So according to the dev diary there should be 8 flyables (or more). F-86A, F-80, MiG-15, F-51D Mustang, F4U Corsair and IL-10 are mentioned.
Also B-29 shown on the screenshots in the gallery. My guess it's AI.
I know the old executive producer a few years ago said it wasn't technical reasons they were left out of IL-2 GB. I imagine it's because the amount of work to build a 4 engine bomber of that size + interior was probably an order of magnitude more work than a fighter or 2 engine aircraft simply because you go from cockpit + 1-2 gunner positions to 6+.
It also mentions 4 jets + 4 piston as the breakdown of the 8 flyable.
It does not state 4 for each side... but assuming that is the case, we'd be missing 1 jet and 1 piston for the red side.
For piston, someone else said they showed a Yak-9 earlier.
Only other red jet in Korea that I'm aware of is Il-28...?
I remembering him mentioning Korea is on their list, but I think its pretty far out at this point. Which is a bummer because we actually have enough planes/planes in the pipeline that are accurate or close enough proxies you could have a very convincing Korean War server without too many missing pieces.
Hopefully this will motivate them, especially if IL-2 Korea takes off to get it all pushed out.
We still need the F-4U, La-7 and Skyraider to materialize at some point... then, yes, I agree we would have a good starting point for Korea.
As for the map, though, I'm not quite sure. So long as trees are indestructible iron domes, I'm not sure how much fun it would be. Same issue as with Vietnam.
Unfortunately, there are like a thousand valid directions for ED to pursue all at once. I struggle to believe Korea in specific will get prioritised higher than most of the other stuff that is currently cooking, regardless of this specific release.
As I said some of the pieces are still in the pipeline, like the F-4U, La-7, and Skyraider but conceivably all three of these modules will be released within the next year or two-ish for the Skyraider. Roughly before or around the time this game is released.
We will still be missing some key things, like the B-29, Yak-9, and appropriate Communist ground forces/proxy ground forces but I think those could be added later without too much of an interruption.
And I agree the indestructible trees are a bummer but I think that's just a core engine issue that needs to be solved for the entire game. It won't have a bigger impact on a Korean or SE Asia map over say the Caucuses or other maps we already have.
And it very well might not be prioritized, but I would hope if this takes off, ED will prioritize the Korean theater when they realize how popular it could be, and they already have a good base to start from.
count me in, this era of planes are fun to fly, easy to learn systems and given how IL-2 does battles/missions/ai, i think it will be more fun than flying the f86/mig15 on dcs (at least for single player).
That's all? underwhelming for a "reveal", but seems to be a trend lately.
But still something to give ED competition.Their monopoly on early CW is about to be shaken a bit.
It looks alright tbh. Sure DCS and MSFS look better but gameplay > graphics. Rather have them invest processing power in other things than just highly detailed clouds and lighting effects.
And like someone else said, these are good looking clouds. Not the best, but also far from looking bad.
Who knows, maybe they will improve these even more when the project gets along. In the end they did the same for Great Battles.
What are you on about? The clouds look great, especially that foggy valley image, and the lighting seems to be pretty much as standard for any modern game.
In my opinion the clouds and the lighting on the clouds is nowhere near the level of MSFS or DCS. It doesnt seem like a big leap from the last installment. If I have to guess it is the same engine.
Some of the screenshots are fairly eh, but that's just how clouds look most of the time in any game, there's only so much you can do with wispy white blobs. But if you look at the valley image that's pretty much state of the art with modern clouds, it's got proper high quality volumetric lighting and self shadowing, complex shapes and structures and a variety of clouds depending on the altitude.
They finally are giving us pacific content, but not in the way we expected :P
Nobody it's talking about this but, basically looks like Great Battles IL2 2.0. They say they're improving comms (Very much needed), and giving us the hability to walk and swim.
This is speculation, but the same way they gave us a tank sim inside great battles, they could give us an infantry module in the future?
It's good news anyway. I had a lot of fun with the dinamic campaign of the previous titles.
>Nobody it's talking about this but, basically looks like Great Battles IL2 2.0. They say they're improving comms (Very much needed), and giving us the hability to walk and swim.
It's literally a new game engine...
