1C Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official 1C Company forum > 1C Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer 1C: Maddox Games.

View Poll Results: How happy are you with the current state of COD terrain?
Very Happy - the terrain is currently excellent and requires little or no change 16 6.37%
Generally Happy - the terrain is good, but there is room for improvement 140 55.78%
Generally Unhappy - the terrain is poor, and requires significant work to be done 62 24.70%
Very Unhappy - the terrain is so bad that it makes me reluctant to fly a mission 33 13.15%
Voters: 251. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 07-16-2011, 12:16 PM
kendo65 kendo65 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 908
Default

It seems that with the exception of a few stragglers (...Tree? Wonder which option he'll vote for ) the results are in.

Thought I'd give my take on the outcome, with the proviso that it is just my opinion. I can foresee disagreement in the interpretation of all this - maybe we just moved the problem one step back, from disagreeing about the terrain to disagreeing about the meaning of the vote about the terrain Really, the only interpretation that is important is what the devs make of it.

I'll be upfront and state that I voted "Very Unhappy", but I'll try to give a balanced reading of how I see the result. Some of you may disagree on whether I succeed or not.

It's a mix of good and bad. Roughly two thirds of people are happy against one third unhappy. The devs should take some comfort from that. It means that maybe it isn't so critical to get this fixed asap - the majority of people can continue to enjoy the game while waiting for terrain improvements. (This wasn't clear before the poll. From the noise generated it was easy to believe the split was closer to 50:50.)

Having said that, the vast majority (94%) believe that further improvement is necessary.

On the bad side, to have over a third (38%) of your customers dissatisfied with something as important as the terrain IS serious, and to have 1 in 8 (13%) of the people responding say that the terrain actually puts them off playing the game is disastrous (despite being one of the afflicted I was really surprised the number was as high as that).

So, not sure overall exactly what this proves - maybe that we are severely split - though we didn't need a poll to realise that. A majority are happy with things as they stand. A small, but significant, number are so unhappy they don't want to play the game.

Over to the devs......
__________________
i5-2500K @3.3GHz / 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1600 / Asus P8P67 / GTX-260 (216) / WD 500GB
Samsung 22" 1680x1050 / Win7 64 Home Premium
CH Combat Stick / CH Pro Throttle / Simped Rudder Pedals
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 07-16-2011, 02:16 PM
pupo162 pupo162 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

low.jpg vs high.jpg
Attached Images
File Type: jpg low.jpg (20.3 KB, 21 views)
File Type: jpg high.jpg (20.3 KB, 20 views)
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 07-16-2011, 02:29 PM
Sammi79 Sammi79 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 124
Default

I voted generally happy. The one terrain thing I notice every time I fly that could do with work is the way that the shoreline render essentially draws over the top of the water render. The effect this has is to slightly shrink the area the water covers (specifically inland rivers & lakes) as the edges are drawn over by the shoreline render. As this is a distance affected render, as the river or lake becomes more distant the shoreline render dissapears. The overall and undesirable affect is that rivers and lakes appear to get wider and wider the further into the distance they get, resulting in a kind of patchwork land archipelago effect. It would almost be better if the shoreline was only rendered at distance, and dissapeared close up but that would kind of defeat the point of it.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 07-16-2011, 03:14 PM
Lixma Lixma is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 201
Default

The very existence of this poll carries more significance than the actual results.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 07-16-2011, 03:38 PM
bongodriver's Avatar
bongodriver bongodriver is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,546
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lixma View Post
The very existence of this poll carries more significance than the actual results.
Of course...everybody knows that 1 poll starter is worth 1000 regular people, therefore everytime somebody wants to gripe.....start a poll.
__________________


Intel Q9550 @3.3ghz(OC), Asus rampage extreme MOBO, Nvidia GTX470 1.2Gb Vram, 8Gb DDR3 Ram, Win 7 64bit ultimate edition
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 07-16-2011, 03:49 PM
furbs's Avatar
furbs furbs is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,037
Default

And if most people vote a certain way bongo, doesn't it make the poll and vote valid?
__________________
Furbs, Tree and Falstaff...The COD killers...
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 07-16-2011, 03:57 PM
bongodriver's Avatar
bongodriver bongodriver is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,546
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by furbs View Post
And if most people vote a certain way bongo, doesn't it make the poll and vote valid?
Yes it does but the poster I quoted seems dissatisfied that the poll doesn't agree with his view and is suggesting the existence of the poll is more a validation of the negative aspect despite the majority positive result.
__________________


Intel Q9550 @3.3ghz(OC), Asus rampage extreme MOBO, Nvidia GTX470 1.2Gb Vram, 8Gb DDR3 Ram, Win 7 64bit ultimate edition
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 07-16-2011, 04:21 PM
furbs's Avatar
furbs furbs is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,037
Default

i would say if 1 in 3 people who paid money for your product were unhappy then i would say its a fail.

especially if you wanted to sell them your next product.
__________________
Furbs, Tree and Falstaff...The COD killers...
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 07-16-2011, 04:27 PM
Jatta Raso Jatta Raso is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 411
Default

i think one needs to pay closer attention to the option description rather then the headline i.e. there is a clear majority who's not really generally happy but rather thinking it needs some improvement (my case). sorry but that's because of the way the options were stated; it's hard to say i'm unhappy, the terrain cannot be described as 'poor' but it does need some improvement. and i am not generally happy, nor do i think anyone mentioning its shortcomings.
so as i see it the results are not that mixed, rather there is one main clear conclusion: terrain is not so bad but it does need some improvement

Last edited by Jatta Raso; 07-16-2011 at 04:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 07-16-2011, 09:58 PM
GOZR GOZR is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: France - USA
Posts: 386
Default

Very unhappy, No bank on rivers at Oleg stated long ago that it will... Old technology for terrain design .. The whole Sim is a disappointment to me at the moment..
__________________
-GOZR

http://www.gozr.net/iocl/
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:02 AM.

Based on a design by: Miner Skinz.com

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 1C Company. All rights reserved.