling Linda Blairs head movement though.
IMO with the efforts CRS made in the attempt to create realistism or immersive (such as moving control column, levers, icons, no linda blair 6 view) I am surprised CRS did not advance past that age old view system as AH has. Kudos on the innovative icons too.

And yes, I personally would rather CRS had put the gauges (generic or otherwise) in the standard forward view as IMO that replicates a pilots peripheral vision and ability to quickly glance at guages (with just the eyes and not by moving the whole head) in the cockpit a lot more realistically than a seperate guage view. Again, when constrained by a 17" or so monitor replicating the view to the "world" for a game player.

I know my opinion won't sway yours or anyone elses at CRS and likewise yours with mine. These topics (six view and guage view) were discussed and argued over during the closed beta and on the old boards. The fact is these"features" are there and there's nothing I or any other player can do to change that. Well other voice displeasure and criticism with those choices during discussions. And for me when they're added in with some other serious flaws and other issues such as disappearing cons, enemy/friendly biasing problems and not being able to enjoy playing without having to join a squad, I also forgo the extra step of subscribing.