IL-2 Sturmovik: Battle of Stalingrad

 PC
User Score
6.1

Mixed or average reviews- based on 279 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 147 out of 279
  2. Mixed: 35 out of 279
  3. Negative: 97 out of 279
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. trident_109
    Oct 27, 2014
    7
    I've been an early access member of the IL2:BoS flight sim since the beginning. I wholeheartedly jumped in based upon my previous experience with 777 Studios' Rise of Flight game. It was a product I greatly enjoyed and despite some short falls they weren't anything that affected my enjoyment of the game. Eventually a decent campaign system was released and I was a relatively happy camper.I've been an early access member of the IL2:BoS flight sim since the beginning. I wholeheartedly jumped in based upon my previous experience with 777 Studios' Rise of Flight game. It was a product I greatly enjoyed and despite some short falls they weren't anything that affected my enjoyment of the game. Eventually a decent campaign system was released and I was a relatively happy camper. So when 777 Studios was tasked with creating the next iteration of the venerable IL2 I was confident I'd get a quality product that would provide years of entertainment.

    Where do I begin with this game? Well the obvious is the graphics. It's the first thing you notice and for the most part they look satisfactory to very good. I'm not fond of the cockpits but find that the atmosphere effects and ground details are pretty nice.

    Flight models? They are very functional and remove my disbelief enough so that I CAN imagine I'm flying a LaGG 3 on the western front. Most of the sounds are excellent, but as has been noted on several posts, the hit sounds of bullets striking your craft are inconsistent. Plane engines all sound realistic. Subtle things like the sounds of brake pistons and canopy hatches add to the realism.

    AI is a mixed bag. I don't consider my talent to be expert flyer/marksmen so I do get a challenge from the fighters, but not so much the bombers. Take it for what you will. AI is subjective and one man's hard may be another's easy.

    Where I fault the game (and it is a big fault because I'm a single player) is the campaign. I feel the game is Head and Shoulders above others because the it feels like the campaign has me applying, lathering, rinsing, and repeating over and over again. The campaign generator is just that, but instead of in-depth, living, breathing missions I get quick missions with three access points and minimal enemy interaction. The runways are thread bare and lifeless. I lead a flight of four and intercept two 111s and maybe one or two 109. Go home, land, and do it all over again.

    I can live with the unlocks, though I hope they don't continue this trend on further releases.

    There have been numerous ideas on the IL2:BoS forum where improvements can be made and I hope 1C/777 look into them.

    There is no mission editor yet and I hope that when it's released the community will get the plethora of user made campaigns we enjoyed in the original IL2. We'll see. Originally 777 wasn't going to release it at all but after community uproar they changed their mind. We'll see.

    My personal and final grade would be a 6. The campaign really does affect my desire to play and as it is I only fire up IL2:BoS a few times a week. I longingly look at my Track IR and CH Products HOTAS and just say, "Naw. I'm not interested." So much is good to very good, and my SIX is a subjective grade, so I rate it based on my likes and how they affect my desire to play.

    My NUMBERED Metacritic grade is 7. I'd like to see if 777 takes the opinions and desires of the community and improves on the good solid base of this game to the status of the original IL2.    … Expand
  2. Smurfy1967
    Oct 23, 2014
    6
    Everythings there for this title to be a future classic. The externals are very very well done, the landscape and general scenary are what you`d expect of a snow covered Stalingrad area. The little extras like the cylinder firing flashes etc etc are all very well done.

    The cockpits imo are not that great, definitley not as good as CloD or DCS and that`s a shame, they are dull bland and    Everythings there for this title to be a future classic. The externals are very very well done, the landscape and general scenary are what you`d expect of a snow covered Stalingrad area. The little extras like the cylinder firing flashes etc etc are all very well done.

    The cockpits imo are not that great, definitley not as good as CloD or DCS and that`s a shame, they are dull bland and lifeless almost as if someone has thrown a veil over them, possibly the SSAO but without full access to all the graphics options you are left with how they think you should see the game whereas a lot of us want to be able to tweak as we like, bad decision number 1 that one.

    I can`t comment of the FM or DM as I don`t spend hours analysing such stuff on the internet, the planes feel as though you`re flying them which is good enough for me. Again though the community threw a lot of info into the ring and were met with a less than welcoming response. They sent a project manager with poor English and a sarcastic bias to answer questions and then post responses usually comically negative to claims that were made. When you refuse to listen to someone who has flown all the recently built Yak 3 and 9`s you have serious self importance issues.

    The decision to force everyone to play the Sigle Player Campaign which is nothing more than some QMB style missions arranged into a campaign with childish Experience Points and Weapons unlocks is baffling to even the most ardent fan.

    For 80 weeks we were predominantly onboard with the direction BoS was taking, then the unlocks and XP bomb was dropped and hell broke loose on the forums, threats, forum tantrums between major devs and punters, threads locked , posts deleted, all left a bad taste in the mouth. The general feeling for myself is that they want control over everything and the paying customers opinion matters not if it doesn`t fall into line with their philosophy. 80 good PR weeks tainted by 3 spectacularly bad ones.

    Despite 90+ % expressing a less than favourable response to the unlocks poll, they still implemented it!!!! approx 1000 total voters over all btw. That says a lot to me, a real **** you attitude regards players wishes cannot be good for relations, the poll was a sham btw, never had a hope of anything being done.

