Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Vulcan on July 29, 2001, 06:47:00 PM
-
Well, these guys live and breath on software sales, but thankfully I always find the put up honest reviews - see what they say about "it":
http://www.cgonline.com/reviews/ww2online-01-r1.html (http://www.cgonline.com/reviews/ww2online-01-r1.html)
-
A few excerpts:
That's the idea anyway. Strategy First may as well sell a box of rocks with instructions for players to take the rocks into a field and throw them at each other. At least it would work as advertised
What a glorious idea for a game. If only it worked better. If only the strategic elements were in place. If only your stats were tracked. If only the interface was more manageable. If only the graphics weren't so slow and ugly. If only, if only. World War II Online is a box full of "if only."
<snicker> :p
-
But on a much more important level, what we have here is a minor atrocity that belongs next to Sierra's Outpost, Take Two's Battlecruiser 3000 A.D., and Microprose's Falcon 4 in the annals of computer gaming.
I agreed right up until the jab at Falcon 4.0. Falcon 4.0 had some issues on the unpatched, original version, but nothing compared to the abortion called WWII Online.
-
6 months.
-
Review seems fair I guess.
I thought it should be more like this-
Medal of Honor (http://mohaa.ea.com/)
Download the High Res Quicktime demo and grab a napkin.
-
The review was done about 3 or 4 weeks ago I believe, but not published until now. It's probobly very accruate of the game as it was released.
Hopefuly they'll go back and give it another review in a few months once CRS has fixed it.
Sandman,
Don't you remember that Microprosed stopped ALL support for F4? they game was still a POS when they did that. In defence of the F4 developers they said it wouldn't be finished at released, and it wasn't. The problem was that they never got around to fixing it. Thank you erazor :) and who ever leaked the source code. CRS is at least supporting their product after SFI made them release too soon.
I agree with Dowding, in 6 months this game should be ready for prime time, I hope that's what you were saying Dowding :D
Udie
-
As soon as that "objective" reviewer compared it to Falcon4, I pretty much threw all his spew right into the toilet.
And also, this moron needs to keep looking at the tachometer to drive a tank? ROFLMAO! The holes in his "objective" review is so apparent one wonders what kind of vendetta he has against the CRS team.
[ 07-30-2001: Message edited by: fscott ]
-
Scott, comparing WWIIOL to F4 has merit. “Never before has such a hyped game been released so buggy.” Well, until WWIIOL that is.
Seriously.
The only thing I see different, is F4, in it's worst state, was graphically superior, and provided hella single player enjoyment. Now, thanks to the user end of fanatics, Falcon 4.0 is quite a accomplishment. I see nothing of this promise or salvageable single player in WWIIOL's hideous graphics vs. system requirements. Actually, in gameplay for that matter, and it’s whole entire pretence and structure WAS FOR ONLINE play.
There's no denying that massively multiplayer games are perpetually works in progress, continually evolving. In light of this, World War II Online has promise. But there's also no denying that this game was released far too early and has no business sitting on retail shelves wearing a $40 price tag as if it were finished. On one level, what you have here is a buggy multiplayer tank sim. Hop in, sling some AP rounds, and have a ball.
He ain’t lying. It's a fun tank sim for now, that's it. Hardly what it's advertised to be.
Forget Falcon 4.0, use AceHigh as a “benchmark.” It blows it out of the water, and delivers in spades. Not one of us reading this doubts that 1.08 is going to be a hoot, and 6 months in development for HiTech is HUGE. In comparison, I’d say WWIIOL in 6 months will begin to address the box promo supposed to be in the initial shipped product, yet will still be WAY short.
The reviewer was harsh, but discounting the factual discrepancies in this touted “MASSIVE ONLINE WWII BATTLE FIELD” because he mentioned another buggy sim in Falcon 4.0 is silly. So is your response accordingly.
BELCH.
[ 07-30-2001: Message edited by: Creamo ]
-
Hehehe Udie. :) Time will tell - but something significant will have happened in 6 months, for better or worse in relation to WW2OL.
The speed and quality of their updates leaves a lot to be desired.
Any ETA on the Blenheim yet or resource system?
-
It is somewhat depressing to see the struggle of WWIIOL, and the enthusiasm of those bashing it as well.
It's the first serious attempt on a combined air/land/naval simulation, set in WWII. Nothing else has been done to compare to this.
I know I know, CRS cannot live on the merit of their intentions forever, if at all. However if WWIIOL become at least a partial success with time, this will pave the way for new attempts in the genre, attempts maybe that are a bit more proficient.
WWIIOL seem to have serious issues with the code, wether it's due to forced release or poor coding remains to be seen. However CRS is made up by guys who created the online sim genre (as you surely know) so I have some hope for them to actually fix the game given the time.
:rolleyes:
-
I see no enthusiasm to bash WWIIOL Jammer, and in fact, I fear it’s the code that is the problem. The reviewers portray it as it is, and that is what’s unfortunate.
I owe Hitech dick, (well 80 hours per month online of fun) and although I didn’t hope for HTC’s successor, I wished something touted as the next new massive online WWII experience, was in fact that. Then I’d have 2 things to play online.
WWIIOL failed initially, lets give it 1 or 2 years. Then I have $10/month spare for sure.
-
Originally posted by Jammer:
WWIIOL seem to have serious issues with the code, wether it's due to forced release or poor coding remains to be seen. However CRS is made up by guys who created the online sim genre (as you surely know) so I have some hope for them to actually fix the game given the time.
Actually that's not entirely true... about them creating the sim genre.
Granted, they had their hands in WB... but HT&Pyro were the big guns making CK/WB in the beginning.
-SW
-
It is somewhat depressing to see the struggle of WWIIOL, and the enthusiasm of those bashing it as well.
That depends.
I don't really pay money for good intentions. I'm willing to give them a break in hopes of further development, but to call this game anything but buggy (perhaps one of the worst initial releases I've seen) is a stretch.
Many people hoped it would be better. The fact that its not is pretty much to blame for the current reaction.
The article is pretty much spot-on IMO.
AKDejaVu
-
This is what I posted on the WWIIO BBS in regards to one of the fan bases' challenges to naysayers:
How's this?
Let's take a reality check here.
We have multiple people who say they cannot play for 5 minutes without CTHL. When they comment on this, they get the "You need to buy yourself more RAM, a better system, etc." from the fan base.
