Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Senor_ding_dong on December 30, 2001, 12:14:00 PM
-
Hey guys, since the 1.5 patch WWIIOL is greatly improved. Barely any CTD's or anything like that.
And this stuff about playnet filing Chapter 11 is true, but the devs of the game said there not going out of buisness, they just need to change stuff so there not spending as much money, and the head dev "killer" even said that "the game will go on"
Check it out, its very fun now.
-
Hey funked, you have that animated gif handy?
-
Ya , and I just bet I get 60 fps in the air over the grunts in 1024/768 32 bit , RIGHT ?
LMAO , it's ok I guess if you don't like to fly IMO .
Your handle says it all , troll some more :D , plus use much much better bait :cool:
-
As much as I want to believe a ding-dong that can't spell senior...
(http://www.raf303.org/funked/ag00290_.gif)
-
Actually it was good but when CRS decided to limit Bf-109 (You know that fighter Germans used mostly?) numbers I quit playing.
-
Gee, this post wouldn't have anything to do with this would it? :rolleyes:
Author Call To Community- We Need Your Help
Rafter
Posts: 994
posted Fri, Dec 21 4:40pm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We need your help
--
Al "Rafter" Corey
Executive Producer, Marketing Manager
Playnet.com
rafter@playnet.com
-
Originally posted by airspro:
Ya , and I just bet I get 60 fps in the air over the grunts in 1024/768 32 bit , RIGHT ?
I really hate to reply here - but yeah, I do get about 60 FPS over a ground fight in 1024 32 bit, with FSAA, too. Granted my box is an XP 1600 w/GF3, but I'm just sayin' (tm). I was able to get very playable frame rate in the air (25+) on an Athlon 800 w/GF2 MX, and 640 RAM, too.
It's mainly about the RAM. Ya need about 450 meg of free, physical RAM for good performance. So, 512 is bare minimum, and 640 or more is great.
Not debating the numerous problems with the game or the fact that the box specs are a joke, but I'd hardly call an 800MHz/GF2MX/512 RAM a power computer these days. It's average - can be built super cheapo, and you'll get nice playability.
-
It's actually "seņor", not "senior" or "senor"... wait, I think you won't be able to see the "ņ" now that I think of it.
:)
Daniel, aka Cyrano
-
lol
nevermind the joke of system requirements
what about the joke of a FM?
i got the chance to try WWIIOL at a friends house over xmas.
i was glad I didnt get it in my stocking.
-
I had a 733 PIII, 768MB and a GF GTS DDR 32MB. Sorry, 25-35 in the open, 5fps over a big city. That's right, F-I-V-E. Had every tweak in the book performed as well. It was not only ram, nor system spec, nor this, nor that. Whatever it was, it wasn't user-friendly, and that's enough.
I am reading mixed reviews on 1.5- some good, some bad. As usual, a WWIIO patch is mixed in its results, so it would appear it is business as usual.
The original post is indeed someone desperately seeking more players. Maybe some will go, and that is ok. He should not however represent the game as fixed, 'cause it isn't.
-
Great like this?
What a newcomer can expect (http://www5.playnet.com/bv/wwiiol/dg_message.jsp?group_id=8802&parent_id=10545&BV_SessionID=@@@@0408488888.1009752761@@@@&BV_EngineID=dadccljiefjlbjjcgmcggichhl.0)
-
Oh comunity, please help us "recruit" more customers! (http://www5.playnet.com/bv/wwiiol/dg_message.jsp?group_id=8802&parent_id=987598&BV_SessionID=@@@@1896451668.1009753389@@@@&BV_EngineID=cadccljiefjjbjjcgmcggichhl.0)
-
kieran i have a bit "better" system then yours and fps sux in flight.
It goes up and down from 65 to 20s some times lower.
Gameplay sux if you are an axis player. A good chunk of them are the ones that have stopped playing.
If your a char driver hell ya wwiiol is the place to be.