    Anyway I personally won`t let three bad weeks ruin my enjoyment, it`s a good quality product that will only get better if the Devs wake up and realise a lot of us have been playing these games for years , we know what we want, we know what we like and some even know what they`re talking about. Get rid of the unlock farce, give us FMB and DS and the majority will be back fully behind you.

    Anyone voting less than 4 probably has issues beyond the game imo.    … Expand
  3. Gammelpreusse
    Oct 24, 2014
    6
    This is not a SIM! I'ts an aircraft "game", as said by the developers themselves. So just that you know what you get here. I will review this sim from a simmers perspective flying IL2: CloD and DCS, who wants "more" depth in a Sim, not less. IL2 1946 players though will feel right at home here.

    + Very nice graphics, all optimized to create a huge feeling of immersion of winter in    This is not a SIM! I'ts an aircraft "game", as said by the developers themselves. So just that you know what you get here. I will review this sim from a simmers perspective flying IL2: CloD and DCS, who wants "more" depth in a Sim, not less. IL2 1946 players though will feel right at home here.

    + Very nice graphics, all optimized to create a huge feeling of immersion of winter in Stalingrad 1942
    + Stable release, most bugs worked out
    + very nice aircraft models, just a bit too reflective skins

    +/- solid, but not exceptional FM, gives the feeling of flying a much lighter plane then what a WW2 warbird (loaded 3-7 tons, depending on the ftype of fighter plane) actually was, has some quirks still to be worked out (landing bounce, low speed stall characteristics, roll rates of several aircraft, max speed in all aircraft etc.) Feels more like flying an ultralight, but is still a lot better then War Thunder.

    - no campaign deserving that name
    - unlock system/level system, giving the impression of an arcade game
    - simplified damage model/Hollywood feel -> quick successes
    - simplified CEM (same level as old IL2)
    - no mission builder (yet)
    - no user made skins (yet)

    So far, a 6 with a tendency to 7, though with lots of potential for better ratings. Will check the game again in a year and see what changed. As that, I can recommend this sim for beginners, or people coming over from War Thunder seeking more of a challenge and immersive expirience. It's solid in it's core, needs some optimisation. But in it's complexity a step back from IL2 CloD and a huge step away from DCS. I'd personally call it a transition sim on the way to more challenges.    … Expand
  4. Arealsimmer
    Nov 1, 2014
    5
    This game is an Arcade with a dash of simulation. The unlocks IMO are a joke and a ploy to target a certain audience. I think this game could have been better and its a shame it has the IL2 stamp on it.
  5. Maax
    Nov 16, 2014
    4
    BoS may be a good flight sim in the core but the behavior and outright contempt for their core players, who has been around for years enjoying the true IL2 Sturmovik series takes away any good that can be found, with a bit of searching mind you, from the game.

    Wont repeat the negatives as you only have to read all the other scores that are not 8-10.
  6. rss334
    Oct 30, 2014
    3
    Single Player is pretty bad. Bought and backed this primarily for the single player, did not turn out as expected and the end development was rushed to get it out. The company who made this was 1C, same company who abandoned Cliffs of Dover. They will tell you it was a different set of people but it's the same company, the same drama, and the same results. Official forums are NaziSingle Player is pretty bad. Bought and backed this primarily for the single player, did not turn out as expected and the end development was rushed to get it out. The company who made this was 1C, same company who abandoned Cliffs of Dover. They will tell you it was a different set of people but it's the same company, the same drama, and the same results. Official forums are Nazi style moderation and anyone who has anything negative to say is moderated and removed.

    While the graphics are decent, the flight model and damage model are not up to par. Additionally the single player campaign is tedious and boring. Whoever decided to charge 80 dollars for a game then make you unlock everything is out of their minds. Buy Cliff of Dover with the Team Fusion Mod, it's a better game at a much cheaper price.