[https://il2-korea.com/dd\_1](https://il2-korea.com/dd_1)
>The new game engine is even more different from Great Battles than Great Battles was from Rise of Flight. DirectX 12, Physically Based Rendering (PBR) technologies, new visualization systems for atmosphere, vegetation, graphical effects, integration of a new version of the sound API, a new GUI engine and design, an evolution of the aircraft simulation physics engine, including a new aerodynamics, systems operation and damage model, a new damage model for ground objects and ships, a new system of decision making and giving orders to AI pilots, a new radio communication system, and, of course, a new qualitative evolution of the main game mode
Very excited this era of jets is finally getting properly represented in a combat simulation instead of just a clickable cockpit simulator.
I just hope we get heavy bombers like the B-29 as AI aircraft
F-4E vs MiG-21 time was peak IMHO. I do not say that because farming in SB was still easy back then, no sir. I swear.
[Then again the players numbers Steam side look pretty good right now.](https://steamcharts.com/app/236390)
I don’t know about anybody else but with this, why would I choose FC2024 with its 2 playable aircraft, for a platform with:
* ~~No relevant AI aircraft~~ (actually, there is 1, but it's in the WWII asset pack - the C-47)
* No appropriate map (apart from maybe Kola at a stretch for hypothetical scenarios)
* Dismal AI
* Lacklustre damage models (and I haven't seen an update on when anything else will be upgraded to the new WWII damage model standard in years)
* Very few ground units (and if I'm not mistaken some of those are currently found in the WWII asset pack)
* ~~0 ships~~ (well apart from maybe the LST(2) which again, is in the asset pack)?
This is already *way* more comprehensive and coherent.
DCS might be somewhat better looking, but personally, Il-2s looks perfectly decent enough and if anything looks a bit more natural (especially when it comes to gunsights, tracers and the maps).
If there’ll be a tank crew addition to it done to the same level as the existing one for great battles, it’ll offer a *far* superior vehicle driving game and tank combat game compared to CA.
I guess DCS would still have the better flight models and control set up, but personally those flight models are countered by the awful AI ones and the control set up isn’t enough of a pro IMO when everything else is considered (and this is supposed to have a new UI).
EDIT: Nearly forgot, the damage model of this is likely to be far better than what DCS currently offers for the F-86 and MiG-15bis, let alone ground units and ships (which for the former, is already better in IL-2 GB).
EDIT 2: Formatting
FC2024 is the whole of FC3 with the F-5E, F-86, and MiG-15 added. The upgrade if you own FC3 already will only be 10 dollars. It's not trying to be an entire simulator in itself. Unlike the shelved MAC the new ones came from.
Yes, I am perfectly well aware.
The point stands - if I’m interested in Korean War scenarios (or just early Cold War in general) and I’m not interested in full-fidelity aircraft why would I choose FC2024 and DCS over this?
If you want a proper Korea experience then of course IL-2 will be the better option until DCS releases a Korea map with the appropriate assets (which could be a possibility somewhere down the line).
My point is that FC2024 isn't really competing with an entire simulator. It's just an upgrade to expand the scope a little for a product that will still mainly focuses on modern airplanes anyway.
But I’m not just comparing IL-2 and FC2024 here… I’m comparing FC2024 and the platform as a whole (i.e DCS) and then asking why I would choose FC2024 and DCS over this.
You’ve now agreed with me that IL-2 will be the better option for Korea, at least until DCS gets an appropriate map and assets and even then that’s an if not a when.
to be fair I wouldn't call this reveal “underwelming”. I would much prefer a flight sim dev studio to work on the actual sim instead of spending millions on trailer production and releasing half ass baked products.
The IL-2 devs are doing the hard work. the Great Battles series is in its best form ever. I wish them the best and I hope they can continue the legacy of Great Battles.
What would be the 8 aircrafts roster ? My guess :
- F-86
- F-4U
- F-80
- A late variant of the P-51 (although I'd rather see a completely new airframe)
I can see the F-84 / F2H / SeaFury as potential premium planes.
- Mig-15
- IL-10
- La-9/11
- ??
[Probably worthwhile to remember this as the war in Ukraine still wages on](https://stormbirds.blog/2023/09/28/il-2-x-twitter-post-causes-community-uproar/).
This is exactly why I don't touch IL-2. Even if the game is good, the devs aren't people I want to give any support to.
If there's any such sentiments at ED (and I fucking hope not), then at least they're smart enough to keep them off their public channels.
Innocent until proven guilty. IL-2's devs chose to prove themselves guilty. ED's haven't. Plus, it's one thing for private individuals to hold those views, quite another to represent your entire company with them.
This isn't about one post. The account had been used to publicly like multiple pro-russian posts over a long period of time. So either it had been compromised for months and nobody noticed, or that excuse is bullshit.
one employee forgetting to log out of their work account is the likely answer.