I still have a paid sub there although I rarely ever play it.
Oh well...........
-
I have a better system now... I put together an Athlon XP 1500 rig this fall, and it can do better that the other rig. The deal with anyone advocating the game (with me, that is) is that they make it sound so great, but they leave out the all important staggering system requirements and end-user hassle to get it going properly. You end up with threads like the one I linked above; people who are naturally outraged by being mislead, only to be told by the community to "leave if you don't like it". Even in CRS's darkest hour you have a community that still doesn't get it- the day for telling people to get lost is over.
Truthfully that is the catchphrase most appropriate for the game, and the one that should have been put on the box:
"WWIIO; don't let the door hit your bellybutton on the way out!"
-
What version was that Kieran? That's the performance I get with 1.4+ versions. I've got several squaddies who play occasionally on various setups comparable or slightly better than yours, and none report drops to 5. Maybe 20s as a low over a city.
As for the FM, well, to each his own. It's less real in some aspects, but more real in others, arguably. The net effect is something I can have fun in. A decent amount of serious sim folks I recognize from this and other flight-sim communities must agree, 'cause I see 'em there.
-
I still can't get over the ease in which a Ju-87 can outfly a Spitfire in there. As my boss would say This can't be!. Plus the fact that someone else mentioned about
CRS decided to limit the Bf-109
.
-
Spitboy-
I would still be there, but for a few things:
1. No matter what I did, I could not stop the frame freezes. I am not alone in this, and suggestions on the BBS to consider looking at this were soundly rebuffed. It was always "our fault" or "our terrible rigs".
2. Limiting of units. Sure, it's real, but it isn't fun.
3. CRS's continued evasion of responsibility for anything bad. It was always somehow the users' fault. I hold Hatch in particularly low regard here, as he is the PR guy.
4. 64 player limit. Being on a bad guy's six and having him disappear when you pull the trigger is common, and unacceptable. Just because there are 65 guys on the ground 3K below us doesn't mean I should have to guess where the guy 200 yards ahead of me is.
I never really cared that much about the f/m, though I think it is a joke. Still, it was fun fighting in the planes, and that was what mattered to me. I did have to laugh at anyone calling it real, though.
If the game was ever to become stable, where *I* wouldn't disco several times a night, where I could see the guy I am trying to kill, if, if, if... you get the idea. I became convinced it wasn't going to happen, so I am gone. When I read the boards I see the same stuff... "Works great for me, you must be lying! Leave if you don't like it! STFU!". I have absolutely nothing against anyone who plays or likes the game, but I won't be mislead again.
-
Kieran, it works fine on my Athlon 850mhz (512 RAM, KyroII).
"I did have to laugh at anyone calling it real, though."
It's just as real as the FM in AH. Just different parts are more 'real' than AH and vice-versa. It's still by far the best 'feeling' sim I've flown.
Daff
-
Daff-
I think you miss the point- none of them are completely real. I am not comparing it to AH, and carefully avoided doing so. I said it was fun, but it certainly wasn't real. In fact, there were parts of it I thought felt better than AH, and have said so many times.
In the end it was not the f/m that drove me outta there. It was the utter hopelessness that things would get better, and the utter disgust I had for the way it was being run. Have those things changed? No, not really.
-
BTW, just what do you mean by, "It runs just fine on my..."? Once again, it sounds as if you are saying it is my fault things didn't run well. Define "fine". Define what you think is acceptable- understand I had someone tell me to "Stop whining, 8fps is plenty to fly! I get kills all the time and that's what I have!"
For that matter I didn't say it wouldn't "run fine" on anyone's system, I said it wouldn't on mine. I also said there were many more like me. I've also said that if a game is this difficult for joe average to get into and get running, it would fail. That is why we are where we are today, because joe average will not be able to run this game on the system recommended on the box, and that lie alone is enough to make most people throw this thing on the shelf. Throw in the missing features, the fact that many of the ones included are broken, and the generally warm reception a newcomer gets on the BBS and you see why people leave. IMHO, of course.