    Due to the single player experience this game fails at what it tried to set out to do.    … Expand
  7. Blade_Meister
    Oct 27, 2014
    4
    Okay, this is my second review for IL2 Battle of Stalingrad. My first review, along with ever other review of BOS 90% complete was deleted at 1C/777 insistence. It seems the devs didn't like the backlash of negative reviews after some of the final rounds of updates. So, here we go again.
    1. Game Engine = 7 Bos works right out of the box. The updating system works well and is easy. The    Okay, this is my second review for IL2 Battle of Stalingrad. My first review, along with ever other review of BOS 90% complete was deleted at 1C/777 insistence. It seems the devs didn't like the backlash of negative reviews after some of the final rounds of updates. So, here we go again.
    1. Game Engine = 7 Bos works right out of the box. The updating system works well and is easy. The true strength has not been thoroughly tested in the consumer market because the D Server has just been released, so this remains to be seen. How many player and AI planes and objects that can be used in a functional mission is not known yet. Once FME is released, which may be up to 6 months from now per 1C/777, the strength of the DNE good or bad will be displayed.
    2. Graphics and Sound = 6 The games looks nice and gives pretty good frame rates(40 FPS for me on Ultra). There is nothing new here graphically(dx9c) except that BOS uses a full snow map with vary little on it in the way of objects, which is probably correct for Stalingrad during WWII.Graphics are set through 1C/777 designated presets, no custom graphics settings. Low, Balanced, High, and Ultra are the presets. Antialaising and Gama-correction are available. The sound in BOS is good with the usual setting of low, medium and high bit rate.
    3. Plane models = 7 They are nice but they do not compare to either DCS or CLOD plane models. The damage modeling again is nice, but does not compare with either of the above mentioned Sims. As of now only 1C/777 can add skins to BOS. There are 10 skins per plane that have to be unlocked through SP missions.(more on this later). No Nose art.
    4. Flight Model = 6 BOS gives a good feeling of flying but it still feels something like flying the ROF FMs. a very lite feeling. It is not a convincing metal plane heavyweight feel. It is very bouncy unless you set deep curves in the control settings. Landings are quite bad. BOS is way to bouncy on each plane, this really needs attention IMHO.
    5..Map = 5 Here again it looks nice. It has very little in the way of trees(trees do have collision model, a +)or other objects. Stalingrad itself is modeled and looks average at best. The sky and depiction of the 24 hour lighting(Sun) cycle are absolutely excellent, one of the best in any Sim yet. The weather effects are standard.
    6.Gui = 4 The Gui looks very "Arcade" and plain. There is no theme once you are in the SP, MP , QMB or Campaign selection screens. The Campaign has a tiny theme in the Campaign selection screens, and video intros for each stage of the Campaign. These videos are CG graphics and while good graphic quality is there, they are quite unrealistic and plastic feeling. In game videos would have been much better.
    7. SP, QMB and Campaign. = 2 There are 14 SP missions, they are fair at best. QMB is straight forward and a good place to practice, but no meat as far as building immersive missions. The Campaign is awful, that is the only true way to describe it. Non Historical Squads at non Historical Airfields, cannot custom name your pilot, there is no storyline and the missions are non connected and generated by the QMB. The way points are Home Field, Action point and Exit points(completely arcade). All planes come with basic weapons for SP and MP. During the Campaign you accumulate Xpoints by flying missions, Intercept, Escort, Ground attack, Ground Support and Bombing. These missions either consist of takeoff start or air start and fly to action point and fight enemy there. You may encounter some miscellaneous flights to fight, but that is rare. It is estimated to take about 60-80 hours of flying in Campaign mode to unlock all plane upgrades(see BOS Forums). THIS IS REQUIRED IF YOU WANT TO USE PLANE UPGRADES IN MP. This Single player and Campaign mode is very "Arcade" and does not even measure up to the original IL2 Single player and Campaign immersion or challenge. IMHO, this is the worst Campaign in a Flight Sim I have ever played.
    8. Replay Ability = 2 Other than MP, BOS has no replay ability as of now. Of course if and when user content can be added to BOS this could change. The Campaign mode is just plain boring and is best flown in very small doses.
    Conclusion: Score = 4(at best) THIS IS NOT THE IL2 SUCCESSOR THAT THE DEVS PROMISED, NOT EVEN CLOSE. The cover art for BOSs DVD box says," IL2 Sturmovik: Battle of Stalingrad, The Legend Returns." IMHO, The Legend is not back. A quote from one of Lofts' initial interviews during the beginning of pre-purchase but before production of BOS had begun,"And to the experienced avia-sim players I want to say: “Don’t worry! We know how to make our sim the way you’ll like it." I have owned and flown every IL2 iteration from the first IL2 to BOS, and I can comfortably say 1C/777 have not lived up to there word. I supported BOS from a before production start EA purchase and 1C/777 had a pretty good game going until 3 weeks ago when they locked everything down. This is an Arcade game.    … Expand
  8. Jaklar
    Oct 23, 2014
    6
    Been playing simulators since "Jet" on the Atari 400, RoF fanatic (with all planes owned)...so I was really looking forward to the devs getting a hold of this franchise and hopefully moving this long-troubled franchise in the right direction. Such is not the case, I fear. Game feels half-assed, hampered with deeply questionable design choices, an intrusive and inelegant interface, datedBeen playing simulators since "Jet" on the Atari 400, RoF fanatic (with all planes owned)...so I was really looking forward to the devs getting a hold of this franchise and hopefully moving this long-troubled franchise in the right direction. Such is not the case, I fear. Game feels half-assed, hampered with deeply questionable design choices, an intrusive and inelegant interface, dated graphics and an uninspiring campaign system.

    The flight-models are good...but that's about it. Doesn't merit the price tag and ultimately feels like a huge step backwards for both the dev and the IL-2 franchise.    … Expand
  9. JPRuri
    Oct 28, 2014
    3
    Synopsis: a mediocre game based on an old but solid engine (RoF), dumbed down to dumb for the masses.

    BoS is a bit muddled and feels as though it has suffered from a development tug of war between making a simple blaster to appeal to the masses, or a flight simulator for the smaller core audience. As it stands it on release, BoS does neither element well and unfortunately falls foul to    Synopsis: a mediocre game based on an old but solid engine (RoF), dumbed down to dumb for the masses.

    BoS is a bit muddled and feels as though it has suffered from a development tug of war between making a simple blaster to appeal to the masses, or a flight simulator for the smaller core audience. As it stands it on release, BoS does neither element well and unfortunately falls foul to mediocrity. It doesn’t help that it is based on an old direct x9 game engine that is already showing its age (RoF engine).