We have people that are upset about missing features. They point to a box that says "All this cool stuff inside!"- but it ain't there. The fan base says "You just need to have patience. It will get done."
Some people point out that cheating occurs, and a few foolish ones have even posted on the boards how to do it. The fan base says they have never seen anyone cheat.
The servers aren't even close to holding the "One-World" concept. Not-even-close. "Damn Cisco routers are to blame!" say the Rats. Damn, the rest of the business technology industry has it all wrong, I guess.
Now we are looking at Windows as the cause of the latest CTHL problems. Sorry, that's ass-backwards. You write the program to work on an operating system. Yes, DirectX 8 was just released, and it has some quirks. That is as it has always been and always will be.
It has now become common practice to accept the occasional CTHL with no concern- can you think of another piece of software you would allow to exist on your system that behaved that way? Guaranteed, reproduceable lockups whenever you try to properly use the basic functions of the program? "Patience!" says the fan base. These bugs will get squashed.
Reality check here. I am a person that typically stands behind a company or a group of developers because I like their vision. I appreciate to some extent what CRS has attempted to do. What has been brought to the consumer in reality is something so sub-standard as to be laughable. I can see the CRS staff walking down the streets with bags on their heads, so ashamed to show their faces in public.
Even this forum is an example of how poorly planned this whole effort has been. Why is it so slow? I suspect because it has such high traffic. But what did CRS expect? A community that was going to be one-world with 20,000 players was bound to gather somewhere.
Reality? This game is not ready for prime time, nor will it be any day real soon. Sure, it may get better (assuming the doors stay open that long). Sure, I can wait because other than the initial $40 I haven't spent a dime. But that isn't the point.
The fan base here acts as if there are no legitimate complaints against the Rats. Hardly- I cannot remember such a bug-ridden, overly demanding program outside of a high school programming class. And while I normally wouldn't be so blunt, it's time a few of you fans started to consider where some of the complaints are coming from, and that, despite your fun and the stable gameplay, high frame rate, etc. you enjoy, they aren't. That is documented, provable, and quite frankly inexcusable.
I have about 3 vehicles I can play online- all the others cause CTHL if I use them, every single time. I get a max of 50 fps, more like 10 fps when near a fight. I have:
PIII 733
512 MB
GeForce 2 GTS DDR 32MB
cable modem
Don't tell me to get a new system- that is ridiculous! Don't tell me about your wonderful frame rate- first, I believe you and second, I don't care. The system I have is at worst a mid-range system and should have no trouble pulling the game as-is... just as it does every other program I run.
Stop pretending there are no problems.
A bit long, but pretty much accurate to this date.
-
Creamo, I envision the next generation of MMOG WWII sims to be somewhat in line of what MoH promises today. The current computer power is not enough to host such a game just yet, but it might not be to far away either.
-
Seems fair Jammer. You still would think those awful graphics would make a 1.2gig, 512 RAM make more than 20 fps.
I really dont get it, nor shall I wonder.
-
Originally posted by Dowding:
Any ETA on the Blenheim yet or resource system?
lol!!!! ETA HAHAHAHA!!!!
Seriously though :D I think it's otw in the next big patch, but haven't been told that.
One thing I'd like to say, though I think it breaks my NDA, but since this is my own speculation I dunno... BUT :) It is my personal belief that they have all the debug code still in the game debugging stuff. I bet when they are able to get rid of that the FPS issue will be fixed. 1 step further... I think it's the network debug stuff to be specific, that's why I think we get the fps hit when around other people. Alot more cpu cycles being used that what will be once the debug code is gone. (I HOPE)
I started in the beta last summer, I was the 17th person let in. I just wish you guys could have seen it then compaired to now. Back then I never got over 5 fps ANYWHERE, heck just about 3 months ago I was always under 11 fps. That has doubled since release.
Anyway, before I piss somebody off :) I'll stop cheerleading. Most of the negative opinions have merit due to the crappy release, but I for one have seen CRS doing everything they can to fix the situation. Give it time it will get better.
Oh yeah, AH still has the best FM :) and I miss flying with you dudes. I think my burnout on flying is starting to go away, maybe I'll be back up in AH next week or so!
Udie
-
I agree Creamo.
I don't understand how my 1.2 Ghz Athlon, 512 Mb CAS2 Crucial RAM, Prophet II Pro 64, 7200rpm Deskstar HD powered machine runs at only 20 FPS at 1024x768x16bit when I'm an infantryman.
Or how people can claim that the bizarre cycling between 45 FPS and 19 FPS in air combat is playable?
I don't play the game for the graphics, but they are not anything special. I'd describe them as 'passable'. I hope you are right Udie.
Hope you get back to AH mate - v1.08 sounds like it will be quite interesting if they get the trains in. :D
[ 07-30-2001: Message edited by: Dowding ]
-
Udie u'd never piss us off - too many of us know you. Hope to see you up there soon bud!
Originally posted by Udie:
Anyway, before I piss somebody off :) I'll stop cheerleading. Most of the negative opinions have merit due to the crappy release, but I for one have seen CRS doing everything they can to fix the situation. Give it time it will get better.
Oh yeah, AH still has the best FM :) and I miss flying with you dudes. I think my burnout on flying is starting to go away, maybe I'll be back up in AH next week or so!
Udie
-
Not to start another flame war, but I fail to see how you can go on describing the WWIIOL graphics as 'awful' considering what they display in the game.
I shall repeat myself only once:
-There's a visual range of several kilometers on the ground, and even more in the air.
-There are ground objects (trees, houses, signposts and so on), it might not seem to be a lot, but given the visual range triangles add up quickly.
-Vehicle models are fairly detailed, although an agressiv LOD reduction alorithm saves triangles here.
-Up to 64 units visible onscreen. This is a bunch, I guarantee you.
If you know and understand this, and have some familiarity with what GFX cards can do you soon realize that there's a triangle budget that the designers have to follow, or the client will quickly choke.
Games like Quake 3 can afford high triange count because of level design that ensures that only so much is visible at any time, also, no quake levels are 2km's wide.
So all in all, the WWIIOL can be considered bland looking or outdated, I know that was my first reaction. But there's a reason for this, as listed above.
And honestly, is AH that much prettier? Granted the air aspect works better in AH, but one could argue the slightly 'cartoonish' look of AH, as well as the non-existing ground features (except a few buildings and random shrubbery).
