homepage Forums Air Combat & Civil Aviation IL-2: Great Battles IL-2: Great Battles - Extended Discussions In search of answers...

So what is your definition of a valid score?

Everyone knows?
We all know?

Hmm, apparently not... but then you use those phrases a lot.
I expect your more speaking for yourself.

Hey Mister "that's my interpretation .... Do you speak, read and write Russian fluently?

I wouldn't call myself fluent but I have a minor in it and speak it read it and write it enough that I'm quite certain I know your interpretation is incorrect and sanitized....as if there were an agenda . Oops.

I speak it well enough I've earned a substantial part of my living doing it in the past. I'm fairly sure there are other SHQ folks who do as well.

Not one step back!

Everyone has their own personal view on how to rate a game.....but....the aircraft, graphics, FM, DM...all the things outside of the lack of soul.....they worked for me, and just climbing in a nice 109 and starting the engine..is worth a 2 alone..for me. 0....I mean is like the game wouldn't even load on my system. Unless they allow minus scores...like -10 and such. Does the game get any credit at all?

And when you add to the Metacritic conspiracy the Steam conspiracy where most of the players who have bought BoS have stopped playing it you can then see the Grand Conspiracy, is that right?

And I forgot to mention the conspiring non-Steam players who have stopped playing BoS online leaving the MP servers mostly a ghost town.

So now we've got the Metacritic conspiracy, the Steam conspiracy, and the MP conspiracy. Its all a conspiracy, I tell you!!!

If a product is introduced that is not popular, its a conspiracy...this is ripe!

7.31783901893, or there abouts?

That was my point concerning the scoring on MC.. Heck WoP with it's non collidable buildings in some spots and tiny maps and no mission editor at all, not to mention the way kit would put you randomly back in the map if you went off the edge, similar to what happens in BoS but worse.. did not deserve a 0..

No sim created in the past 15 years has deserved a 0 on any review.. Even if you thought it was bad .. just the basics of what was in there deserved a 3 at worst depending on what you liked but certainly not a 0 by any measure .. and we can go on about how one person thought it sucked etc and another thought it was the best thing since beer (hypothetical one person folks.. I know that more than one person thought it sucked ok...just to nip that in the bud..). Those MC scores were a reflection of some of the passions good and bad that swirled around this sim from the moment it was announced. How having unlocks, as stupid as that was for a sim bearing the IL2 name, which was the biggest beef most folks had with it and the fact that to get them you had to go through that poor campaign system can give a sim a 0 when some of the other stuff it has was present.. some stuff that had not been seen before (at least as far as I know I could be mistaken) is beyond me. I can't help but wonder if it had been called Flight of War or something other than IL2 if it would have engendered such ... drama..




No one ever said the 10s were justified either.. I certainly didn't (not saying you said I did..) .. and I think everyone knows that they were a response to the 0s..



I am not surprised and I didn't expect anyone else who comes here regularly to see it that way..



I don't have an agenda. My interpretation was based on what I read.. I do not read Russian.. I never said I did, nor did I say I was going off of anything but what Zak posted.. What because I don't speak Russin I am not allowed toi have an opinion on what I read?




This was exactly my point with no sim in the past 15 years has deserved a 0. A 3 or even a 2 if you really hated it .. but 0s? Considering what it does do well.. and did from day one? No.... that is not accurate. If you think it is then you are not looking at the sim honestly. Like Sharpe said the critics got it right.. their scores were more reflective of the true quality or lack thereof of the sim than many of the users who posted unless their reviews were fair because they did not have whatever passion good or bad involved.. All the 10s and all the 0s mean nothing.

Regarding BOS, I would suggest to anyone asking:

SP - don't waste your money. Maybe if it goes on a large discounted sale someday, like 20 bucks or less, you might get a few hours enjoyment out of it, but that is it. Especially if you are a the type of SP guy that wants some historical type of campaigns with a lot of re-playability. And even more especially if you come form the IL-2 series looking for more SP type action one had with the previous incarnations.

MP - maybe, but your going to see a lot of pretty empty servers, maybe one will have decent activity but with the limitations on number of players you may find it full a lot of the times. The bulk of any decent type of activity seem to occur more on European times.

Myself, I have not played BOS even since official release. The unloaded of the unlock system and campaign system, did it for me.
So wonder what score I would give it today...

If the game was not a disappointment this whole conversation would be moot.

Pretty easy to avoid these kind of discussions, really.

1. Make a good sim, with a professional team, and let it speak for itself. There will be critics, and discussions but that is with any game.

2. Make a sub par sim, with sub par team, and try to control what is said about. In other words make a crappy game and try to silence people that call it out. Be unprofessional, insulting, and whine. Sit back and be "amazed" at the low numbers.

Sadly, the team of BoS chose to go route 2, which is why this discussion is going on right now. Ahh if only they could turn back the clock. This would save BS and Sharp so much keyboard wear.

The lack of immersion lulls me to sleep. Do you want me to give it points for being a cure for insomnia?

You realize you are talking to a bunch of people who mostly don't play BoS at all. They perceive it as that bad.

I'll tell you what...for kids age 12 and under I'll give BoS an 8. For teenagers and adults a 0. I forgot to consider audience.