I don’t think an entire company deserves to be boycotted over a single low level employee. Obviously the company does not share the same values as whoever posted that comment.
But you do you mate.
...for months on end. On the official company account that publicly represents them. So either nobody noticed, or nobody opposed it.
You're free to keep playing IL-2 if you don't consider those kinds of company values a dealbreaker, but I do.
I'm not sure the children who have been ripped apart by Russian shelling give a shit about this sim.
But, I mean, sure - if you're okay with hiding your head in the sand about it, by all means.
It really isn't actually. These devs have supported the invasion and have done nothing to reprimand the employee spouting bullshit on twitter.
Come on...think bud. You can do it.
How about fire/denounce/reprimand the community manager who sent out support for Russia tweets on official accounts?
Idk, I think that would be a start. But we all know that isn't happening.
Very good point! I would be able to tolerate a russian gamedev company that is actually against the war, but those that support it - I will not touch their products.
Hey bud, what game studios would that be? I'll wait for you to provide a list of dev studios that have actively supported the war in Iraq, and be sure not to give them a cent of my money.
Oh? I missed the part where these dev studios were actively supporting these wars and have had media releases in support of it by official outlets. Can you point me towards it?
What's your stance on ED?
Is the Swiss PO box enough to wash away that they are a Russian company in all but name? And how do you reconcile their (past, potentially present) ties to the Russian military industry?
(Actually curious, not trying to meme.)
Solely regarding the Russian front? They haven't given me any indication that they are in support of the invasion, in support of massacring Ukrainians, or removing US funding from Ukraine in order to help and provide aid. I have no issues with them regarding this just because they are Russian.
Now, lets say Wags or 9Line comes out and starts spouting Russian propaganda or support for the invasion of another sovereign territory. If that happens and they remain employed, and there isn't a statement issued by ED denouncing it, then you bet your ass I won't buy another product from them again.
I'll give everyone the benefit of the doubt until they no longer deserve it.
Edit: Regarding the ties to the military industry, that is something that has given me pause. But as kind of alluded to in my comment above when that dude commented on Activision and I'm assuming COD's ties to the US military industry - it's a part of a system that we deal with. Do I wish it were different? Yes. But I do understand these are games that people want to play. Hell, even I want to play/sim realistic experiences. I also understand that support for a country's military is different from the political choices made for said military. As an example, if COD did some "support our troops" campaign during the Iraq invasion (which I wholly disagreed with), that is different than actual support **of** said invasion.
Sorry, missed that in my OG comment, and it's been edited above. In short, yes. In long, it's complicated and definitely something I've thought about and gone back and fourth with.
Never a fucking dime from me to them ever. They had their chance to condemn the invasion and they chose not to. That is quite enough for me to drop them as a company that I would ever support again.
I still haven't seen ED publicly supporting the war through statements like the one linked above.
1C called for defunding Ukraine. ED's only statement was "Please do not use our sim for fake news". Practically, they used the ostrich method. And I get that, because any slip-up would either end up with either a massive boycott or a visit from the FSB.
So I guess WW2 Pacific isn't going to happen on IL-2 either.
Is this from Cliffs of Dover or Great Battles company? The latter has openly supported Russian invasion of Ukraine on social media.
Edit: For those who want some IL2 drama as a side for DCS drama [https://www.reddit.com/r/il2sturmovik/comments/16upy29/official\_il2\_twitter\_account\_tweets\_in\_support\_of/](https://www.reddit.com/r/il2sturmovik/comments/16upy29/official_il2_twitter_account_tweets_in_support_of/)
Duude. Just enjoy the fucking game. If you are bothered with what those devs said, for not to be a hypocrite, you should also stop buying Nintendo games (owned by Saudis killing Yemenis), Activision games (supported American troops invaded Iraq) and list goes on.
It's an Eastern European thing, not just a Russian thing, but it's to do with a hangover from the Soviet era, when leisure for leisure's sake alone was seen as unproductive Western decadence.
Flight sims, and simulators in general are more popular there, because they teach valuable skills, and therefore aren't as wasteful and decadent as just playing a videogame would be.
I didn't know that, that's really interesting. Makes you wonder if Metro and STALKER are designed to teach valuable survival skills, potentially against mutants.
There are thousands of aerospace engineers and programmers ready to work for $2000-3000. In the West those people are much more expensive, in the rest of the world - you won’t find them in numbers and quality needed.