We all know that AH and WWIIOL isn't played for the eye candy, but for immersion.
Bugs and framerate issues in WWIIOL is another story though, and it is nothing I try to cover up for. I HOPE for improvement here, as others have said there is chanses that it will get better with time.
Ok. That's my final thought on the subject.
Cheers,
-
Originally posted by Jammer:
And honestly, is AH that much prettier? Granted the air aspect works better in AH, but one could argue the slightly 'cartoonish' look of AH
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/images/shots/players/solas5.jpg)
(http://www.hq.wwiionline.com/screenshots/032800-02.jpg)
You have got to be kidding me..
-SW
-
I'm not kidding, but not dead serious either. It's a matter of preference I guess, and also those pics represent software in vastly different stages of development...
My guess is that the WWIIOL pic is pre-beta (more than one year old) while the AH pic is relatively recent, no?
However, that is not the point - my comment was a spontaneous reflection I made while D/L the latest AH build to try it H2H today.
I know it's a matter of opinion, but in WWIIOL I feel like I'm more present in the aircraft than in AH. I respect those who don't agree, and I hope you can respect my opinion (even though I'm really no pilot).
I have no reason cheering for CRS over HTC, I'm niether an employee nor a shareholder of CRS. I have no personal interest to promote the game other than I find it enjoyable on it's own premises.
Cheers, :)
-
Jammer I'm not sure.. I got that screen shot off the WWIIOl HQ web page.
Just one thing, they are different stages in one aspect: One has been in the public's hands for a year and a half.. the other one hasn't been. Both have been under developement the same length of time though....
-SW
-
As I said, I'm not cheering for CRS, and I agree that AH is far ahead of WWIIOL dev. wise.
The thang is, the WWIIOL approach appeals to me more than AH. Simple as that.
-
I'm not sure why AH or WB would be compared to WWIIOl... AH/WB2.xx appeal to a different crowd. WWIIOl, ATM, appeals to tankers mostly and 133t 5|\||p3r5, while AH/WB2.xx appeal to air combat enthusiasts. sorry about the |-|4><0r lingo but that's all I read over there. ;)
-SW
-
FWIW, the AH official forums absolutely dominates the WWIIOL forums, which really plunged after release... ;)
-
LOL, everytime someone gets defensive, they always say 'your sim looks cartoonish'...that's the same as saying "You're sim is dominent, and I have no rebuttal, therefore, I will insult it."
FYI:
F4 ran fine the first time on my box, can't say the same for WW2 Online, and the customer support sucked (yeah, I was a beta tester, but come on, 3 weeks before they straightened out a sys admin problem with my account? Get real.I wasn't alone either)
-
Honestly, Ripsnort...was that called for?
Was I defensive? How could that be? Was I attacked?
I was merely stating an reflection, and if you want to read a hidden agenda into that, well that has to stand for you.
Cartoonish was maybe a poor choice of word, since it made you go defensive ;)
I could have said "too bright, colorful and 'flat'" instead.
Sorry for feeding the fire here. This IS my last comment on the subject.
By the way, I never understood the use of 'my sim' and 'your sim'...I'm confused I guess. ;)
Also for reference:
(http://www.markeedragon.com/killzone/images/325.jpg)
(http://www.markeedragon.com/killzone/images/278.jpg) (http://www.markeedragon.com/killzone/images/265.jpg)
[ 07-30-2001: Message edited by: Jammer ]
[ 07-30-2001: Message edited by: Jammer ]
-
top pix shows 7 fps? how in the heck do you play with that??
let me know when you have a solid >60fps and I'll try it again
-
Argh...must...not...respond.. .aww hell:
There are serious frame rate issues. Period.
Also, taking a screenshot momentarily and temporarily reduce the framerate by some, so the actual FPS might actually have been as high as 12 at the occation ;)
No one is denying they got work to do on the optimization, a LOT of work if they can even do it.
BTW, I doubt anyone could tell the difference between a sustained FR of 40 and a FR of 60... anything beyond 30 FPS is nothing but bragging material, as long as it is a sustained, stable fram rate 30 FPS is 'nuff for anything but Quake DM's. ;)
[ 07-30-2001: Message edited by: Jammer ]
-
There are things I like about WWIIO; there are a lot more I don't like, fps chief amongst them. There is no way a flight sim enthusiast can enjoy WWIIO in its current incarnation. I don't want to ride a tank, I jog everyday for excercise (hence, I don't want to be a virtual grunt), thus I am left with the unusable part of the game. Udie may be right, the debug code may very well still be in there- and maybe it isn't. The bottom line is there are many reasons not to play, and precious few reasons to play.
-
Originally posted by Udie:
Sandman,
Don't you remember that Microprosed stopped ALL support for F4? they game was still a POS when they did that. In defence of the F4 developers they said it wouldn't be finished at released, and it wasn't. The problem was that they never got around to fixing it. Thank you erazor :) and who ever leaked the source code. CRS is at least supporting their product after SFI made them release too soon.
Actually, 1.08 wasn't too bad. At least you could still fly offline and we had some limited success with 4 players. Sure, there were a few bugs, Mavericks and HARM come to mind but it was nothing like the abortion called WWII Online.
-
Jammer check out the graphics in Operation Flashpoint. These are fairly close to WW2OL in some aspects. I get hi frame rates in OFP running 1600x1200. This with things like shadows, the gorgeous fog effects (nothing like combat in 50 feet of visibility), the smoke effects (OFP has smoke shells which are tactically useful, I use them quite a lot to cover retreats). You can even enter the forests in OFP and use them for cover. And I've had many battles with more than 64 units present and the framerate barely suffers for it. This on a P3-600, 256Mb, GF2MX - a system that groans under the strain of WW2OL.
Next, check out M1A1 Tank Platoon II, and Microproses Gunship!. These use a similar engine, the later, is fairly close to WW2OL but with great viewing ranges. Gunship! is probably 2-3 years old now? It achieved good framerates on now obsolete systems.
The WW2OL graphics engine needs to be rewritten from the ground up. Its not ground breaking, there are other engines out there that achieve long viewing distances and do it a lot (vast amount) better. They might even look at licensing someone elses engine (OFPs would be a good start).
I have cold-hard examples to back up my opinions on the graphics. Its not just abusive rambling.