-
There were nearly 1000 Bf109 used in the western offensive of 1940, CRS decides to "limit" it?????? OK........
-
Wow I read that thread by Kurosawa, man I've seen some flames here but those guys went after him with a vengeance.
The only thing that concerns me about WW2OL is where all those lemmings go when it does (and it will) go out of business?
As for Sony buying it, I believe Sony have a MMPOG in the works already: http://www.cgonline.com/previews/planetside-01-p1.html (http://www.cgonline.com/previews/planetside-01-p1.html)
IMHO the WW2OL engine needs reworking from the ground up. Having said that the CRS guys probably have some good experience under their belts now and if given the chance at a complete rewrite I'd say they'd come up with something more like most people were expecting.
As for sympathy, well, CRS had a chance at every simmers dream, they blew it. Now its most likely no one will take a crack at a WW2 MMPOG battlefield for sometime. Business is business, if I f**k up in my job I don't go cap in hand to my customers asking for their charity.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
There were nearly 1000 Bf109 used in the western offensive of 1940, CRS decides to "limit" it?????? OK........
1. You can get a 109 any time you like, simply by selecting an Air Defence mission from an Axis airfield.
2. There were nearly 1433 Me262 used in the western offensive of 1944-45. Yet you still can't get one if you don't have the perkies, can you? ;)
-
The last time I checked out a version of WW2OL, I decided to push the nose over in my 109 to get a look at something and my pilot died from -2 Gs. I logged out and have never looked back. And limiting the 109? That's about the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen in a game. You're left trying to fight Hurcs and Hawk75s in a damn Bf110. I still have an unopened box sitting on my shelf and I'll try it again in about a year if it survives that long.
Before a fan boy comes along to flame me, I tested this thing for 8 months. I was one of the first 50 or so beta testers. Some of the bugs that the game released with were reported over and over for 8 months and CRS decided to do nothing about it. The beta testers screamed to have some things fixed before released. We basically told them exactly what was going to happen. Beta testing for CRS was pretty much a colossal waste of time. I can only think of a few issues that we reported that were actually fixed. Their treatment of the community and their refusal to take responsibility for a crappy product ruined any chance they had of getting a paying customer from me.
-
Almost 1000 Bf109 were USED in the western attack.
Only a couple hundred 262 were used.
And anyway I dont care WW2OL is garbage.
-
wel said gruen
-
I play both these games, although since I got my XP1700 and Geforce 3 I tend to play more WW2OL. The flight model is actually quite good, but it demands a good framerate. At anything below 25 it feels like old Airwarrior or Flight Sim 95, but if you have the hardware to keep it fast it's as good as AH or better IMO.
The game has problems, and the extreme system requirements for flying is one of them, but it's come a long way and I think it's a whole lot better than when it came out this spring.
-
Ricken could it have gone anywhere but up since its release......... :)
ofcourse it smells better then steaming fresh crap............
but its still crap.............
I've had a paid sub since it went pay fer play........
play it rarely. I can get a stable frame rate but then the game looks like crap. (16bit at night lol). Even with it running "perfect" it aint that good.
Guys walking through walls at the bunkers to kill ya. I've seen since 1.50 came out even played fer 4 hours on saturday.
If ya like to play allies its "tolerable" but I like axis stuff and combine all the other stuff its less then enjoyable.....far less.
I'm a sucker who keeps waitin fer a fix but I haven't seen 1 yet that tells me the thing will last.
I'll just keep bailin water out of the titanic with a shot glass till it goes under I guess.
-
i must say that i was very impressed with 1.5...i never have CTD or CTHL anymore...i do think the FPS are worse than ever tho but ive sorta learned to live with it
This is quote from their ( ww2online ) board . I got 512 of RAM , and a 1.4 tbird , and still 1.5 doesn't run as fast as earlier version . At least for me .