    The IL-2 brand name, the developers previous RoF tittle and PR suggest a good solid ww2 flight simulator but simple engine start-ups and management, unlocks and experience points for munitions and skins, the ‘Michael Bay Hollywood’ damage model and air-quake style servers limited to 32 players smacks more of a simple but flashy arcade game. Single player content is poor and revolves around getting the aforementioned experience points needed in both single and multiplayer and what’s worse is there is no public mission editor for players to make new content. Worse still, the developers have attempted to hold players to ransom, no mission editor in the future for groups that critique and even a now deleted threat that the game would be cancelled if negative critical scores prevailed hence the many 9 and 10 scores here.

    There are some positives, the graphics aren’t at all bad and the general feeling of flight is rendered ok (despite some colourful bugs), however there just isn’t enough to this title to make it stand-out against the competition never mind justify the price tag for an ageing game engine. Simply put War Thunder does the arcade thing better and Cliffs of Dover and DCS are more detailed simulators - BoS feels lost in the wilderness.

    I bought in as a “Founder” to support BoS and I wanted to like this game. BoS is not terrible but it doesn’t do anything particularly well either and taking into account the contempt the developers have shown for much of their fanbase I give this a 3/10.    … Expand
  10. Siggi
    Dec 3, 2014
    1
    Soviet biased FMs, broken German plane FMs, a laughably shallow DM, an arcade campaign that requires the player to unlock components he's already paid for, no mission editor, hit-sounds that still don't work, inability to tune graphics to best suit ones personal computer hardware and nobody playing online. This arcade game is a travesty and a cynical betrayal of the revered IL2 name itSoviet biased FMs, broken German plane FMs, a laughably shallow DM, an arcade campaign that requires the player to unlock components he's already paid for, no mission editor, hit-sounds that still don't work, inability to tune graphics to best suit ones personal computer hardware and nobody playing online. This arcade game is a travesty and a cynical betrayal of the revered IL2 name it stole to try and con sales. Avoid it.… Expand
  11. CWMV
    Dec 6, 2014
    0
    In early access I was super stoked, but then it was released and the devs showed the utter contempt they have for us, the end user.
    This game, and I do mean game as it is not a simulator of the same level as CoD, was released with awful options that force boring game play with a crap campaign that is not historical in any way, more a series of unrelated single missions.
    Further you must    In early access I was super stoked, but then it was released and the devs showed the utter contempt they have for us, the end user.
    This game, and I do mean game as it is not a simulator of the same level as CoD, was released with awful options that force boring game play with a crap campaign that is not historical in any way, more a series of unrelated single missions.
    Further you must play through this abortion in order to unlock equipment and even skins for the aircraft. None of which are available for single or multiplayer use until you have ground them all out in the previously mentioned terrible campaign that is included in the release.
    And whats more it is impossible to tailor this game to your system. Your options are low, balanced, high and ultra. That is it. Apparently Loft has it in his head that we as a community are too stupid to use this software properly.
    In summation, here is an excerpt from one of my posts at BoS forums:

    "I can't select the best graphics settings for my rig.
    I cannot play a coherent unit based historical campaign.
    I cannot create a coherent unit based historical campaign.
    I cannot play the coherent unit based campaigns created by others.
    I am forced to play a garbage campaign in order to unlock common front line mission essential equipment and skins.
    When a work around is found to the above by running at x16 speed the devs punish us by limiting it to x2.
    I cannot create skins (to my knowledge anyhow, might be wrong).
    I dislike online play.

    So what, exactly, is there left for me to do with this 100 usd boondoggle?"

    I should have used the $100 somewhere else.    … Expand
  12. Tree_uk
    Nov 22, 2014
    2
    Good graphics is about all this has going for it. Rubbish offline campaign, xp points, grinding for unlocks, online is dead, devs treating the fanbase with contempt and threatening to close the game unless things improve.
    Not worth the $60/$90 they are asking, when war thunder is free and with a lot more content.
  13. Jingle_Bellz
    Dec 10, 2014
    0
    Genuinely poor effort. Really bad design decisions and intransigent and combative devs.

    Money down the drain. Wish I could get my money back but not going to happen.
  14. dburne
    Dec 6, 2014
    3
    I have been playing combat flight sims for many years, started with the original Red Baron for DOS. I owned the original IL2, along with all it's expansions up to Il2 1946, along with many other WWII combat sims. The IL2 series remained my favorite.

    I purchased the Early Access Premium version of BOS when it became available, and participated all throughout the Early Access period.    I have been playing combat flight sims for many years, started with the original Red Baron for DOS. I owned the original IL2, along with all it's expansions up to Il2 1946, along with many other WWII combat sims. The IL2 series remained my favorite.

    I purchased the Early Access Premium version of BOS when it became available, and participated all throughout the Early Access period. While I had some smaller concerns, I really liked what I saw, and had very high hopes for this sim. I was and am a fan of ROF, and with BOS being developed by the same guys, I was very excited. Until they released the Single Player system upon us, shortly before the official release. Last time I played it , was the day after the SP was released to us.

    The XP grinding, unlocking items, unlocking airfields, no continuity of a player's career, only what appear to be some QMG missions thrown together, just does not do anything for me - in fact, turns me off to the sim completely. Throw in the graphics presets only in the options - 4 presets one has to choose, with no ability to customize any individual items like bloom, hdr, shadows, terrain, etc. Plus no ability to customize globally difficulty settings for the SP campaign. Want to fly with unlimited ammo while you are cutting your teeth on the sim? Not going to happen.

