Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

WOFF New WW2 sim


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 Oldsimmer

Oldsimmer
  • Posts: 445

Posted 20 January 2017 - 15:35

Well Old Brown Dog are going into WW2 lets hope the graphics are better than there WW1 the terrain is ok up to a point with rail tracks going off at all angles and if they fly from Britain in the new sim I hope they do something about the south of England terrain in WOFFUE it's rubbish were is Dover harbour and Dover castle the shore line way out trees up to the sea buildings hanging over cliffs, the sea looks crap well I purchase WOFFUE and wished I had not.

 

With so many WW2 sims out there they are going to have to do something very special for me to buy it.

 

We are now in the 21st century and PC's are getting faster we do not want 20th century graphics CFS3, just look at Battlefield 1 not my cup of tea but one must admit the graphics are good.

 

WOFFUE will always have there dyed in the wool fans that can see nothing wrong with it ROF for me has a long way to go with the AI but for me the flying and the graphics are first class and they have a nice terrain on the south of England and a DOVER CASTLE and this is from a Russian sim maker.

 

Just to say I have a high end PC and run all the flight sims flat out including DCS.


  • 0

#2 Hellshade

Hellshade
  • Posts: 786

Posted 20 January 2017 - 16:03

It all depends on what someone wants out of a game.  RoF and WOFF UE are almost mirror opposites of one another in terms of priorities. RoF has physics, feeling of flight, newer graphics shaders and MP.  WOFF has AI, huge plane set, deep immersive SP Campaign.    Something that is a deal breaker for one person is a non-issue for another depending on what their priorities are in a sim.   That's why a number of people, myself included, fly both.  Neither sim has it all.  I wish one of them did.

 

As for WW2, I guess we will just wait to see what they come up with.   It IS a crowded genre, but one that mostly seems to focus on MP.   Probably their focus will once again be on creating a deep SP experience.   Only time will tell if there's a market out there for it but one thing the market has established is there just isn't a big enough player base to survive on WWI sims alone.    I was hoping for either Pacific Theater WWII or Korean War Jets, but eh...I will wait and see what they come up with on the Western Front. 

 

PS - This thread should probably get moved to the "Other Games" section. 


  • 0

#3 Dutch2

Dutch2
  • Posts: 4365

Posted 21 January 2017 - 08:28

I still hope OBD will get an 1C deal to refurbish RoF and stay to WW1. 


  • 0
If I wrote something in this forum that is hurting or abuse a member, organisation or country? Let me know by pm for the corrections, please do not react back by bashing/trolling/flaming or other personal attacks!

Yep I’m an 2009 Rof pre-order buyer and one of the few that did buy the Sikorsky game.

#4 Zooropa_Fly

Zooropa_Fly
  • Posts: 1338

Posted 31 May 2017 - 07:59

I was hoping WoFF would concentrate on improving on the things Hellshade pointed out, plus a MP arena - then I'd certainly buy it.

I'm not sure why they think there's a gap in the marked for another WW2 effort at this stage..


  • 0

".. and they'll send you home in a pine overcoat, with a letter to your Mum,

    Saying find enclosed one son one medal and a note, to, say, he, Won".


#5 Dutch2

Dutch2
  • Posts: 4365

Posted 03 June 2017 - 10:32

If looking at the critsm on the aces high postings on Bos and Simhq, I guess ODB have to move up in graphics when entering the WW2 sim market or get the same hars remarks. But the greatest challenge would be to change from an single core game to an multi core game.
  • 0
If I wrote something in this forum that is hurting or abuse a member, organisation or country? Let me know by pm for the corrections, please do not react back by bashing/trolling/flaming or other personal attacks!

Yep I’m an 2009 Rof pre-order buyer and one of the few that did buy the Sikorsky game.

#6 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15541

Posted 04 June 2017 - 22:05

Get a cardboard box.  Draw wings on the outside of it.  Put on some flying goggles and sit in the box.  That is WOFF.

 

It all depends on what someone wants out of a game.  RoF and WOFF UE are almost mirror opposites of one another in terms of priorities. RoF has physics, feeling of flight, newer graphics shaders and MP.  WOFF has AI, huge plane set, deep immersive SP Campaign.    Something that is a deal breaker for one person is a non-issue for another depending on what their priorities are in a sim.   That's why a number of people, myself included, fly both.  Neither sim has it all.  I wish one of them did.

 

 

Yeah, but OBD is so behind the times they might as well publish an aerial warfare strategy game rather than a flight sim.  


  • 0

#7 AnKor85

AnKor85
  • Posts: 1002

Posted 17 July 2017 - 15:16

I have to agree with gavagai, unfortunately.

While I kept working on graphics updates because it was an interesting challenge, I stopped actually playing WOFF more than two years ago, mainly because some FMs are just unacceptable and I don't mean inaccurate speed or climb rate, I mean something as obvious as the rudder. I still wonder why so few people notice it.

 

Of course, there's a chance that WW2 crafts will be better, after all the game engine was designed for WW2 sim and stock CFS3 doesn't exhibit such FM issues.

 

Though I have to say that after these years I feel pretty jaded about flightsims as a genre. I think I've tried all current ones, and maybe it is just not my thing.


  • 0

#8 BraveSirRobin

BraveSirRobin
  • Member
  • Posts: 6356
  • LocationHackistan

Posted 17 July 2017 - 15:35

Though I have to say that after these years I feel pretty jaded about flightsims as a genre. I think I've tried all current ones, and maybe it is just not my thing.


Flight sims are currently better than ever. If you're not enjoying them, then you are right. Flight sims probably aren't your thing.
  • 0

The toughest part of my job is dealing with incompetent clowns who think they're good at their job.