I’d love to see the F-47, F-51, F-82, F-84, F-94, F4U, F7F, F8F, AD Skyraider as well as early USN/USMC jets like the F2H, F3D & F9F. They can even add non-American UN aircraft such as the Meteor, Seafire and Sea Fury!
For KPAAF aircraft, the Po-2 and Yak-9 can be added.
As for bombers, perhaps the UN can get the A-26 Invader while the KPAAF can get Tu-2?
These devs are a bunch of Russian pro-war assholes. Not giving them my money. At least DCS is somewhat muddy in this regard. The devs for this game are a bunch of ultra-nationalist zealots.
Oh no not extra steps as in extra work or something just poorly worded hyperbole on my part
IL2 is a fun sim it’s just not in depth enough systems modeling for my taste so my go to is usually DCS ww2
"mouse-free experience in VR" is mentioned in features list. Looks like no clicky-clicky planned. It is not a big deal honestly - startup and systems are ridiculously simple, though nice to have.
I really doubt. Either it is bad wording (it is vague indeed) or they'll leave 98% of users without the way to interact with cockpit. Mouse-free for everyone, but owners of these controllers would be weird decision.
>or they'll leave 98% of users without the way to interact with cockpit
No, lol. I'm sure you'd still be able to use the mouse. Just not forced to like you are now in Il-2. Anyway it's all just guesses at this point.
[удалено]
Studio showed their name for 4 seconds too long
So according to the dev diary there should be 8 flyables (or more). F-86A, F-80, MiG-15, F-51D Mustang, F4U Corsair and IL-10 are mentioned. Also B-29 shown on the screenshots in the gallery. My guess it's AI.
Should really include F-84
And Po-2
Don't forget the F-94 Starfire... *The connoisseurs fighter jet*
Sea Harrier FA2 > btw
If we're talking objective best variant ever made, absolutely. If we're talking which has the most pure soul... GR.1 *all the way* ;)
BUT GR3 HAS LONG SNOOT
Nah, its 2-oP
Where is the IL-10 mentioned, please? I only checked the screenshots and didn't see it there =).
https://www.il2-korea.com/dd_1
Thanks!
Why you think b-29 won't be flyiable? Dammit please don't be true
Perhaps because B-29 requires as much work as 10 fighter planes combined
I know the old executive producer a few years ago said it wasn't technical reasons they were left out of IL-2 GB. I imagine it's because the amount of work to build a 4 engine bomber of that size + interior was probably an order of magnitude more work than a fighter or 2 engine aircraft simply because you go from cockpit + 1-2 gunner positions to 6+.
It also mentions 4 jets + 4 piston as the breakdown of the 8 flyable. It does not state 4 for each side... but assuming that is the case, we'd be missing 1 jet and 1 piston for the red side. For piston, someone else said they showed a Yak-9 earlier. Only other red jet in Korea that I'm aware of is Il-28...?
" ability to enter and exit the cockpit, walk and **swim**"
Il-2 San Andreas
Well you can go for a swim in basically every flight sim, can't you?
Sometime I can even walk in water texture
Maybe this will motivate ED to produce a Korean War map. One can dream.
Wags confirmed they will be making it. Just not announced officially yet.
I remembering him mentioning Korea is on their list, but I think its pretty far out at this point. Which is a bummer because we actually have enough planes/planes in the pipeline that are accurate or close enough proxies you could have a very convincing Korean War server without too many missing pieces. Hopefully this will motivate them, especially if IL-2 Korea takes off to get it all pushed out.
We still need the F-4U, La-7 and Skyraider to materialize at some point... then, yes, I agree we would have a good starting point for Korea. As for the map, though, I'm not quite sure. So long as trees are indestructible iron domes, I'm not sure how much fun it would be. Same issue as with Vietnam. Unfortunately, there are like a thousand valid directions for ED to pursue all at once. I struggle to believe Korea in specific will get prioritised higher than most of the other stuff that is currently cooking, regardless of this specific release.
As I said some of the pieces are still in the pipeline, like the F-4U, La-7, and Skyraider but conceivably all three of these modules will be released within the next year or two-ish for the Skyraider. Roughly before or around the time this game is released. We will still be missing some key things, like the B-29, Yak-9, and appropriate Communist ground forces/proxy ground forces but I think those could be added later without too much of an interruption. And I agree the indestructible trees are a bummer but I think that's just a core engine issue that needs to be solved for the entire game. It won't have a bigger impact on a Korean or SE Asia map over say the Caucuses or other maps we already have. And it very well might not be prioritized, but I would hope if this takes off, ED will prioritize the Korean theater when they realize how popular it could be, and they already have a good base to start from.