    If one likes power ups, unlocking items ( that you have already paid for), etc - then you will likely like this sim. If you are more used to what you got with previous WWII combat flight sims in terms of campaigns, careers, then you may well be disappointed like myself. Especially if you are coming from the IL-2 Series itself. I myself just can not see this sim as they have billed it " The continuation of the legendary IL-2 Series".

    I am giving BOS a score of 3 here. I feel that is generous on my part, it does have nice graphics and for the most part the flight physics seem really good, but what pulls that score down from me is - I no longer play it, and have no desire to play it in it's current state. I will keep an eye on it going forward and see if maybe something changes that might lure me back to it.    … Expand
  15. Beebaboo
    Oct 22, 2014
    6
    A good core is hampered by poor design choices in IL-2: Battle of Stalingrad. As I play the game, more and more it feels like a shinier version of Wings of Prey or Birds of Steel for the xbox 360.

    Yes, this game has one of the best physics engines in flight simulator history. All the aircraft have their own unique "feeling" that make learning each one's nuances very satisfying and    A good core is hampered by poor design choices in IL-2: Battle of Stalingrad. As I play the game, more and more it feels like a shinier version of Wings of Prey or Birds of Steel for the xbox 360.

    Yes, this game has one of the best physics engines in flight simulator history. All the aircraft have their own unique "feeling" that make learning each one's nuances very satisfying and fun. The Engine-related systems are all modeled as you would expect in a simulator like this, although the lack of clickable cockpits is very disappointing.

    The graphics are very good in this game, with reflections on the planes/glass, realistic smoke and fire, excellent lighting effects, and clouds that look almost real. The sound engine is a work of beauty as well, when it works properly.

    Unfortunately, there are some big problems with this game. First, and most obvious is the lack of any type of campaign or career mode. The built in "campaign" is only there to serve as a mission generator for the main focus of this game: Unlocking equipment for your planes by earning experience points in the campaign. The missions in the campaign are what can only be referred to as boring. Autopilot is disabled and time compression is limited, so there will be significant stretches of time where you sit idly and do nothing. Doing nothing is not fun.

    The unlock system and the random mission generator would be interesting components if they were not so tied together with the profile system. Instead of medals, there are achievements, of which there are many to earn and some that are pretty challenging. Unfortunately your pilot profile also is tied to the unlocks system, so even for multiplayer and quick missions, you will have to play the campaign to unlock equipment.

    The multiplayer component runs well and has a very simple server browser that anyone can use. When there are people playing, multiplayer is very fun in this game, however the plane set for this game has shown to be chosen very poorly.

    First, the German fighters are the best planes by a wide margin. Superior to Russian planes in most performance measure with the exception of turn radius vs the Yak, these planes have next to ruined the online atmosphere. Russian pilots are outnumbered 2 to 1 by better aircraft nearly every single game. That is not an exaggeration. While this situation is easily overcome by an experienced pilot, for new players this is extremely off-putting and for early access players like me has become a very frustrating feature of this game.

    Also in the multiplayer you will notice that more often than not, you will not hear when your plane gets shot. This is a bug in the sound engine that causes your plane to outrun the sounds of it being damaged, essentially.

    Avoid this game if you do not like to grind for exp, and also avoid it if you are looking for a deep, involved single-player campaign: there is not one here. As there is no way to get out of grinding for unlockable airplane components, the game's experience will be severely hampered even if you are a MP exclusive pilot.

    On the other side, if you can stand to play the same missions over and over again so you can unlock the rear turrent on your IL-2, then buy this game. If you want to fly one of the most graphically and technically impressive flight sims of all time, and can stand to play or ignore the horrible unlock system, then get this game.

    Pros: Excellent graphics, Excellent Sound (mostly), Excellent physics, Excellent Server Browser for MP
    Cons: Terrible forced grind, shallow and boring campaign, no career mode, no advanced graphics options

    One more thing: There is a screenshot and movie recording functions built into this game that are very easy to use and work very well.    … Expand
  16. Terribleone
    Oct 27, 2014
    3
    I have played flight games and sims since falcon 3.0. I like many others backed Il2 BOS because of 777 studios great work with Rise of Flight. I thought it would be a reskinned ROF set in WW2. I would expect movement forward, new ideas, and new improvements to what Il2 1946, and ROF offered.

    Instead it is a step backwards. Instead of focusing of making a complete study sim, they    I have played flight games and sims since falcon 3.0. I like many others backed Il2 BOS because of 777 studios great work with Rise of Flight. I thought it would be a reskinned ROF set in WW2. I would expect movement forward, new ideas, and new improvements to what Il2 1946, and ROF offered.

    Instead it is a step backwards. Instead of focusing of making a complete study sim, they focused on game elements, unlocks tied to a quick mission style campaign. You are part of no squadron, and can pick and choose randomly what you fly. It really is a quick mission generator with a skin trying to give you the impression of a campaign. Calling it that almost feels generous.

    The camera effects are great, head movement from G forces and maneuvering are great. Combat is over the top Hollywood. Everything burns instantly. There is no such thing as a self sealing fuel tank in BOS. Planes go down very fast, AI seems about as good as ROF. Feeling of flight is not on par with Cliffs of dover or DCS. In fact the feeling of flight is the #1 issue with the game for me. It feels wrong, but the camera masks it well. Sound is good, graphics are alright, good lighting, and textures which seem 4 years old.