-
None of your cold hard examples transmit that environmental data, plus the data of all the units, bullets, and damage encompassed by 64 players, either. Nor do they do so in anything approaching an arena of the size already available in WWIIOL, much less with 1000 people in the same arena.
Call it a buggy piece of toejam if you will, but there is nothing else to compare it too out there, sorry. EQ, UO and AO are not good examples, if you have played them, either. They all go into terrible lag when you 10 people together, much less bullets whizzing about.
So far, WWIIol can only be compared to.....WWIIOL. There is nothing else of similar scale there. Keep that in mind as you enjoy yourselves picking it apart.
[ 07-30-2001: Message edited by: Gadfly ]
-
Here are some pictures of that piece of toejam that no one can play:
http://www.lizking.com/ww2olpics.htm (http://www.lizking.com/ww2olpics.htm)
They are not great pics, and there are not many pics of the enemy, but when I was that close, I was much too busy puckering my amazinhunk to take pics.
-
Hitech wont defend his creation but I will!! Anyone that went to the Convention last year will know Im right. HTC limits the graphics of the game so more people can get online and not take a huge hit in frame rate. Natedog and Superfly can choke the biggest computers out there if HT would let them, but he wont. Do a search I brought up this fact in a WWIIonline thread long time ago, and it for the most part came true. The graphics and scale they want over there will choke computers. Even AH slows down when in the company of many players.
-
Indian, I don't think anyone is saying that AH isn't a great game. We are talking about a different game, WWIIol.
-
Gadfly-
I don't wish ill of the sim. I do tire of the people on their BBS that pretend there are no real problems with the game. I would enjoy it if I could manage a decent fps.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan:
Jammer check out the graphics in Operation Flashpoint. These are fairly close to WW2OL in some aspects.
Next, check out M1A1 Tank Platoon II, and Microproses Gunship!. These use a similar engine, the later, is fairly close to WW2OL but with great viewing ranges. Gunship! is probably 2-3 years old now? It achieved good framerates on now obsolete systems.
The WW2OL graphics engine needs to be rewritten from the ground up. Its not ground breaking, there are other engines out there that achieve long viewing distances and do it a lot (vast amount) better. They might even look at licensing someone elses engine (OFPs would be a good start).
I have cold-hard examples to back up my opinions on the graphics. Its not just abusive rambling.
Flashpoint is a lovely game, graphics are nice and quite well implemented. Make this game a persistant MMOG and in a WWII setting and I'm in! ;)
M1A1 TP II OTOH is very bland looking. I don't know how you consider it to be on par with WWIIOL. Really.
Gunship is unknown to me and I can't comment.
I respect your opinion, but until I see an engine that do what the WWIIOL (unity engine) engine does in a superior way, I reserve the right to doubt any claims of it being a POS or inferior. When comparing graphics engines you have to pay attention to what it really does...also, it's hard to judge an engine when the rest of the code is not mature and optimized...
That said I might not agree on all design decisions on WWIIOL, neither do I belive the unity engine is "unique" or "revolutionary". If it simply does its job I'm happy.
-
In all honesty, I do think that WWIIOL may one day become a great game, but only if:
A.)CRS actually learns how to use their code and apply that knowledge to fix the problems.
B.)CRS recruits someone to assist in fixing the code.
C.)CRS rewrites the engine so as to use better technology. I seriously think if the game ran with OpenGL support it would rock.
D.)Shorter time between patches.
Also, I don't see why people compare WWIIOL with AH, UO, etc. because they are all different genres. WWIIOL introduced the first "combined arms" type genre....(I think)
-
Vulcan at one point you are wrong, i dont think the graphic have "much" to do with the low frame rate in WW2Ol. When you offline i got approx 60fps+. When online in a area where nobody is around me i got 30 fps. And it drops more again if i have contact, it doesent play matter if i can see them or not (line of sight). It has something to do with the Netcode and maybe a still present Debug code like Udie said IMHO.
I'm really lucky with my 20-30fps online.
Btw. have u tested OpFlash online ? is the frame rate the same as offline ? anyone ? ;)
Gh0stFT
-
I've seen OFP being played on a LAN, no frame rate drop. OFP is not going to be done as persistant multiplayer, all I was pointing out was that the graphics engine in it would be ideal for a WW2OL like game.
I realise that WW2OL suffers fps hits from the communications side. But even so the fps of a non-online PC is astoundingly bad, ie 30fps in low resolution with nothing else around is nothing to dance with joy over.
-
Unfortunately OFP is not going persistant unless a 3rd party writes it (CRS take note).
There are Mods coming for 1944, Vietnam, Star Wars (Hoth), Desert Storm and even WWI.
OK, sorry what I mean't to say was M1 TP2 was the predecessor to Gunship! which tweaked it and looked a lot better.
Now take the OFP engine, what does it need? A persistant server. The real problem will be when a lot of units get to one area. I originally thought this would be the limiter to the OFP engine, but someone mentioned earlier that WW2OL breaks at 64 ppl in view (or stops rendering the extras). So maybe the OFP engine would be better.
At the end of the day I'm no code expert. But I can spot a turd and I can smell a turd. And my honest belief is that no amount of dressing up will make the stink go away from WW2OL. IE they need to start from scratch. Mistakes are obvious (like fps being tied to the connection) and many.
Many people in the gaming industry have come to realise if you can't do something as good as the other guy... license his technology. And visa versa, if your technology kicks the toejam out of the neighbours, license it to him.
CRS need to wake up and smell the stale turd. 2 Years of work and there is better engines out there they can take advantage of. If they don't do something fast the only guesswork we need to do is whether its the users or the financiers who pull the plug.
I waited a long time for this game to come out. I visited the CRS website and downloaded all the screenshots the videos etc. I WANTED a kickarse MMPOG to come out from these guys.
Originally posted by Jammer:
Flashpoint is a lovely game, graphics are nice and quite well implemented. Make this game a persistant MMOG and in a WWII setting and I'm in! ;)
M1A1 TP II OTOH is very bland looking. I don't know how you consider it to be on par with WWIIOL. Really.
Gunship is unknown to me and I can't comment.
I respect your opinion, but until I see an engine that do what the WWIIOL (unity engine) engine does in a superior way, I reserve the right to doubt any claims of it being a POS or inferior. When comparing graphics engines you have to pay attention to what it really does...also, it's hard to judge an engine when the rest of the code is not mature and optimized...
