At the beginning let’s make the bombers in the game sensible and playable, and not just maybe I will fly or maybe die after 3 minutes, and the cockpits should be made by the players and gaijn should give them something for it, the same as it was with the he111, in addition to that I would like gaijn to introduce community maps that players would vote for and the best maps, They would appear in the game, because everyone knows that Gaijn doesn’t know how to make maps.
1 Like
I couldn’t say better ! You said all.
Well… put it this way… it takes about one month to make a 3D fighter model from scratch, roughly about two months for a 3D bomber model…
It is about one month for a 3D / high detailed fighter cockpit
For light bombers at least, it is about two months for a 3D / high detailed cockpit
Now… for a B-17, you have something like 10-12 compartments including the 9 or so gunner stations, all of which would need to be modeled since you would see most of those compartments from the cockpit
So, a 3D / high detailed B-17 cockpit is very complex and very time consuming… it would take something like 15 months to two years+ to complete… maybe half that time if you put more artists into that project… meanwhile you drastically reduce development time for the game and resources for up to 2 years
So, really it is taking up a ton of resources for something that is not used that much nor do players really care about the details for something that they rarely use
Meanwhile that 15 months to 2 years of development time / and or removing one or two 3D artist for a single project, would be better used towards 10-24 other projects
So… even you can see what would be more worthwhile… it is not a question of too much work, it is more of a question of where or what would you better spend those resources on
Players are always welcome to make their own cockpits, that is what War Thunder. Live is for in the first place… players can make their own Aircraft/Tanks/Ships/whatever else and put it up on WT.Live, the same goes for other content such as 3D Cockpits, and if Gaijin Developers like what they see on WT.Live, then the Devs can contact those Authors/Content Creators to talk about using them in game
That is what the (RSP) Revenue Share support program is all about
Players can also share their own maps on Wt.Live, tho I do not think it is supported on the RSP ?
Then they shouldn’t still be called placeholders for one, since they are not, and with how neglected bombers have been for the last decade players have never been given a reason to care about bomber anything, let alone cockpits, which is a consequence of the neglect, not a cause to neglect them, which is the type of reversed logic that happens more in the game.
As for something like a B-17, I question if an instrument panel is 2 years of work.
And is it any wonder people do not use bomber cockpits when this is what it looks like? I’m fairly certain there aren’t even windows in this thing as I fail to see them.
This looks like cardboard, although that would probably do better than the current damage model on bombers anyways which is paper at best.
There surely is a middle ground between 2 years of development and just creating cockpits that aren’t offensive to be inside of.
And speaking of offensive, you pay $30 for this, half the price of a triple A game and this is what you get.
I do not expect Gaijin to spend 2 years on every cockpit, but I do expect Gaijin to put in some effort to make it look acceptable and have some standards for the game and themselves, I want them to take pride in their game and their product and feel shame when seeing the stuff they push and realize this extremely low bar has become an acceptable standard for them.
You’re not going to tell me that this is what cockpits have to look like and this is the best Gaijin can do and that the only alternative is 2 years of work to make this look like something other than this mess.
8 Likes
Gaijin: no, we need only low effort.
Gaijin hates bombers so don’t expect any quality
4 Likes
We need Quality, not Quantity…
Why not chill on how many vehicles Gaijin releases per year, and work on improving the hundreds of vehicles we already have? Along with general gameplay.
How many vehicles does one game need?
5 Likes
I understand the desire to make a completely detailed interior from what is visible, but this is obviously not practical and as you stated a general waste of resources. I dare say players can overall forgive lack of detail in some out of the way or hard to see areas as long as the panel in front of them and all relevant controls are modeled, with some details sprinkled around the immediate area. For example, the F-14’s copilot panel is not modeled at all, it is just blank. However, unless you are in VR or move the in game camera backward, you won’t see that. This does not mean that the modeler did not do a thorough job though, it shows that resources were focused on where it matters to the player. I believe this same process can be applied to all current placeholder cockpits.