I am with Kiren , don't work very good for me .
Glad it works for you Spitboy , maybe when my Ti 500 comes it will be better , but I doubt it . I tried a G3 when they first came out and fps DROPED by 3 fps . Go figure .
I got it on hd , 1.5 . Got the game but havn't used the key yet . IF they get it to work offline like you say I will use key , so far get 26 fps offline 1024/768 32bit , in Spit looking into cockpit . I can only "guess" wtf it would be over Dinat ???? 8^)
take care
spro
-
Fletchman covered it very well on the AGW board on page two of the topic there :)
http://agw.warbirdsiii.com/agw//Forum3/HTML/025572-2.html (http://agw.warbirdsiii.com/agw//Forum3/HTML/025572-2.html)
But this line from Hardcase
when was the last time you actually played. If you haven't played 1.50 your info is totally out of date. So many changes, not enough space. made me honestly laugh as I swear that after every release he (and some other not-as-rabid-as-the-rest-of-the-mob fan bois) say the same thing. And you'd get the impression from him that after all the work with the 1.26, 1.30, 1.40 and 1.50 patches that WW2O would simply pull the house down.
lol Jeklyll. Comparing the online availability of the ME262 in AH, via perks, to the 109 in WW2O? Have to admit that was a a funny :) When you think about how there's only three Axis planes available to even fly in WW2O and why would they want the ME109 when the better fighter the Stuka is available anyway ;)
Westy
-
for the 20 minutes i had it installed on my PC i had great frames (dont recall the exact amount), but CTD countless times and odd things happening like flying through mountains... this was at initial release with the first "patch"(so called).
Kieran it was probably that crap CPU.. intell blowz goats for proformance (ecspecialy the PIII).
i had..
- ABIT KT7-RAID
- 800mhz AMD/Duron @ 1Ghz
- 256megs pc133 @ cas2
- GeForce II MX 400 (32 meg)
- 2 ATA100@7200RPM WD hard drives, RAID +0
[/b]
Rest of the hardware is irellevant in terms of proformance.
-
Well, I'm sure WW2Online is great now...but I will have to take your word for it....all I get since the 1.50 patch is a 10057 error and I can't log in.
This 10057 error was something that was prevelent after the game was first released...I know because I was prowling the boards at that time to try and fix the "head-shaking" bug for a friend of mine, who I introduced to the game.
So...I have a feeling that Playnet has just lost me as a customer, unless this is fixed NOW...not soon....frigging NOW!!!!
It really isn't a big deal anyway...because Aces High kicks WW2Online's butt in practically every category!
-
Let's forget what CPU I had for a sec, or what anyone had. Let's imagine for a sec we are CRS and deciding what requirements we are going to need to make this thing float.
1. We are going bigtime for the RPS crowd. This means Quake, OFP, RS, EQ, etc.
2. This target requires we make the game run on a modest system. Why? Many of the target audience computers will be lunchbox systems. Like it or not the game lives or dies on the back of joe average.
3. The game needs to be easy to set up. Tech support will be busy enough without unnecessarily creating trouble.
4. It must be fun to play. It could be "real" without being "real fun".
So there you go... you have a target audience, and what do you do?
1. Allow the game to be released encased in a box replete with exaggerations and outright lies.
2. Alienate the FPS crowd with gameplay difficult if not impossible to accomplish successfully.
3. Release the game in a state that is so demanding on a system that even the recommended specs on the box don't come close to making it run properly- in fact, at a place so high the standard computer of the time will not run it. Definitely not lunchbox systems.
4. Make setup a chore that only an esoteric group of techno-wizards can successfully navigate. The game becomes more a measure of who can get the highest framerate, and indeed the fun of the game itself is the bragging rights to getting it running "properly".