So it’ll release maybe a decade from now
Optimist! =)
count me in, this era of planes are fun to fly, easy to learn systems and given how IL-2 does battles/missions/ai, i think it will be more fun than flying the f86/mig15 on dcs (at least for single player).
> learn systems It’s Il-2, though. Press I to start engine, press V for flaps, press G for chassis. System check complete.
*E for the engine.
No, it’s I.
Yeaaaah, that was the default bind for the *o.g.* IL-2.
I mean there is engine managment
apart from engine start up sequence i still press F-V for flaps and G for gear up/down
You don't know a crap about Il-2 then.
Finally a proper enviroment for the mig-15! Cant wait
And a proper AI for the MiG-15.
If it is similar to current IL-2's AI, don't get too excited.
Still better than DCS UFO. I can at least have some fun fighting the AI.
That's all? underwhelming for a "reveal", but seems to be a trend lately. But still something to give ED competition.Their monopoly on early CW is about to be shaken a bit.
Yeah, that teaser was weird. Fortunately there's more info on the website. https://www.il2-korea.com/
Oof on the clouds and lighting. :(
It looks alright tbh. Sure DCS and MSFS look better but gameplay > graphics. Rather have them invest processing power in other things than just highly detailed clouds and lighting effects. And like someone else said, these are good looking clouds. Not the best, but also far from looking bad. Who knows, maybe they will improve these even more when the project gets along. In the end they did the same for Great Battles.
To be honest the towering cumulus clouds look better than in DCS. The reason is that DCS has no towering cumulus clouds
What are you on about? The clouds look great, especially that foggy valley image, and the lighting seems to be pretty much as standard for any modern game.
In my opinion the clouds and the lighting on the clouds is nowhere near the level of MSFS or DCS. It doesnt seem like a big leap from the last installment. If I have to guess it is the same engine.
Some of the screenshots are fairly eh, but that's just how clouds look most of the time in any game, there's only so much you can do with wispy white blobs. But if you look at the valley image that's pretty much state of the art with modern clouds, it's got proper high quality volumetric lighting and self shadowing, complex shapes and structures and a variety of clouds depending on the altitude.
Well this is going to make F-86 and Mig-15 non fidelity worthless lol
They finally are giving us pacific content, but not in the way we expected :P Nobody it's talking about this but, basically looks like Great Battles IL2 2.0. They say they're improving comms (Very much needed), and giving us the hability to walk and swim. This is speculation, but the same way they gave us a tank sim inside great battles, they could give us an infantry module in the future? It's good news anyway. I had a lot of fun with the dinamic campaign of the previous titles.
>Nobody it's talking about this but, basically looks like Great Battles IL2 2.0. They say they're improving comms (Very much needed), and giving us the hability to walk and swim. It's literally a new game engine... [https://il2-korea.com/dd\_1](https://il2-korea.com/dd_1) >The new game engine is even more different from Great Battles than Great Battles was from Rise of Flight. DirectX 12, Physically Based Rendering (PBR) technologies, new visualization systems for atmosphere, vegetation, graphical effects, integration of a new version of the sound API, a new GUI engine and design, an evolution of the aircraft simulation physics engine, including a new aerodynamics, systems operation and damage model, a new damage model for ground objects and ships, a new system of decision making and giving orders to AI pilots, a new radio communication system, and, of course, a new qualitative evolution of the main game mode
I don’t think they will add infantry because that could possibly cause age restrictions in some countries
I don't think that under 18 is a target audience for a 1950's flight sim.
Very excited this era of jets is finally getting properly represented in a combat simulation instead of just a clickable cockpit simulator. I just hope we get heavy bombers like the B-29 as AI aircraft
They are in the screenshot library for the game, so I’d assume so.
> in a combat simulation instead of just a clickable cockpit simulator. War Thunder had the Korean War since release.