That is such bull malarkey. They said what they wanted to. If this was a bad google translation then they should have retracted it and clarified there position relative to this post. They produced the game they wanted to and they baited and switched their game to the early supporters. That should most definitely not be buried, it should be posted once a week here whenever you all start crying that they were abused on Metacritic. The abuse was just as bad in the form of 10 ratings at the Developers insistance. While they made some improvments, BOS still is not what they advertised they would make and the reaction was directly a result of their half ass production of BOS and claiming it was(because it is not) the IL2 successor. If they actually did produce the IL2 successor wouldn't the Forums be full of happy customers, wouldn't the MP be full, wouldn't the Metacritic scores all be high and wouldn't we not be here having to expose your poor attempts to cover up what has happened with BOS from about a month before the officali release until present? You and many others, according to you, like BOS, I get that , but you need to get that many people do not like or are bored and disappointed with BOS. Hiding, covering up and burying what has transpired is just plain dishonest to potential customers that are trying to decide whether to purchase BOS or BOM. Personally I do not care whether they buy them or not, but any potential customer deserves to be able to read what has transpired throughout this first two years so that they can make an educated decision, and not merely a product and fanboi hyped decision. People that want to bury criticism of BOS or unfavorable Dev rants are being down right dishonest. Better yet, why don,'t you all over at that Official forum start deleting, hiding or burying some of the overly gushing posts about how good the FM's are or the DM or the immersion. Those sort of posts are just as distasteful to me as some of the Devs poorly thought out PR posts are to you.

S!Blade<><

Imho, what should be concerning to the devs:

A bunch, and apparently quite a bunch, of players - early access guys, have left BOS. Given up on it, at least for now for many.

Those of us that still hang around, still pay attention to what is going on with BOS, still voice our concerns here on SimHQ, are oftentimes ostracized for what we post here. Oftentimes referred to as " you guys", or " you folks", sometimes even worse. When in reality, the vast majority of us that are still here, still critiquing, do so out of a passion for combat flight sims, a passion for the IL-2 Series, and want to see it be a huge success, a great continuation of the legendary series.

We are a fair minority over all of those that have left, saying nothing. Yet we probably represent much of the underlying reasons why they have all left, saying nothing. If I were the devs, I would take some notice, and be very concerned about all that have left, saying nothing.

Just my opinion...

It strikes me as odd when claiming to be a concerned flight sim fan who continues to monitor the game and post a lot about it, bemoaning the $100 you have wasted, wont even try it out with the 200+ fixes new features and a fair number of excellent new historical SP missions, you keep on saying that you have not tried it since release, but it strikes me that you don't really even want to give it a go

Just my opinion

Cheers Dakpilot

In my case I played BoS through and including the release of the first Veteran missions. 99% of the other 200 things you mention were not related to content so I haven't been back. Whenever I'm ready to go WWII flight simming I just realize I could be having more fun with IL-2 1946, CloD TF, or CFS3-ETO. So its not a conscious rejection of BoS, its the process of natural selection. All the players that have left BoS are simply doing something else and BoS is in real danger of becoming extinct due to natural selection and not some grand conspiracy.

If it was not your call to make and the post had to stay so super secret then why post just a small extract, not even a full sentence but enough to give a skewed view of what was said and not enough to give the full context?



LOL so only now you post it as if to suddenly cast light over the subject when it was you withholding the full context of what was said until I posted the screenshot of Zak's post because your very small quote did not give the full context of what had been said. You said backing up Dakpilot's comment:



You seemed to play on the fact only you could see the post but only posted a very small extract and just to add further emboldened the word 'was'. Only now you post the full text but its too late, the boat has sailed and we already saw the post in its entirety, the one you chose to cherry pick words out of and lose the context of what was said and no amount of your usual walls of text, bold fonts etc. can hide that.




I did not call you a liar but it seems you believe you can read people's minds when you say:


Tin foil hats at the ready guys, Karnak is back



I don't recall putting a number to the people paid off by 1CGS, its more telling that you actually seem to be defending the practice




No I am not constantly calling you a liar. I don't believe I've ever used the word 'liar' to describe you even when you've perhaps given me grounds to do so like when you said your campaign stats were always public and they were not. The word 'liar' is a strong one to use in a discussion forum which is why I try not to use it but you sling it around trying to make people believe other members are being nasty or confrontational towards you in what seems to be an attempt to make things personal and distract viewers from the actual topic at hand if its not one you want to discuss like this one which the 1CGS faithful would certainly like to bury and thought they had until we saw the screen grab of Zak's full post.

Nothing odd about it. In it's current state, it has no appeal to me. My sim time is limited.

Current sims of choice, TF Cliffs and 1946.
Going to start playing around with what is available currently in DCS WWII soon, to see how the planes feel, however need to write a TARGET script first.
Will be watching it's progress closely especially after the big update is released.

An objective and informed assessment written without an agenda or axe to grind. Like the one written here on SimHQ or other journalistic sites.

That was not the question.

That's funny seeing as the DCS stuff has just about the most impeccable FM you can find. Maybe you need to get away from CoD and 1946 and fly some real FMs

This is really well said, Don. +1

Oh my Sharpe, you follow my posts here pretty regularly so it should not be that difficult for you to figure out/understand.

I have not gotten into DCS WWII yet, as it is not there yet. I donated to the original kickstarter, nicely, and have all the planes coming to me. In case you have not noticed, I am a SP guy and what does it for me is some great SP content, to include some good campaigns, over the appropriate time period map would be nice also.

DCS overall, well different story. I very much enjoy A-10C, as I did Blackshark and now Blackshark 2. Awesome sims.
Unfortunately during the summer months I don't get to spend as much time as I would like with any of them, and my main preference overall is WWII. Hence, why TF Cliffs and 1946 are currently my main go to sims.

Hey, here is an idea. Since this is the BOS Extended Discussion forum, rather than constantly replying to any and all critique of BOS, why don't you make a thread or two, extolling the virtues of BOS, talking about what it does that you really like and how you enjoy it? Ya know, a positive thread. The forums could probably use some of that for BOS - unless....
You do still play it right?