That said I might not agree on all design decisions on WWIIOL, neither do I belive the unity engine is "unique" or "revolutionary". If it simply does its job I'm happy.
-
Gadfly, who gives a flying f**k. Guess what? I played the game for 3 weeks. I've seen what it looks like. Don't you understand this??? A lot of people here have played it and know exactly whats going on.
A pile of screenshots is nothing to us!!! Because we've already been there!
Originally posted by Gadfly:
Here are some pictures of that piece of toejam that no one can play:
http://www.lizking.com/ww2olpics.htm (http://www.lizking.com/ww2olpics.htm)
They are not great pics, and there are not many pics of the enemy, but when I was that close, I was much too busy puckering my amazinhunk to take pics.
-
Ahh, if you played it Vulcan, then why do you say it is unplayable? Even with all the bugs it has, and Cod knows it has lots, it is still the only game like it, and is very playable.
Maybe not to your tastes, or maybe not up to your high standards, but if that is the case why do you bother talking about it?
-
I think we can all agree that we'd honestly *like* to see WW2 Online get de-bugged, optimize the code for better FR since we the end users like this sort of combat environment. Let's hope they can work the issues out in a timely fashion.
-
quit being obtuse gadfly.
Everyone that is commenting here has quite a bit of experience with ww2ol. Enough experience to know that the game is buggy as hell and really offers little more than the average game of quake.
It just seems everone else realizes it. But then, we didn't bring our little plastic shovel and bucket to the beach with us and comense burrying our heads in the sand.
AKDejaVu
-
Look, you don't see me here, or anywhere, making posts about how great the game is. Many of you may have tried it, others have not, and when they see the stuff you post, may not. That is why I post.
I reply only to offer the other side of the argument. Both viewpoints are valid, but what is the point of harshing the game? Do you think it will make it better?
If you advocate the position that it is unplayable, well, I am offering proof that it is. If you advocate the position that you don't LIKE the game, you won't see me attempt to refute your claim.
-
Originally posted by AKDejaVu:
Enough experience to know that the game is buggy as hell and really offers little more than the average game of quake.
LOL, yeah right...comparing WWIIOL with Quake made your credability in the matter extinct IMO.
-
looks like the pom poms are on fire now ! ;)
and yes i like ww2ol ! :D
-
HEHE WW2 aint nothing like quake, except for the tank wars at Denant and Anhee. The other night I spent over 2 hours in the top room of a church with a tommy gun :) I watched truck after truck drop off 4 to 5 german inf just over a hill outside of town about 200 yards from me. Poor bastards didn't realize I could see them and kill them, which I did. I got about 20 before they called in a panzer to kill the building I was in. I died in the explosion hehe.
Another note on FPS. It seems realy random to me. Sometimes I never drop under 25-30, and others I never get over 12-15. Same size battles too. Since 1.2 flying is alot better for me. I'm 35+ fps most of the time, unless new terrain is loading then Im down to 11-15, but after about 20-30 seconds it pops back up to 35. I actualy managed a 5 kill flight the other night. Bouncing is SOOOOOO easy there with no 6 view ;)
On the sucky graphics. The models are some o the most complex I've ever seen in a game. Screenshots don't do them justice. All the moving wheels on the tanks, the leading edge slats on the 109 the insides of tanks and planes, levers move and stuff. There are SO many trees and bushes to hide in/behind, hills roads with signs and side rails at turns. 3 or 4 diferent types of bridges. All kinds of stuff. What doesn't look too good to me are the textures. Once they get this thing where it's supposed to be in a couple of years and everybody has upgraded some more they can change to bigger texures.
This is the way I see it, but all this stuff is subjective I guess. To each his own. I'm hoping we don't see the fracture that we did when AH came out. I plan on playing both and don't want enemies at either place, they are after all only games...
Udie
-
You are assuming they make it those few years to the point of completion (or atleast meeting half of the features listed on the box)..
The game is unfinished plain and simple, I would never recommend anything in that state to any of my friends or fellow gamers. It would be ripping them off to say "Hey it's fun for that $40... but all of the features listed aren't there!"
Fun or not, the advertising is clearly false.
-SW
-
Hear no evil, see no evil
-
well now something complete different, if you into "quake" style fps, why not try Day of Defeat a Half life WWII Modification, i must admit i installed it last weekend and i like it alot.
Its "instant action", jump in and start the fragfest on Omaha beach, Stalingard or in the bombed Köln.
Its not much about tactic & strategie but its fun :D
Gh0stFT
-
HEHE WW2 aint nothing like quake, except for the tank wars at Denant and Anhee
Ah.. bs.
Its quake with tanks and 8fps aircraft. I find it quite ironic that one of the photos above is an fighter straffing a spawn point. Nah.. its nothing like quake.
:rolleyes:
Instant respawning.. well.. instant if you figure in the 3 minute load time (please.. tell me this is a "feature"). Unlimited lifes. 1st person perspective. No real point other than fighting a continuously spawning foe. Nah.. its nothing like quake.
:rolleyes:
What's funny is that some saying WW2OL is nothing like quake have actually called AH quakebirds. At least one of the games is simulationg something somewhat accurately.
...and... most people posting against WW2Online have bought the game. I know that I bought it because I wanted to play it. I did not want to waste my money by placing it on the shelf. I have to pay no money right now to play it.. and I choose not to. That says something about the game. Many other people made the same choice.. that says even more about the game.
AKDejaVu
-
Which picture shows a plane straffing the Spawn? None of mine, although that is a valid tactic, and one I strive to achieve.
Unfortunatley, respawning is now almost instant; I preferred that it took a while myself.
If any of you believed the hype you are dumber than a box of rocks. Joe Blow on the street was ripped off, no question, but we as a class are informed buyers, I think.
-
Originally posted by Gadfly:
If any of you believed the hype you are dumber than a box of rocks. Joe Blow on the street was ripped off, no question, but we as a class are informed buyers, I think.
I didn't buy the hype, nor the product. I didn't even believe the hype when the game was just a website.
I am just astonished that people are here trying to promote the product.
It does nothing that it's supposed to and is horribly bug ridden.
If a car promised me features on the sticker, and I was told AFTER I bought the car that I would get those features later on.. I would be mightily pissed off and would return the car immediately. Especially if what is currently in there barely worked in the first place.