This is my point point with regards to system requirements- the customer is extremely mislead right from the get-go, and a complaint on the BBS got you a "don't let the door hit your bellybutton on the way out" or "go get an X-box". Well, people left, and by all indications bought the X-boxes and are enjoying the hell out of 'em. Turns out this was pretty good advise, especially when one considers that for the cost some would be forced to incur to bring their rigs up to the real specs they could buy an X-box and have 100% certainty it would work as advertised. And, let's not forget, this was the core audience CRS needed to keep.
-
I went to Playnet and met most of the team 2 1/2 years ago. This was a year after meeting the great team of Aces High (yes brown nose mode is on they deserve it). While I was there not only did I see what they were working on but heard what their thoughts were. 1 or 2 of them ( probably more ) did nothing but talk about how bad they were going to hurt Hitech and Aces High like they had a gruge on them. They said HT was going pay to play when they were going open beta. They constantly talked about how HT never completed the code for WB betwork servers and thats why it had to be reset every 2 weeks. It seemed thier only goal was to put HT out of business. Well I think HT is doing fine and will do much better in future. He should promote Aces High as "Aces High a World War II experience" Thro in infantry and he has what WWIIonline is trying to do.
Why am I saying this here like I said I met both teams HiTechcreations never once bad mouthed any of the other companies not even WarBirds (which I believe HT said he is still a part owner). Public relations is the only way to survive you go around pointing the finger at others it turns most people off you promise something and dont deliver you loose customers, you patch a bad game you cant patch a bad image very easly. I have never tried the game so wont talk about that they lost me with the bad comments about HT and his team.
P.S. They said HT would not survive six months after going pay to play.
That was 2 1/2 years ago.
-
Indian-
You know, I suspected as much. Killer posts daily at AGW about the mess they're in, not here. There've been other digs here and there, and I suspected there might be something like that going on.
-
Am0n-
I would pit my PIII 733, 768MB SD133, GeForce 2 GTS 32MB, 10G 7200 rpm, and cable connect against that system you spec'd any day of the week. My rig 3DMarked at 2600, well above many 1G systems of the time. Aside from the CPU my rig was equivalent or blew yours away (especially in RAM and video card). Even the CPU's are roughly equivalent. The best thing I see on your rig is the RAID setup.
But you see, there are those that tell me they get better performance on a PII 400. How that can be I cannot say, but I'm not saying they aren't. The point that should be clear (but isn't) is that my rig was waaaaaaay above the box recommended specs, not minimum. We shouldn't be having this conversation at all, see?
[ 12-31-2001: Message edited by: Kieran ]
-
A simple test to see how good a game is, check out warez sites - NONE of them list WW II Online for download, if the community of software thieves think it sucks it probably does.
-
Don't know if this is a warez candidate at all weazel. The way they have the registration code set up.. its difficult for people who actually bought the game to set up... much less someone that stole it.
AKDejaVu
-
Originally posted by Kieran:
Am0n-
I would pit my PIII 733, 768MB SD133, GeForce 2 GTS 32MB, 10G 7200 rpm, and cable connect against that system you spec'd any day of the week. My rig 3DMarked at 2600, well above many 1G systems of the time. Aside from the CPU my rig was equivalent or blew yours away (especially in RAM and video card). Even the CPU's are roughly equivalent. The best thing I see on your rig is the RAID setup.
But you see, there are those that tell me they get better performance on a PII 400. How that can be I cannot say, but I'm not saying they aren't. The point that should be clear (but isn't) is that my rig was waaaaaaay above the box recommended specs, not minimum. We shouldn't be having this conversation at all, see?
dont get so defensive man, the PIII is a POS.. you didnt make the PIII did you?
A Duron 800@1ghz is faster than a PIII 1ghz in almost all applications. The only thing that would make your system faster is how much data it can move at a time, your RAM.
But given the CPU in your system, it cannot haul that load of RAM efficiantly. In otherwords that is overkill.
the PII was a top notch CPU, i would rate it the best CPU ever clock for clock.
Now on to the video.. Like the duron the geforce IIMX400 is extremely overclockable, as i have mine now i highly doubt your factory settings on the GTS are formidably faster.