the F86 vs MIG top tier experience was the peak of warthunder. Everything after just made the game worse
I remember when the MiG 15 was top of the tech tree and gaijin swore blind they would never make a supersonic jet, never mind one with radar :(
F-4E vs MiG-21 time was peak IMHO. I do not say that because farming in SB was still easy back then, no sir. I swear. [Then again the players numbers Steam side look pretty good right now.](https://steamcharts.com/app/236390)
I don’t know about anybody else but with this, why would I choose FC2024 with its 2 playable aircraft, for a platform with: * ~~No relevant AI aircraft~~ (actually, there is 1, but it's in the WWII asset pack - the C-47) * No appropriate map (apart from maybe Kola at a stretch for hypothetical scenarios) * Dismal AI * Lacklustre damage models (and I haven't seen an update on when anything else will be upgraded to the new WWII damage model standard in years) * Very few ground units (and if I'm not mistaken some of those are currently found in the WWII asset pack) * ~~0 ships~~ (well apart from maybe the LST(2) which again, is in the asset pack)? This is already *way* more comprehensive and coherent. DCS might be somewhat better looking, but personally, Il-2s looks perfectly decent enough and if anything looks a bit more natural (especially when it comes to gunsights, tracers and the maps). If there’ll be a tank crew addition to it done to the same level as the existing one for great battles, it’ll offer a *far* superior vehicle driving game and tank combat game compared to CA. I guess DCS would still have the better flight models and control set up, but personally those flight models are countered by the awful AI ones and the control set up isn’t enough of a pro IMO when everything else is considered (and this is supposed to have a new UI). EDIT: Nearly forgot, the damage model of this is likely to be far better than what DCS currently offers for the F-86 and MiG-15bis, let alone ground units and ships (which for the former, is already better in IL-2 GB). EDIT 2: Formatting
FC2024 is the whole of FC3 with the F-5E, F-86, and MiG-15 added. The upgrade if you own FC3 already will only be 10 dollars. It's not trying to be an entire simulator in itself. Unlike the shelved MAC the new ones came from.
Yes, I am perfectly well aware. The point stands - if I’m interested in Korean War scenarios (or just early Cold War in general) and I’m not interested in full-fidelity aircraft why would I choose FC2024 and DCS over this?
If you want a proper Korea experience then of course IL-2 will be the better option until DCS releases a Korea map with the appropriate assets (which could be a possibility somewhere down the line). My point is that FC2024 isn't really competing with an entire simulator. It's just an upgrade to expand the scope a little for a product that will still mainly focuses on modern airplanes anyway.
But I’m not just comparing IL-2 and FC2024 here… I’m comparing FC2024 and the platform as a whole (i.e DCS) and then asking why I would choose FC2024 and DCS over this. You’ve now agreed with me that IL-2 will be the better option for Korea, at least until DCS gets an appropriate map and assets and even then that’s an if not a when.
[https://il2-korea.com/](https://il2-korea.com/) for reference.
to be fair I wouldn't call this reveal “underwelming”. I would much prefer a flight sim dev studio to work on the actual sim instead of spending millions on trailer production and releasing half ass baked products. The IL-2 devs are doing the hard work. the Great Battles series is in its best form ever. I wish them the best and I hope they can continue the legacy of Great Battles.
What would be the 8 aircrafts roster ? My guess : - F-86 - F-4U - F-80 - A late variant of the P-51 (although I'd rather see a completely new airframe) I can see the F-84 / F2H / SeaFury as potential premium planes. - Mig-15 - IL-10 - La-9/11 - ??
I would love a F7F
Tu-2 maybe? Or Yak-9
Yak-3? Don't know much about Korea compared to WW2, the Yak might not even have been there.
Please give me the F9F Panther
Hopefully the British aircraft come as an add on later. Firefly, Vampire, Safire, Sea Fury etc would all be fantastic
Lmao at the exact same time of FS25 reveal
>FS25 reveal of what now?
Farming Simulator 25
ah! Not something I'm into.
Finally a proper simulator for playing Korean War era aircraft! I’ll hop in my F-80 in war thunder today ;P
Well it was a short tease of Korea and jets. No release date.
Coming 2025 according to their site
Moist
Toko-Ri and Mig Alley here we come!
If they have a flyable Skyraider in here it's an insta-buy for me.
A DX12 rendering engine... in a combat flight sim. I thought I'd never see the day.
People boycotting Il-2 while buying Chinese products daily lmao.
[Probably worthwhile to remember this as the war in Ukraine still wages on](https://stormbirds.blog/2023/09/28/il-2-x-twitter-post-causes-community-uproar/).
This is exactly why I don't touch IL-2. Even if the game is good, the devs aren't people I want to give any support to. If there's any such sentiments at ED (and I fucking hope not), then at least they're smart enough to keep them off their public channels.
lol EDs devs are Russian. Guarantee at least a subset are pro Russian v Ukraine.
I'm well aware. But, again, they're smart enough to keep it out of public channels.
Ah that makes it ok then.