-SW
-
It's like the eternal discussion, isn't it? No one is listening to anyone elses arguments. Instead people keep chewing the same yadda-yadda-yadda over and over again.
Heh, ok WWIIOL is a bug ridden Quake clone with zero entertainment value and AH is the best single piece of software ever written, and that will ever be written for that matter. ;)
-
Jammer my only reference in WWIIOl vs AH was graphics.
Since then I've only been stating my opinion on WWIIOl.
Did I mention AH in that post above?
-SW
-
What don't you understand about...
- crap load times
- shocking framerates
- CTD and CTHL (terms that almost TM'd by CRS)
- more than half the promised features missing
Originally posted by Gadfly:
Ahh, if you played it Vulcan, then why do you say it is unplayable? Even with all the bugs it has, and Cod knows it has lots, it is still the only game like it, and is very playable.
Maybe not to your tastes, or maybe not up to your high standards, but if that is the case why do you bother talking about it?
-
What don't you understand about...
- crap load times---Big Whoop, 3 minutes of your life gone.
- shocking framerates----Mine are low to good, but not shocking.
- CTD and CTHL (terms that almost TM'd by CRS)----Don't have em.
- more than half the promised features missing----Didn't expect them in the inital release.
It is perception, bud, those are the deal breakers for you, and I agree with your decsion. They are just not applicable or deal breakers for me.
I think we have entered the realm of circularity at this point, and we will just have to agree to disagree. No worries, guys, your loss.
Cya in the War!
-
Also :):
-There are people who actually enjoy WWIIOL and are willing to look past it's obvious flaws.
-I don't belive that anyone here ever denied that there's issues with WWIIOL.
I don't why this would tick you off. I can understand if you are disappointed, but I don't understand why some of you are so unwilling to aknowledge the good aspects (yes the game has those too).
I hear what you are saying, "the game is buggy", " doesn't work on my computer", "gfx sux" etc etc. Ok, so what? It's not like you're forced to play the game.
If you like it, fine, if you hate it, don't lose any sleep over it.
I can't see that pointing out the fact the there are enjoyable sides to a game would be wrong in any way, as long as you don't try to deny it's flaws...?
[ 07-31-2001: Message edited by: Jammer ]
-
I actually cranked up the resolution to 11**x960 at 32 bit (I don't remember the exact figure) and the frame rate was a little more consistent. But the buildings still flickered annoyingly - to the extent I no longer fly because the image makes me feel ill.
The gameplay is, frankly, nothing to write home about. The worlds are not persistent, there is no 'reward' for completing missions or killing the enemy and the same battles are fought over and over and over again.
The funniest suggestion I heard recently was to start creating historical scenarios in WW2OL. Kind of defeats the whole concept of the game, surely?
At the moment the game is absolutely ordinary. When the forums are more entertaining than the game, something isn't quite right.
But from what I played of it, occasionally you would get a glimpse of what it might have been (or hopefully what it could be).
[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: Dowding ]
-
Guys, I am not trying to bash WWII Online, but I just saw some really funny bug screenshots on the WW2OL forums. I have nothing against WWIIOL, I just find these extremely funny, just as I've laughed at bugs in AH.
(http://www.user.dccnet.com/supa/001.jpg) A German Soldier sticking out the back of an Opel.
(http://www.user.dccnet.com/supa/004.jpg) Allied truck pulling an Axis gun.
(http://www.user.dccnet.com/supa/006.jpg) Flying infantry.
(http://www.user.dccnet.com/supa/012.jpg) LOL! Infantry being towed by a half-track.
(http://imperitare.homestead.com/files/otherstore.jpg) I didn't make this!
-
Ahh dude check out Gadfly's posts...
Originally posted by Jammer:
-I don't belive that anyone here ever denied that there's issues with WWIIOL.
[ 07-31-2001: Message edited by: Jammer ]
-
Vulcan can you read, or are you just stupid?
-
As the great philospher Cartmen said once... SUCK MA ASS!
Originally posted by Gadfly:
My only goal is to counter the fellows that say it doesn't work. You see, it does, though it may not for you.
I do not discuss AH because I don't play it, you should do the same.
-
Originally posted by Gadfly:
Vulcan can you read, or are you just stupid?
Vulcan is a waste of time...when not here is out "shaggin" sheep!
Oh BTW Gadfly I'm not in your camp either...I just like to call Vulcan a "pointed ear Sheep shagger" and haven't done so in quite some time. Obviously he has been swating flies and other bugs in WW2OL :)
-
OH MY GOD!
SKERNSK! YOU'RE A GENIUS... everything just fell into place!!!
W W I I O L H A S N O S H E E P !
-
You sure that you have played, Vulcan? There are sheep.
-
(http://www.pchorsepower.com/POS.gif)
-SW
-
actually Gadfly,why do you bother at all,,,,,,,,,,,,IM NOT CONVINCED,,SHEEP OR
NO SHEEP;OR GOATS,DUCKS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
-
Why do I bother? Good question, and the only reason I can give is that I hate to see lies spread, and the worst lies are ones that contain some truth.
If someone says "WW2OL sucks a donkey dick", or "WWIIOL is unplayable for me", you won't see me try to convince them otherwise.
If someone says "WW2OL is unplayable", well, That may be true FOR THEM, but for thousands of others it is a lie.
See the distinction?
-
Here is an odd development... I've found that some servers work better than others in the fps department. I can play manageable fps on Server #2, but not elsewhere. I still CTHL quite frequently, but when I can play it is somewhat fun.
-
What is this CTHL everyone refers to?
After 1.2, I got in and although i never found a NME to shoot at, my FPS were way up to 40 sometimes, maybe cause I couldn't find a fight. So I drove my tank like I was in NASCAR 4 till i flipped it over, then when I hit escape, everything looked like a white snowscape, ironically equally as "frozen" in lock up, and I had to reboot. 2 more times just like that made me quit, but havn't played it since.
How do you find someone to shoot at there?
--
[ 08-03-2001: Message edited by: Creamo ]
-
Look for the "fire" icons at the theatre screen, then double click that icon. broadcast on the radio, and someone will probably tell you where the action is. If you are axis, tune to channel 95, and listen for a minute or two, and you will know.
-
This is all for you "wwiionline is completely stable for most of us, we got what we was told to get".