I have the GPU and the SDRAM O/C on the video card, the GPU is the same speed as the GTS as we speak(dont recall the clock cycles) but the bottle neck of this card is the cheapo VSDRAM, it cannot contend to the DDR on the GTS. but it is pumping out as many cycles as it can with stability.
And your correct in your satement about the RAID, it would pummle your data transfer rates.. probably 4+ times as fast.
-
Kieran BTW what is your SDRAMS cas latency?
-
Honestly, I don't know for sure. I'll have to check.
-
Amon yer talking out yer bellybutton about the GF2MX400 m8 :) It's a piece o' crap and isn't worth overclocking. The GTS is a far better card and you'll squeeze much more out of it than you will from a MX400. Even the bset MX400 overclocked can't keep pace with a GTS. And lookie...someone already did the benchmarks for me ;) http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/01q2/010625/index.html (http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/01q2/010625/index.html)
*I now return you to your regularly scheduled WW2OL flaming*
[ 12-31-2001: Message edited by: Raubvogel ]
-
Tried WW2OL this month, its still a HUGE POS.
It still is tank quake.
CRS made an extremely lame attempt to circumvent the REAL gameplay problem by making medieval like forts so that tanks cant just park and vulch a base until a lone infantry can take it. Instead, these walls make it so that tanks need to surround the base, vulch it from higher ground if possible, and slip kamikaze infantry into the big bunker (which btw, you can kill any inf behind the bunker wall by using an HE shell on it.. what a joke).
FM is still complete arcade. I think the only thing I like about it is the opening of the hatch and the wind/clacklclak sound it makes as it rattles in a fight. Tracers and ballistic are total BS.
Inf. still cant kill another inf using a rifle unless it stays still. SMG inf is the only thing that can really do any kind of attack. Inf. is still completely hopeless against tanks thanks to the lack of visibility beyond 20 yds they have and the fact that inf just cant kill tanks without having to walk up to them.
AT guns dont have their iron shields modeled. Spray an AT gun from the front without a second thought, their crew, sitting behind inches of steel plate, will be killed.
Tanks are still BS modeled, German and Allied tanks still MG the other tank's crew to death (yes, all slits closed). German shells are still wonder-in-all killing hits, allied shells dont damage or kill german tanks unless they literally DRILL a hole by continously hitting in one place (even at point blank range from behind).
Its a waste of money still. Give it 2 more years.. if playnet dont sink them before that.
-
Tried it again about 2 months ago...well, attempted to try it. Couldn't get it working.
I just came back from their boards. Read Killer spewing on about how all the screwed up gameplay and bugs were the players fault. I mean there is the difference right there.
I don't see HTC making excuses on this board, if they think something is broken, they fix it...end of story.
Whatever, the rats got $70 of my hard earned cash. I hope they enjoy it, because they'll never see another dime.
-
The RATS gave me a nice drinkcoaster thats all this pos is worth.
-
I have seen HT [erpsnally work with one person to get his game working right and find out the problem. :cool:
PR makes a big difference.
-
I have spoken with HT a few times, Pyro a few times, Ronni, Yankee, etc. If I e-mailed, I had an answer inside two days. My problems (what few and minor though they've been), if not fixed every time, always received prompt and courteous attention. My e-mails to CRS sent months ago have yet to result in any response. Even iEN would send me a curt, "Sorry, looks like you're screwed!", and I was no fan of iEN.
-
What I don't understand is why they want $60 just to buy a game that I then have to shelve out over ANOTHER $120 a year just to play.
The box version of their product is pooched and you have to download HUGE patches to play. If you are a dialup user, which still accounts for 90% of the internet population, 90% of your customers won't bother and shelf the game.
HTC didn't charge me $60 just to get the software to play Aces High.
Their poor marketing on the publisher's side is a direct result of their chapter 11 filing. Don't blame Cornered Rat, blame Playnet.