    It could be a good game for a fast 10 min quick mission, but the feeling of flight, unlocks, and mediocre cockpits keep me away. Whats left with the price of extra aircraft doesn't the ability to stand on it's own. Modders have made Cliffs of dover superior in every way....and they don't get paid.    … Expand
  17. Skoots
    Nov 22, 2014
    0
    Until the developers listen to their core community, this title is not going to the be successor of IL2. It really is a shame. If they wanted to blow the doors off of the sim genre, they should have taken all the things everyone loves about IL2 and CLoD with the TF mods and implemented them into this title. I understand change is hard for some people and the ones frustrated with this titleUntil the developers listen to their core community, this title is not going to the be successor of IL2. It really is a shame. If they wanted to blow the doors off of the sim genre, they should have taken all the things everyone loves about IL2 and CLoD with the TF mods and implemented them into this title. I understand change is hard for some people and the ones frustrated with this title might seem that way, but it really is just a case of bad implementation of non sim ideas into a "sim" game.

    Instead of trying to draw in the WT crowd or think they know how to draw in the younger gamers, could you imagine if they put that time into building an out of this world immersive SP campaign?

    I play lots of games, from the late Darkfall Online to the FPS Insurgency to titles on the WII U to RO. The bottom line is GAMEPLAY will always win. If you don't have solid gameplay and depth to your game it will fail.    … Expand
  18. Flying_Penguin
    Oct 27, 2014
    2
    I've bought or played every IL-2 product ever produced, but this is the first time I can't bring myself to recommend one. At every step in the evolution of the IL-2 franchise there has been a sense of ambition, of a desire to make the "next big thing" in flight simulation, the original (even on release) blew the competition out of the water in terms of fidelity and capability, Birds/WingsI've bought or played every IL-2 product ever produced, but this is the first time I can't bring myself to recommend one. At every step in the evolution of the IL-2 franchise there has been a sense of ambition, of a desire to make the "next big thing" in flight simulation, the original (even on release) blew the competition out of the water in terms of fidelity and capability, Birds/Wings of Prey were good simcade games, Il-2: CLoD aimed to be more realistic, more in depth and more beautiful than everything that had come before. CLoD was let down by shoddy project management and a restless publisher and it took a while for Team Fusions to rescue it, but at least there was the ambition to be the final word in WW2 flight sims.

    BoS, whilst pretty, seems to have lost that ambition. The fidelity level is somewhere between CLoD and War Thunder, the single player is lacklustre and arcade inspired (even the original Il-2 linear story driven campaign would be preferable), the community is in an unhealthy state and the developers seem to be aiming for the mid-core War Thunder Air Quake crowd.

    This is not what I (and many people) hoped for in an Il-2 successor, and that makes me sad. :-(    … Expand
  19. mudcat
    Oct 24, 2014
    7
    Really has a great core to it and should honestly be rated higher, game looks amazing, although you may go snowblind, pretty good DM, FM's seem fine to me. But the problem as probably noted in plenty of other reviews is some poor decisions regarding SP and unlocks. Unlocks can only be done in the SP campaign. So if you want those field modifications you are going to have to spend aReally has a great core to it and should honestly be rated higher, game looks amazing, although you may go snowblind, pretty good DM, FM's seem fine to me. But the problem as probably noted in plenty of other reviews is some poor decisions regarding SP and unlocks. Unlocks can only be done in the SP campaign. So if you want those field modifications you are going to have to spend a considerable amount of time in the campaign.

    As for the campaign, you have choices based on what aircraft you choose, between things like ground attack, intercept and escort etc. The missions are then randomly generated and difficulty of said missions will vary and increase based on your "pilot level".

    The missions aren't exactly the worst thing in the world, but I wouldn't exactly call them enjoyable either. It's a decision to have them work this way that has angered a lot of MP focused folks, essentially being forced to play SP. For the SP oriented folks it seems to miss the mark as there is nothing exactly imersive about it. No real coherent story to it, just a collection of randomly generated missions.

    There really is a lot of good stuff in the game, but the decision of unlocks tied to a SP randomly generated mission campaign really drags it down, this game should be an 8 or 9, but instead gets drug down by the stinker or an idea that in their unlocks system. I gave it a 7 because while that unlock business is indeed silly, it still does a lot of things really well, that and I can't give it a 7.5 :)    … Expand
  20. il2_player
    Dec 5, 2014
    1
    Terrible for a sim, ok for a game. Trouble is it was sold as a sim, with the developers only dropping the unlock and xp bombshell just before the release.
    No point in complaining on the forum, or asking for a refund, because its ban city over there. Now we wait to see if the lead developer follows thru with his threat to cancel the game later this month...
  21. Moider99
    Oct 26, 2014
    1
    I can't recommend buying this when its been confirmed a much cheaper (€10) version is about to be launched. They locked a thread about it on the official forums because so many customers who bought this game for $60 and $90 were rightfully unhappy.

    On YouTube there is a video of a 109 flying like an RC plane doing impossible moves and you can do endless loops in a he111 - so it's hard    I can't recommend buying this when its been confirmed a much cheaper (€10) version is about to be launched. They locked a thread about it on the official forums because so many customers who bought this game for $60 and $90 were rightfully unhappy.