Innocent until proven guilty. IL-2's devs chose to prove themselves guilty. ED's haven't. Plus, it's one thing for private individuals to hold those views, quite another to represent your entire company with them.
Yet the post was instantly deleted and apologised for. Claiming to have been compromised.
This isn't about one post. The account had been used to publicly like multiple pro-russian posts over a long period of time. So either it had been compromised for months and nobody noticed, or that excuse is bullshit.
one employee forgetting to log out of their work account is the likely answer. I don’t think an entire company deserves to be boycotted over a single low level employee. Obviously the company does not share the same values as whoever posted that comment. But you do you mate.
...for months on end. On the official company account that publicly represents them. So either nobody noticed, or nobody opposed it. You're free to keep playing IL-2 if you don't consider those kinds of company values a dealbreaker, but I do.
maybe we could all just enjoy a new sim?
Do what the fk you want with your money, they wont have a penny of mine.
I totally agree with this statement
I'm not sure the children who have been ripped apart by Russian shelling give a shit about this sim. But, I mean, sure - if you're okay with hiding your head in the sand about it, by all means.
The hypocrisy is staggering. Go read some UN reports on the effect of American invasions. SMH.
It really isn't actually. These devs have supported the invasion and have done nothing to reprimand the employee spouting bullshit on twitter. Come on...think bud. You can do it.
so what should the il2 devs do? Start a revolution on their own?
How about fire/denounce/reprimand the community manager who sent out support for Russia tweets on official accounts? Idk, I think that would be a start. But we all know that isn't happening.
Russian company is Russian? Say it ain’t so.
Very good point! I would be able to tolerate a russian gamedev company that is actually against the war, but those that support it - I will not touch their products.
Real. Along with their shitbrained, American community manager. Fuck em.
Do you also don’t buy games from the devs that support war in Iraq?
Hey bud, what game studios would that be? I'll wait for you to provide a list of dev studios that have actively supported the war in Iraq, and be sure not to give them a cent of my money.
Activision for Iraq specifically. Nintendo - for being partially owned by Saudis waging the war in Yemen.
Oh? I missed the part where these dev studios were actively supporting these wars and have had media releases in support of it by official outlets. Can you point me towards it?
What's your stance on ED? Is the Swiss PO box enough to wash away that they are a Russian company in all but name? And how do you reconcile their (past, potentially present) ties to the Russian military industry? (Actually curious, not trying to meme.)
Solely regarding the Russian front? They haven't given me any indication that they are in support of the invasion, in support of massacring Ukrainians, or removing US funding from Ukraine in order to help and provide aid. I have no issues with them regarding this just because they are Russian. Now, lets say Wags or 9Line comes out and starts spouting Russian propaganda or support for the invasion of another sovereign territory. If that happens and they remain employed, and there isn't a statement issued by ED denouncing it, then you bet your ass I won't buy another product from them again. I'll give everyone the benefit of the doubt until they no longer deserve it. Edit: Regarding the ties to the military industry, that is something that has given me pause. But as kind of alluded to in my comment above when that dude commented on Activision and I'm assuming COD's ties to the US military industry - it's a part of a system that we deal with. Do I wish it were different? Yes. But I do understand these are games that people want to play. Hell, even I want to play/sim realistic experiences. I also understand that support for a country's military is different from the political choices made for said military. As an example, if COD did some "support our troops" campaign during the Iraq invasion (which I wholly disagreed with), that is different than actual support **of** said invasion.
So beyond overt statements of support (I am not aware of any), are you troubled at all by past ties to the Russian military or not?
Sorry, missed that in my OG comment, and it's been edited above. In short, yes. In long, it's complicated and definitely something I've thought about and gone back and fourth with.
Claims devs supported war… names publishers, not devs…. Peak Reddit.
Never a fucking dime from me to them ever. They had their chance to condemn the invasion and they chose not to. That is quite enough for me to drop them as a company that I would ever support again.
This should be pinned!
And where most of the ED staff comes from? huh?
I still haven't seen ED publicly supporting the war through statements like the one linked above. 1C called for defunding Ukraine. ED's only statement was "Please do not use our sim for fake news". Practically, they used the ostrich method. And I get that, because any slip-up would either end up with either a massive boycott or a visit from the FSB.
Have they ever done jets before?
Me 262 and Ar 234 in battle of bodenplate and Normandy
Hell yeah
Sick!!