Killer (dev team) posted this HIMSELF:
"We'll see what's up, testing last night from home and I had 20+ CTD's in under an hour, tried patch and could still reproduce em.
My home machine is coming in here tommorrow, I'll be on the top server most of the day, I'll be "SYSTEM" calling for as many people who are up to it to all come fight in one place and make me CTD every 10 seconds like I did last night until we trap it and can kill every CTD I can reproduce.
Be there or be square. As for releasing it for weekend, we'll decide that tommorrow."
So, if the devs get 20(!!!!!) CTD:s in hour, how the hell can you say this game is playable? Or do you prefer playing offline only? CTD is the most annoying thing to happen, since you dont have clue why did it happen to avoid it next time.
wwiionline is on ALPHA stage and while i see nothing wrong about that, they have sold the game as being complete. if 50% of the features PROMISED are missing, how can you say you havent been lied? I think 80% of who bought that game BELIEVED, that those features are in when they dare to write those on the BOX.
"Customer: Hey this wasnt Mercedes as you told me, this is Mercedes with Ladas interiors and engine!
Salesman: Oh im sorry about that, but i promise we upgrade those things later, SOON, as we prefer to say in games business.
Gadfly: Yes i believe him. He has lied only couple of times, so why would he do that now? Besides, i know Lada will go downhill as fast as Mercedes AND (with TV-shop voice) you can make-belief if you close your eyes really tight! Oh and Remember to breathe only trough your mouth!"
(I assume that the Alpha has turned open beta now, since they call people to test it with them.. ;) )
Wwiionline isnt ready yet, they can sell it, but they should inform the customers BEFORE selling, that half of features arent in game yet.
Theres no way you could round that FACT.
-
Well what tuomio said,,,and Im sorry gadfly
,they shouldt have waited atleast 6 month to release it,maybe you`re satisfied,,,,,but I
am not,and that is that.
But when/if it´s gonna working proberly we can talk ;).
-
You guys read the whole thread, please, so I don't have to repeat myself so often.
-
Last night I was trying to help take a FB. They were spawning tanks, so I decided to do the closest thing to truck driving I will do- I drove a Stuka to deliver bombs! The FB was only 3 minutes flight from the field, so it was a quick round-trip.
I was a bit worried about the enemy fighter base nearby, but "what the heck" I thought, and decided to surrender the virtual life if need be. Had I known then what I know now I wouldn't have worried at all.
In the course of making the round trips I eventually ran into the fighter opposition I knew would come. I bored in, dropped the load, then turned to face the fighters after me. "Might as well go out fighting" I thought.
To my horror I found that, not only could I maintain a sustained turn with the Spitfires, I could turn inside them. When the hapless Spit pilot realized he was losing angles he began to scissor. Yup, I could scissor with him, too. The boy was forced to drag me along the tank line he was trying to protect to peel me off. Eventually he tried to re-engage, and I shot him down.
Next came a Hurricane. These turn a bit better, so I thought I might have a problem. Nope. Worse than the Spitfire, the Hurricane cannot speed or climb away from the Stuka in time. By the time the Hurricane pilot realized his predicament it was far too late. I managed to auger this one, glued to his tail and him trying everything in his power to escape.
That is the way the rest of the night went. Bomb with impunity, dogfight when necessary. I managed more kills per hour than I ever did in any other available plane. No doubt about it, I will now take the Stuka anytime I go German. I am puzzled how such a wonder plane could have been decimated in and thus removed from Channel operations following the BoB.
-
After 1.2, I got in and although i never found a NME to shoot at, my FPS were way up to 40 sometimes, maybe cause I couldn't find a fight. So I drove my tank like I was in NASCAR 4 till i flipped it over, then when I hit escape, everything looked like a white snowscape, ironically equally as "frozen" in lock up, and I had to reboot. 2 more times just like that made me quit, but havn't played it since.
How do you find someone to shoot at there?
Are you sure you are on-line?
Had a problem for the first week where I couldn't get on line because I installed the game in the C:\Program Files directory (it didn't handle the "space" in the directory well. You see, I really screwed up by assuming that just because they asked me what directory I wanted the game to reside in, I could choose any directory. My bad.
If you are not selecting your battlefield from a globe/map then getting a list of missions... you may be off-line.
AKDejaVu
-
Originally posted by AKDejaVu:
Are you sure you are on-line?
Had a problem for the first week where I couldn't get on line because I installed the game in the C:\Program Files directory (it didn't handle the "space" in the directory well. You see, I really screwed up by assuming that just because they asked me what directory I wanted the game to reside in, I could choose any directory. My bad.
If you are not selecting your battlefield from a globe/map then getting a list of missions... you may be off-line.
AKDejaVu
they way I could tell was all the idiotic chatter in the radio buffer :)
-
CTHL- Crash To Hard Lock-up.
CTD- Crash To Desktop.
I see CTHL's all the time- at least once every hour of play or so, usually sooner. I also lock-up in certain types of vehicles more than others.
The CTD I haven't seen as much, though there are others that do.
-
CTHL = Connection To Host Lost. The Rats have said that they need to fix how the program treats dropped packets. People with near-perfect broadband connections are getting dumped with CTHL errors.
-
Nope, I was online. Some guy kept saying "Hello?" "Hello"?
It feels like your really locked in a tank which I think has it's realism points to it, not for me though.
I think I might enjoy the tank stuff but I can't get around or figure it out. The interface is screwy imo.
-
Here is another tip, and probably the reason that I do not have CTDs or CTHLs: Do Not go to or use the mission screen!
Click the icon of the city you want to spawn at, then click go through the personal data screen, the select your vehicle and click go.
-
That review was accurate. Scathing, but accurate. I don't see how anyone could think otherwise.
Any black eyes that CRS have suffered are solely self-inflicted.
Gordo
-
Yikes! I better coin another one then- LTFU. ;) I get LTFU's a lot in the game, approximately every 20 min - 1 hour.
I don't use the mission screen either. I am not interested in the megalomaniacs' plans at the moment. Until I get steady game performance I would just as soon worry about my own little self. ;)
-
CTHL is actually-Connection to Host Lost
-
Not having bought or tried WWIIOL I have a question regarding FPS. Since, by definition, WWIIOL would have to show lots of detail (grunts are right there close to buildings etc and need detail to operate in) I presume WWIIOL must render at a high polygon count. My question: does WWIIOL's graphics engine make use of hardware accelerated 3D geometry transform and lighting available in GeForce and Radeon cards? (Examples: CFS and AH don't; WBIII, CFS2, and MS Train Sim do)
715
-
Dunno, but the sheer amount of crap on the screen is 100x more than AH and 80x more than WBIII.