    On YouTube there is a video of a 109 flying like an RC plane doing impossible moves and you can do endless loops in a he111 - so it's hard to believe the 9 and 10 scores here. The developers have forced their idea of how to play this game on customers, you can't select your own graphics options just presets like an XBOX game, you can't select them game options you want just two presets easy and expert and you have to play single player to unlock 'powerups' for multiplayer.    … Expand
  22. x15
    Oct 31, 2014
    1
    This is a far cry from the il2 series. They only milked the that name to mislead people about what this game is.
    They had available to them two flight sim engines with almost everything done. They chose to go with the most limited six years old engine.
    That's fine, as long you at least get what was already available in the engine. But looks instead of developing the Rise of flight engine    This is a far cry from the il2 series. They only milked the that name to mislead people about what this game is.
    They had available to them two flight sim engines with almost everything done. They chose to go with the most limited six years old engine.
    That's fine, as long you at least get what was already available in the engine. But looks instead of developing the Rise of flight engine and add more features to it, they decided to chop off stuff as time went on. At this point Battle of Stalingrad is an extremely limited game, where players are forced to play a certain absurd way.
    Gone are the custom skins, gone is the mission, builder, gone is the ability to customize your graphics settings and they even removed the f11 free camera for some obscure reason.
    The career is boring to tears and the players have to focus on the unlocks instead of getting immersed in the action.
    The multiplayer also got a hard hit recently. The maximum number of players allowed in a server being reduced to 32.
    But the worst part about this game is the patronizing and borderline dictatorial attitude of the developers. From deleting thousands of posts on the forums, to locking game content paid at premium price in an absurd offline only unlock system, to threatening to shut down everything if users don't post stellar reviews.
    I wouldn't recommend this game to anyone.    … Expand
  23. Otto_von_Otto
    Oct 27, 2014
    2
    I give BoS a 3, for the graphics (although the cockpits are nowhere near as good as Cliffs of Dover) and the fact that it works with only a few CTD's. It had a lot going for it, but seems to have fallen at the final hurdle with unlocks, XP points, and some questionable flight models.
    If you want a game, this is it, although it will cost you $50-$100. War Thunder, which it is similar to,    I give BoS a 3, for the graphics (although the cockpits are nowhere near as good as Cliffs of Dover) and the fact that it works with only a few CTD's. It had a lot going for it, but seems to have fallen at the final hurdle with unlocks, XP points, and some questionable flight models.
    If you want a game, this is it, although it will cost you $50-$100. War Thunder, which it is similar to, is free.
    If you want a sim, Cliffs of Dover is where its at.    … Expand
  24. Priller
    Oct 30, 2014
    1
    Early-access purchasers were promised a sim, what we have now is an arcade game with shallow DMs, soviet-biased FMs, broken MP and an SP campaign about as interesting as watching paint dry. And never mind "soviet-biased" FMs, the FM allows planes like the He111 to do infinite loops. In expert-mode! And then the unlocks. This is where you cannot use the content you PAID for until you'veEarly-access purchasers were promised a sim, what we have now is an arcade game with shallow DMs, soviet-biased FMs, broken MP and an SP campaign about as interesting as watching paint dry. And never mind "soviet-biased" FMs, the FM allows planes like the He111 to do infinite loops. In expert-mode! And then the unlocks. This is where you cannot use the content you PAID for until you've grinded your way through the dreadful SP 'campaign'. It's not a campaign, the campaign is nothing more than a QMB-generator, in which you're lucky to see more than a handful of planes and tanks to shoot at. That's because the Digital Nature engine cannot handle AI objects very well.
    Then we have the absence of the ability to set-up graphics settings. That's because BoS is basically a console-game dressed up for the PC. The lack of a mission-editor, even a basic one.
    This game brings nothing to the PC. It belongs on the consoles. Shallow arcade dreck and the worst betrayal of the IL2 name since 1C dumped Cliffs of Dover.    … Expand
  25. Rebel352
    Nov 16, 2014
    0
    Take the positive scores, and throw them all away- the developers of this team are threatening to shut the entire project down with no refund to anyone if the score didn't improve. They have consistently made poor design choices from the "early access" consisting of afternoons in the middle of the week, to incorporating an unlock system a-la world of tanks that perpetually brokeTake the positive scores, and throw them all away- the developers of this team are threatening to shut the entire project down with no refund to anyone if the score didn't improve. They have consistently made poor design choices from the "early access" consisting of afternoons in the middle of the week, to incorporating an unlock system a-la world of tanks that perpetually broke multiplayer.

    Everything they do, and everything they are, is a direct contradiction of what they promised to deliver. When called on it, they hold a gun to the sim that you paid money for's head, and tell you to write good reviews because they need "comrades, not customers".

    We haven't even broached the technical aspects of the game yet. Massive biases to the Russian aircraft (in every aspect- flight stability, performance, firepower), coupled with bombers that can do infinite loops right from the runway, huge holes in the damage and flight modelling, ballistics, all contributing to a 180 degree turn from what the original was billed as.

    This is not a flight sim, and you can barely call it a game. If, however, you still subscribe to the antiquated notion that games are supposed to be "fun", then you can't really call it that, either. It is by far the greatest insult ever levied against the flight sim market, and only made worse by its creators' treatment of the community. These people make Oleg Maddox look kind and flexible, and Putin benevolent.

    I wish I had rolled up my money and smoked it rather than give even a stinky ruble to these...."gentlemen".

    Good day.    … Expand
  26. Hooves_McG
    Oct 23, 2014
    7
    The sim aspects of this product excell! The feeling of flight, the faithful recreation of the period Fighters and bombers is excellent, the FM/DM all top notch.