Free Plank!

 


#9 J2_SteveF

J2_SteveF
  • Posts: 994
  • LocationLondon, UK

Posted 17 July 2017 - 18:24

I have to agree with gavagai, unfortunately.

While I kept working on graphics updates because it was an interesting challenge, I stopped actually playing WOFF more than two years ago, mainly because some FMs are just unacceptable and I don't mean inaccurate speed or climb rate, I mean something as obvious as the rudder. I still wonder why so few people notice it.

 

Of course, there's a chance that WW2 crafts will be better, after all the game engine was designed for WW2 sim and stock CFS3 doesn't exhibit such FM issues.

 

Though I have to say that after these years I feel pretty jaded about flightsims as a genre. I think I've tried all current ones, and maybe it is just not my thing.

 

Unfortunately Ankor, the FM frailty is what did it for me, you are not alone. I tried very hard to look beyond the graphic limitations, helped tremdously by your shaders.

But one day in a dogfight I found myself pulling up hard while applying hard rudder and to my suprise instead of stalling I managed to keep that atitude and moved along like a helicopter, nose up and rudder at full deflection.


  • 0

#10 AnKor85

AnKor85
  • Posts: 1002

Posted 17 July 2017 - 19:04

J2_SteveF, exactly!

I can ignore a lot of issues, but when I feel like I'm flying a helicopter instead of WW1 plane I just can't continue.

 

BraveSirRobin, yes, I won't argue.

BTW, so many years have passed and I'm still not sure whether you are constantly trolling or just prefer to state your opinion in a rather harsh way :)


  • 0

#11 BraveSirRobin

BraveSirRobin
  • Member
  • Posts: 6356
  • LocationHackistan

Posted 17 July 2017 - 19:40

BraveSirRobin, yes, I won't argue.

BTW, so many years have passed and I'm still not sure whether you are constantly trolling or just prefer to state your opinion in a rather harsh way :)

 

There is nothing harsh about my post.  Flight sims have never been better.  That includes graphics and flight models.  I am amazed at how far that they have come since games like Red Baron, and I loved Red Baron.

 

And yet you're still finding enough problems that you can't enjoy them.  The problem would seem to be on your end.  That isn't harsh.  That is simply a blunt evaluation of the available facts.


  • 0

The toughest part of my job is dealing with incompetent clowns who think they're good at their job.

Free Plank!

 


#12 AnKor85

AnKor85
  • Posts: 1002

Posted 17 July 2017 - 21:13

Yes, "blunt" is a better word, I've been looking for it but couldn't remember. My English gets a bit rusty.

 

Anyway, I agree with you -- modern sims are just better, it would be dishonest to say otherwise.

And to get back on topic, this fact also plays against OBD. No matter how much I appreciate what they managed to do I just can't call their game modern.


  • 0

#13 BraveSirRobin

BraveSirRobin
  • Member
  • Posts: 6356
  • LocationHackistan

Posted 17 July 2017 - 22:33

 

And to get back on topic, this fact also plays against OBD. No matter how much I appreciate what they managed to do I just can't call their game modern.

 

That isn't the only flight sim you seem to be having problems with.  Here's the thing, it's not that difficult to find problems with any flight sim that has ever been made.  In fact, it's easy.  You don't even have to look very hard.  Unfortunately, that seems to be the reason why some people play flight sims.

 

 

 

Though I have to say that after these years I feel pretty jaded about flightsims as a genre. I think I've tried all current ones, and maybe it is just not my thing.


  • 0

The toughest part of my job is dealing with incompetent clowns who think they're good at their job.

Free Plank!

 


#14 Dutch2

Dutch2
  • Posts: 4365

Posted 22 July 2017 - 10:40

Ankor and others, why did you not post your remarks on the Simhq forum. How the hell can OBD do the changes while nobody put in points that needs to be improved. I know on this official Woff forum it will always end in "the big deny show" because some blind fans clearly do not see any negative points on that game.
Ok it will hurt some diehard fans and they will get angry, only I know OBD will read and OBD will do an investigation.
I still think eventually it will help the developers, in making the game better.
  • 1
If I wrote something in this forum that is hurting or abuse a member, organisation or country? Let me know by pm for the corrections, please do not react back by bashing/trolling/flaming or other personal attacks!

Yep I’m an 2009 Rof pre-order buyer and one of the few that did buy the Sikorsky game.

#15 J2_SteveF

J2_SteveF
  • Posts: 994
  • LocationLondon, UK

Posted 22 July 2017 - 12:04

I think you have already answered your own question.

 

"the big deny show"

 

Pointless raising any negative observations on that board. 

Been there and done that. 

The Woff board is one of the friendliest on SIMHQ, as long as you tow the party line.


  • 0

#16 AnKor85

AnKor85
  • Posts: 1002

Posted 22 July 2017 - 15:04

Dutch2,

I discussed the rudder issue with OBD privately. They tried to fix it in one update, but it didn't work too good.

 

I didn't want to post on WOFF forums because it seems most people there are happy with current FMs. Why would I ruin it for them?

Or maybe I'm just exaggerating the issue :)

 

By the way, if you are curious - you can test it yourself in RoF and WOFF and tell me if you see anything wrong.

 

Take DH4 in quick mission with airstart at minimum altitude.

Try to do a nice flat turn with rudder and opposite ailerons.

Look at the terrain to see where you actually turning. Also note your airspeed.

Here is how it worked for me:

Spoiler

 

I pushed the stick forward and generally failed to maintain attitude in WOFF test, but didn't want to re-record it because it was almost painful to do -- seeing aircraft fly to the left with full right rudder. No matter what I did I couldn't make it fly to the right.

 

PS: This is my 1000th post here!


  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users