-
You're absolutely right...WWIIOnline is a wholelotta crap. :)
bowser
-
Man, I hope you didn't burn too many brain cells trying to figure that out.
-
Actually you make it exceedingly easy. Usually you don't need anybody's help to look like a fool, but sometimes I just can't resist. :)
We've got a few minutes here...tell us again how all of WWIIOnline's problems are the fault of the users/PC.
bowser
-
To be fair to Gadfly, he never insinuated that point (the problems are all the users' machines). There are plenty of people on the WWIIO BBS that do pretty much think that, but Gadfly isn't one of 'em.
This does remind me of when AH first came out, though. Rip was posting on the AGW board (which is cool), he got solidly raped for doing so, then some guys here said that wouldn't have happened if the situation was reversed.
Now I would be the first to admit that talking too much about a competitor on a company-owned BBS is a bad idea, and one that is certain to cause conflict. Still, it wasn't all that long ago when the situation was reversed.
I have posted here on the WWIIO threads because I thought there were some here interested in hearing an informed opinion from someone with an AH background. I think I will avoid doing so in the future, as I sense the saturation level on WWIIO is about met here. ;)
-
While I do not think all(or even many) of the problems are on the users end, I do think that if you want to play bad enough, you can tweak it to make it where it will work, on your end, if only barely.
Is this good? No.
Is this smart on CRS's part? No
Should you have to do this? Hell No.
It is a buggy pc of crap that can be a hell of a lot of fun, provided it can be made to run on your system at all.
-
Ya know, one thing I don't see talked about often is the same thing I posted before WW2Online was ever released. Why would anyone go out and buy this thing when there was no open beta and not even an offline demo that you could try on your computer? Why haven't they released a downloadable demo even now? Aces High, Warbirds, Warbirds III, Air Warrior, etc, all have a means to try the game on your comp before you buy. CRS and Strategy First strangely decided to abandon this very community-oriented approach and instead force you to lay down cash sight unseen. Yet a bunch of you went out and bought the game, then complained when it worked like crap. Until consumers wisely vote with their wallets, lame companies like CRS and Strategy First will continue to spew forth their crapola. I don't blame them for doing it one bit. There are too many lemmings with too much disposable income on their hands I guess. And to those who say that nobody expected it would be this bad, my response is - too bad, all you had to do was wait a COUPLE OF DAYS to hear from others about all the problems it has. So good or bad, buggy or not, I won't buy a game from a company that doesn't have enough confidence in their product to at least let folks try a demo, especially if it's in a genre as untested as this.
-
Hear Hear koala, EXACTLY. I was excited too, but I've dumped too many dollars into POS software that never lived up to the hype on the box. I waited myself and began checking the boards the day it went live. I'm glad I did.
For those who accept WW2OL as is and want to "invest" in the company and "enjoy" moments of limited functionality gameplay until they get it sorted out sometimes down the road, maybe ... well it just tells these companies that they can treat the customer like a chump and get away with it. I think Red Baron 2 was the belated last straw in my case. I don't like being played for a chump.
Charon
[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: Charon ]
-
In my case, I suspected strongly that the game would have troubles. A search of the BBS here will verify this point. My thinking was that $40 was not that much, I was currently out of AH because of lag issues on my end, and the amount was little more than a month's subscription to AH.
I wasn't wrong. Everything from the implementation to the community is exactly as I imagined it would be. The only thing that hasn't turned out the way I thought it would was the ability to do what I wanted when I wanted- though this may change if resources get limited. The day that happens I am gone.
It might turn out ok, it might not. I wouldn't even be looking at it if I had anything better I could do. There are others here that play it as well, and they can pretty much back my sentiment. What little the game does it does well. What it does poorly creates a whole new level of the word "poor".
-
There haven't been alot of "I'VE BEEN RIPPED OFF!" posts over here. Many people suspected that the game would turn out the way it did. I am one of them. Very little about it suprises me. I chose to pay for it anyway, because I wanted to support the idea that cornered rat was trying to impliment.. a real virtual battlefield. I'm hoping they can eventually move more in that direction. I'll definately keep an eye on it.
Most of the reaction you see here is due to the fact that the game is tainted right now. Someone will always enjoy anything put out for one reason or another... but this reviewer's responsibility means he can't be one of those people.
He has to look at what is paid and compare it to what is delivered. The writeup is accurate. Those that come in here and say otherwise really need to take a deep breath.
Basically, sure some people might like it, but most won't. Most didn't. EB touts it as the most returned game. I can't help but think there may be some justification for that.
I paid my money and I knew what to expect. Most of the response here is simply to keep potential customers informed of what to expect. If they choose to purchase it anyway, so be it.
What I'd feel totally guilty about is selling this game by touting all of its great features and defending it whenever possible. At some time a person might believe what I am saying and buy the game with false expectations... then look for someone to blame when things are not even near the nirvana described.
AKDejaVu
-
Shoe? Meet prostrate rotting horse <thumP!>
;)
Cod, glad I missed this topic by being gone. I do have to say it's not a horrid flame fest though and that's a releif. And Gadflys' topic in the AGW off topic forumn shed soem light for me that he's wrung WW2O out more than most have so I'll not knock his two cents on WW2O no more.
And glad to 'see' you Kieran, even if just visiting :)
Westy
-
Woohoo my 2nd post to score a century!
Koala, if you look at some of my earlier posts about WW2OL I shared the exact same concerns as yourself. Being an Aussie I suspect you also suffer from an additional concern I too suffered, nobody sold WW2OL on the shelf in NZ. So I would have had to order it ex-the-states, which mean't if it was a complete let down then returning it would have a) been hard b) been costly.
My mouse flickered over the order button several times at EB's website. Thank god I didn't click.
Unfortunately for the CRS guys my $$$ went to OFP. And I must say I'm very satisfied.
I swear if the CRS guys licensed the OFP engine and put in some MMPOG code they'd rule the world!
-
The reviews keep pouring in. Lum the Mad calls it "Craptacular".
Sad, but funny as heck. ;)