4 Likes
Personally, I don’t know much about creating games, but I will give one example, the Il-2 1946, which has a lot of bombers and planes, each of them has a very detailed cockpit, everything in it works and can be damaged, the Il-2 is very an old game, but graphically after adding graphics mods it looks nice, the physical and visual damage model is several classes better than the previous one, jet engines can break in half or fall off, hulls break in different ways, various devices on the board break, etc. and in this game, which has several classes better technology and for this you can use AI that is coming to the market, it cannot make a cockpit for a bomber, it is ridiculous, of course, in my opinion, how could the creators of il-2 be able to do so much so quickly and so nicely , on such an old engine and limited technology?
Could always ask them.
Well, you answered your own question
I was making very detailed skins for another game in the early 2000s, around when the first version of that game you mention had come out and… well yes… those times were much more simple… I even had to fake certain details on skins to make the models look more detailed than they really were because of the modeling and gaming standard limitations…
These days tho… it is far more complicated and complex… there are much higher gaming standards and technology to take into consideration, and Gaijin has been on the front lines of the gaming standards
As I mentioned tho… if players wish to make detailed cockpits or models, they are very welcome to do so on WT.Live… and if something catches the eyes of the Developers, then certain things can end up in game due to our RSP
I acknowledge the workload involved in creating intricate models, but in the interim, we should strive for a compromise that harmonizes both aesthetics and simplicity of execution. Presently, the quality of our cockpit designs significantly deviates from the optimus for a game of this caliber. They lack any distinctive character, devoid of textures and composed of low-polygonal shapes. It is unacceptable that our minimum requirement for a model’s depiction is merely a replication of levers fashioned from elementary geometric forms; a cylinder attached to a sphere, a task that can be completed within seconds using any modeling software.
3 Likes
On the topic of resources, can you not going forward as the game is both increasing in size and popularity as time goes on. Specifically set aside developers to start working on the backlog of missing features for vehicles and cockpits/interiors which would help elevate the completeness and urganomics of the product that is War Thunder? I started playing War Thunder in 2013 as a bomber player specifically hoping that as time went forward from the Lancaster and B-24’s edition that bomber cockpits would be added as we were told year after year that they were part time placeholders as the name is provided. And that someday soon I and many others would start to see lovely fidelity cockpits just like those seen in the F-111, Buccaneer and others.
But we are yet to see this, just as the edition of more bombers has stagnated since the Avro Shackletons Edition. Is there anychance what I suggested may occur to help as a quality of life progression towards us who play the game for many of it’s features but mainly the ability to play bombers.
(For extra information many of us bomber players have had to go to gamemodes such as pilotage since the main gamemodes are no longer useable for events or tech tree progression in an efficient matter unless you conform to the 5 minute combat time of fighter players).
1 Like
I found funny that everythimg BUT the bomber cockpits are modeled, really find sad and infuriating about “we will add bomber cockpits” then retracting since its too much work (even if they’re payed to do that) but they can pump 100 premium packs a year with HQ textures and historical accurate studf too.
2 Likes
It’s rather difficult for bombers to be more popular when maps are often designed with fighters in mind.
Interceptors, twin engines, night fighters, etc are often rarely in consideration. When the maps are designed.
Long Range Bombers yes are meant to be for strategical targets however currently the only targets we have are 4 bomb bases. Rather than need to bomb this said objective is to open a pathway for your on-the-ground tank forces. While placing a giant bomb point hover above it. But I digress.
3 Likes
In my experience in 3D modelling, it’s the textures that eat up time. I have already created very complex models within a day. But in the end, of course, it’s an effort that few players will see. Simply because of the smaller number of players in the sim sector. BUT I still think it’s important to take these players and their wishes seriously.
As a player of games like DCS and FS, I can understand the desire.
3 Likes
This is the thing interesting thing, If Gaijin reached out to the community and requested them to make cockpit textures, animation work, sounds, etc. For the ones missing in the game. I bet many upon many would be willing to do so and paying them would go even farther on expected.
7 Likes
I agree, but I think it is also because the bomber gameplay is lacking, compared to fighter or CAS-gameplay. Are there any plans to experiment with things, offerring different gameplay, which could improve the situation and make this additional work worthwile?
Also it could be a DLC/Pack etc, regarding the monetization, so it is less about either doing 1 bomber cockpit, or the cockpit for 3 or more other planes.
1 Like
No DLC’s packs the heck? that’s a one-way ticket to piss off the community even more.