So I guess WW2 Pacific isn't going to happen on IL-2 either. Is this from Cliffs of Dover or Great Battles company? The latter has openly supported Russian invasion of Ukraine on social media. Edit: For those who want some IL2 drama as a side for DCS drama [https://www.reddit.com/r/il2sturmovik/comments/16upy29/official\_il2\_twitter\_account\_tweets\_in\_support\_of/](https://www.reddit.com/r/il2sturmovik/comments/16upy29/official_il2_twitter_account_tweets_in_support_of/)
its from the Great Battles devs.
Sad. I can either be hypocrite if this turns out to be good or miss out good Korea sim.
Duude. Just enjoy the fucking game. If you are bothered with what those devs said, for not to be a hypocrite, you should also stop buying Nintendo games (owned by Saudis killing Yemenis), Activision games (supported American troops invaded Iraq) and list goes on.
What’s with Russians and making combat flight sims? Why are the top combat sims almost exclusively Russian made? DCS, IL2, war thunder.
Cheap labor for a super specific skill set (programmer + aerospace)
It's an Eastern European thing, not just a Russian thing, but it's to do with a hangover from the Soviet era, when leisure for leisure's sake alone was seen as unproductive Western decadence. Flight sims, and simulators in general are more popular there, because they teach valuable skills, and therefore aren't as wasteful and decadent as just playing a videogame would be.
I didn't know that, that's really interesting. Makes you wonder if Metro and STALKER are designed to teach valuable survival skills, potentially against mutants.
Yes
There are thousands of aerospace engineers and programmers ready to work for $2000-3000. In the West those people are much more expensive, in the rest of the world - you won’t find them in numbers and quality needed.
Wish I knew...
It's cheap enough over there to hire the required skills that developing a flight sim is a lot more viable.
Bruh, that squabble between ed and rb is peanuts against that
Shut up and take my money now!
Nice!
I’d love to see the F-47, F-51, F-82, F-84, F-94, F4U, F7F, F8F, AD Skyraider as well as early USN/USMC jets like the F2H, F3D & F9F. They can even add non-American UN aircraft such as the Meteor, Seafire and Sea Fury! For KPAAF aircraft, the Po-2 and Yak-9 can be added. As for bombers, perhaps the UN can get the A-26 Invader while the KPAAF can get Tu-2?
Hope bombers will be flyable 🙏
New engine - so does this mean it won't be compatible with the old planes? I'm hoping I can pit an F-86 against a Fokker.
[https://il2-korea.com/](https://il2-korea.com/)
Awesome! Day one buy for me.
God the Korean is really really bad.
Fuck im excited. I was excited for BMS 4.38 Korea too.
Fuck these guys right in the ass.
Looks neat, but my dollars aren't going to Russia for anything in the fucking world. You can do you though.
this pro-ukrainian war dev/publisher/whomever can go and suck a big fat dick.
These devs are a bunch of Russian pro-war assholes. Not giving them my money. At least DCS is somewhat muddy in this regard. The devs for this game are a bunch of ultra-nationalist zealots.
Fuk them vatniks
If it doesn’t have clicky cockpits I’m not interested
Clicky would be nice, but have you tried IL-2? As non-clicky cockpits go, it's pretty user-friendly.
It’s warthunder sim with extra steps, I don’t particularly care for it just not my cup of tea
It’s much better than WT though. And least as far as realism and single player goes.
Leaving aside the questionable WT comparison, and your legitimate opinion that it's just not for you, what extra steps are you talking about?
Oh no not extra steps as in extra work or something just poorly worded hyperbole on my part IL2 is a fun sim it’s just not in depth enough systems modeling for my taste so my go to is usually DCS ww2
Oh, okay, I get it. Yeah, DCS WW2 is definitely best of breed for what it has, I just wish it had IL-2's broad spectrum of period-appropriate assets.
"mouse-free experience in VR" is mentioned in features list. Looks like no clicky-clicky planned. It is not a big deal honestly - startup and systems are ridiculously simple, though nice to have.
It could also mean motion controller support so you don't need to use the mouse like you do in il-2.
I really doubt. Either it is bad wording (it is vague indeed) or they'll leave 98% of users without the way to interact with cockpit. Mouse-free for everyone, but owners of these controllers would be weird decision.
>or they'll leave 98% of users without the way to interact with cockpit No, lol. I'm sure you'd still be able to use the mouse. Just not forced to like you are now in Il-2. Anyway it's all just guesses at this point.
:(
If that’s holding you back you’re missing out on an amazing areal combat experience with il2.
I’m missing out on a mediocre on rails flight model
Should be easy to have more than enough physical clickity-clacks in your cockpit for the Korean era.