homepage Forums Read Only Forums Read Only Forums IL-2: Cliffs Of Dover (Read Only) And still we wait for basic functionality...

Yes, I would. Right now I have 30" of very stark and consequently ugly grainy glittery mess on my monitor when I play CoD. Everything is shimmering and sparkling. There are places all over the planes where the lack of FSAA and AF make them look dire and it's x100 worse on the ground/buildings/trees.

Oh the gloom oh the sorrow oh the despair....

You guys are pitiful. Walk away from it if you hate it so much.

Soon as RoF's new campaign/career-mode is out CoD will be gone unless the devs show some sign of getting a proper handle on it.

I don't own ROF but I'm really hoping they come out with that soon! But somehow I suspect you'll still be here complaining.

Tired of seeing these forums turned into WhineHQ by the usual whiners posting the same crap over and over.

Would you like some cheese with yours?

You know, you could set up a trust fund to pay the price of the game to anyone who bought it and who you expect to "walk away" from it. I mean, it's not like Steam allows returns on non working software...

Cheese goes well with his mature whine, your's is just a lot of cheap whine which'll give almost anybody bad guts

Tired of seeing these forums turned into WhineHQ

Yours is cheaper and makes people really really poorly.

Besides, the games perfect in his eyes, we should all be thankful they made this stunning work of perfection.

But if I detested it as much as the haters spamming this forum I would of course have thrown it away in disgust a long while ago, like any reasonable person. And buggered out of this forum.

Lets be non-provocative and nice for a moment, honest question:

Would you seriously expect people to shelve or throw away a game they paid top dollar for? I think it's a fairly natural customer reaction to cause a stink in whichever form possible when what you paid for does not do as advertised. I actually was able to recently return a game - for money! - in a store because it behaved not as it said it would on my hardware. With platforms like Steam the only recourse a buyer has is to cause as much bad image as possible for the company until the problems are fixed.

So, really honest question: Do you expect guys like Werner who paid for it to go away and chalk it up as loss?

Lets be non-provocative and nice for a moment, honest question:

Would you seriously expect people to shelve or throw away a game they paid top dollar for? I think it's a fairly natural customer reaction to cause a stink in whichever form possible when what you paid for does not do as advertised. I actually was able to recently return a game - for money! - in a store because it behaved not as it said it would on my hardware. With platforms like Steam the only recourse a buyer has is to cause as much bad image as possible for the company until the problems are fixed.

So, really honest question: Do you expect guys like Werner who paid for it to go away and chalk it up as loss?

the only recourse a buyer has is to cause as much bad image as possible for the company until the problems are fixed.

Top dollar? LMAO.

They were fully aware of the state it was in before buying and if they weren't then they didn't do any research before buying, who buys a game these days without checking out any feedback at all? Nobody unless they don't have net access and we all know they do have net access.

They banned him.

I did do research, I read what the devs and Ubi said about it. Unfortunately they ...I mean I misunderstood them. When they said loads of good stuff about it I misunderstood them to mean the game was a functional and viable piece of software. They did say the Russian release was performing poorly because of a last-minute implementation of the Epilepsy Filter but then Ubi announced it would be removable from the western version and I thought we were back on track again. Unfortunately...yes, mea culpa...I misunderstood the devs again and thought that when they said the Epilipsy Filter was responsible for poor performance it meant the game would run fine with the filter removed.

I misunderstood a whole bunch of other stuff too apparently. I guess I'm really really thick, because my most fundamental misunderstanding appears to have been to expect a working product at all for my money. But then we're back to the doing research bit, because nobody should take it on trust these days that ones money gets one what one should feel entitled to get for it (a working product). But I was too thick to understand the fruits of my research. I thought lots of good things stated meant lots of good things would be present. I didn't know the advert on Ubi's site, all that razzle dazzle footage and stuff, actually meant "Broken Alpha Code". Silly me. I didn't realise it was an invitation to be a paying tester.

I suppose I should have posted direct questions on the devs' own forums, because they would have done their best to give me the info I needed to make an informed decision about splashing my cash. Oh, hang on, some people did. A fellow called Tree, amongst others. He asked lots of very pertinant questions...you know, in the interests of that research you mentioned people should do before buying stuff.

They banned him.

I did do research, I read what the devs and Ubi said about it. Unfortunately they ...I mean I misunderstood them. When they said loads of good stuff about it I misunderstood them to mean the game was a functional and viable piece of software. They did say the Russian release was performing poorly because of a last-minute implementation of the Epilepsy Filter but then Ubi announced it would be removable from the western version and I thought we were back on track again. Unfortunately...yes, mea culpa...I misunderstood the devs again and thought that when they said the Epilipsy Filter was responsible for poor performance it meant the game would run fine with the filter removed.

I misunderstood a whole bunch of other stuff too apparently. I guess I'm really really thick, because my most fundamental misunderstanding appears to have been to expect a working product at all for my money. But then we're back to the doing research bit, because nobody should take it on trust these days that ones money gets one what one should feel entitled to get for it (a working product). But I was too thick to understand the fruits of my research. I thought lots of good things stated meant lots of good things would be present. I didn't know the advert on Ubi's site, all that razzle dazzle footage and stuff, actually meant "Broken Alpha Code". Silly me. I didn't realise it was an invitation to be a paying tester.

I suppose I should have posted direct questions on the devs' own forums, because they would have done their best to give me the info I needed to make an informed decision about splashing my cash. Oh, hang on, some people did. A fellow called Tree, amongst others. He asked lots of very pertinant questions...you know, in the interests of that research you mentioned people should do before buying stuff.

They banned him.