V.
-
hehe perseption is a funny animal. I play WW2 OL about 2 hours a night on average. I absolutely love the ground action. Last night I was set up with a 20mm flak 30 in a clump of trees defending a town for the axis. Blenhimes were making low level strafing passes and I was trying to hit them. Suddenly about 200 ro 300 yards away I see an enemy truck drop off a large group of about 20 infantry at the bottom of the hill I was on. I watched them for about 20 to 30 minutes while they worked their way up the hill keeping cover in bushes and trees. I had em pegged :) I don't think they saw me before I started shooting. I waited for them to cross a little field about 150 yards from me. They didn't have a choice but to cross in the open. hehe they should have gone in 2's but they stayed clumped together and made easy targets :)
From the ground perspective it truely is the best game I've got. OFP is nice, but the map is small and vis range is smaller too. In the air is a diferent story. Most of the time it's ok frame rate wise, but as soon as I get near a large city the FPS go down to about 10. It's been like that on 3 diferent computers in the past year. The FM is good, but it has never been tweeked to get rid of the anomolies so I prefer AH or IL2 by far over ww2 OL.
Seriosly though, if you've got the game give the ground part another try. You might suprise yourself and have a good time. I doubt that will happen as people in game communities don't tend to be too forgiving once burned. Except for WB with Wild Bill, but what choice do they have lol.
-
udie, whats yer username in ww2ol? I still have 15 days left, maybe ye can show me some stuff.
-
I actually tried getting online with WWIIOL a few weeks back. They don't accept Amex though and since that's the only way I'll pay online, it was a no go.
Its too bad as I was wanting to give the ground game a try. Although I've got no first hand experience I just didn't see the airwar, with its huge dependancy on FPS, to be viable in this game. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I dunno. For the reason mentioned above I returned the game already though so I likely won't know anytime soon :->.
I do think we'll see a continual shrinking of online flight sims though. The market for flight sims peaked about 3-4 years back and has been rolling back ever since, hosted MP ones included. Under the pressure from both a lack of variance (something WWIIOL was to change, but took to big a step, or one in the wrong direction) in the genre as well as other online games offering a different and possibly more interesting "carrot" (such as the still expanding MMRPG realm) I think this trend will continue.
Simple fact of the matter is that sims are only a fraction of the software market when compared to some of the big draws such as FPS', RPGs and the huge console market. When you go online there isn't much comparison. A single EQ server hosts 5+ times the players that one finds online in any of the online WWII air sims (AH, WIII, FA, WWIIOL) at any given time. Heck, all combined they still wouldn't top one EQ server I don't think...and EQ runs 20 or so of these to meet the demand. And then there's DAoC, UO, AC, etc.
Point being that with the above in mind its unlikely CRS/Playnet/whoever will find a bailout. The market is still heavily saturated. Combine that with the fact that its a whole lot harder getting people back than it is to get them in the first place, and you've got a tough row to hoe ahead of you with WWIIOL. If they do find a bailout it will likely be to pilfer some of their talent, redirecting it to the purchasers ongoing RPG or console projects, and then shelve/toilet the online sim...imo anyway. Financially these games just don't compare well to some of the other options out there therefore they don't make much sense as an ongoing investment for a larger company. Imo this market can only support one to two air combat sims. You're picking from a pretty static, or possibly evaporating, pool at this point.
Vortex
P.S. The link to Fletchman's post above is a good one, and raises a very valid point imo. A WWIIOL concept _could_ prove successful if it targeted the larger strategy oriented FPS communities as opposed to the already saturated flight sim market. Ergo, rebuild it without the air combat portion and concentrate on the infantry aspect. From there make it a much smaller scale and you might actually have something.
-
This is similar to the thread at AGW, but I echo your thoughts; focus the project on the FPS aspect. The greatest potential market is not in the flight sim aspect, rather the grunts. Make it fun to be a grunt and you have plenty of time to flesh out the rest.