    Where this GAME goes off the rails is its design decisions. A War Thunder-esque XP unlock system that, left in Single player would make sense (though its wrapped up in a sub-par campaign system). 1CGS has elected to force the    The sim aspects of this product excell! The feeling of flight, the faithful recreation of the period Fighters and bombers is excellent, the FM/DM all top notch.

    Where this GAME goes off the rails is its design decisions. A War Thunder-esque XP unlock system that, left in Single player would make sense (though its wrapped up in a sub-par campaign system). 1CGS has elected to force the sims content (weapons, mods, and paint jobs) to be unlocked before it can be used in Multi-player. Which seems completely backwards. It has dragged the MP community kicking and screaming into an environment they would rather not be in, and indeed many have just forgone the purchase of the sim/game to avoid the grind style of play of an MMO in a game that has admittedly rebuked (by the devs) that they are not an MMO. This design decision leaves a very schizophrenic taste in many a consumers mouths. Worst yet, is that up to this point they had all the ingriedients of a blockbuster return of the "legendary series", but muffed the ball on the 2 yard line. Leaving me no choice but to give it a disappointed 7 of 10, of what otherwise would have been a 9.    … Expand
  27. EiToro
    Oct 23, 2014
    5
    i think this game a huge back step from a simulator for example CloD. They want to meet both the casual and the pro pilots requirements. Everyone know its impossible to achieve. Some FM model awful, like 109s negative G. And a russians planes originally was much harder to keep on the air than this game.

    Noting more just a fair Arcade game in this stage, but far from a sim. It has named    i think this game a huge back step from a simulator for example CloD. They want to meet both the casual and the pro pilots requirements. Everyone know its impossible to achieve. Some FM model awful, like 109s negative G. And a russians planes originally was much harder to keep on the air than this game.

    Noting more just a fair Arcade game in this stage, but far from a sim. It has named sim just because you have a cockpit. Push the throttle then soot em' all thats of the content, the fan made mission better than the built-in. Available combat tactics so limited, litte mainstream and childish. Maybe the bombers has proper engine management (so-so).

    First look the game eye-candy, but you have to have a high end comp to run it well when you facing the crowds. The devs have promised 100/server, now 75/server barely can maintain. And about the campaign. Random generated stuff without conception. Few chapter, but dont try to find logic in it.

    I think they want to compete with War Thunder, but originally was IL-2 the game of sophisticated pilots not the casual ones.

    Conclusion:
    1. Casual player wont buy it because the controlling devices.
    2. For a Hardcore players it a weak game.    … Expand
  28. Bongodriver
    Oct 23, 2014
    5
    So IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad has finally arrived, many people praising it's realistic feeling of flight, sadly none of them have ever experienced the real feeling, this game has some of the strangest flight modelling I ever experienced, damage modelling has some nice touches but is very simplistic visually, the game looks nice enough, the DX9 game engine hasn't done too bad but it is waySo IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad has finally arrived, many people praising it's realistic feeling of flight, sadly none of them have ever experienced the real feeling, this game has some of the strangest flight modelling I ever experienced, damage modelling has some nice touches but is very simplistic visually, the game looks nice enough, the DX9 game engine hasn't done too bad but it is way behind some of it's contemporaries, it is still a game with arcade style features despite a huge community protest, it is still missing many key components like a full mission builder and Oculus rift support.… Expand
  29. ebola
    Oct 27, 2014
    1
    The last time reviews got posted here the devs asked fanboys to post good reviews. Ignore the fanboy 10 fest and read the comments about the poor flight models which you can find on Youtube. This is not IL-2 its a poor imitation.
  30. The_truth_2014
    Oct 27, 2014
    6
    This game is not worth to call it a simulation. The sovjet planes are so overmodelled, Stalin had won the war within days with just a few of them :-) Seriously, the German planes, which were famous for their topnotch engineering and quality fly like crap, whereas the sovjet planes fly like on rails. And all evidence brought to the developers during early access phase didn't better theThis game is not worth to call it a simulation. The sovjet planes are so overmodelled, Stalin had won the war within days with just a few of them :-) Seriously, the German planes, which were famous for their topnotch engineering and quality fly like crap, whereas the sovjet planes fly like on rails. And all evidence brought to the developers during early access phase didn't better the situation at all. Quite the contrary was the case. They demanded documents for each single bit the community claimed (although it is common knowledge), but never proved themselves with supporting documents for their phantasy flight models.

    So if you want to have a gamey game, get it. But if you are looking for a proper flight simulation which reflects the true history, then you better wait for another try of a development studio. DCS has a big potential in terms of honest flight models, and has probably a better chance to be sincere and honest, because the development isn’t Russian…    … Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

36
#36 Most Discussed PC Game of 2014
53
#53 Most Shared PC Game of 2014

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
74

Mixed or average reviews - based on 7 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 7
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 7
  3. Negative: 0 out of 7
  1. Pelit (Finland)
    Jun 14, 2015
    74
    Il-2: Battle of Stalingrad boldly seeks to renew the genre by adding modern game design elements to the admittedly often sterile genre of flight simulators. Unfortunately not only does the bold attempt fail spectacularly, the developers also seem to have completely forgotten what made the original Il-2 a legend. The Rise of Flight legacy shows in the rather impressive visuals and physics modeling, but strangely a lot of its nice features didn't make the cut either and the “sequel” falls short of its predecessor in many ways. [June 2015]
  2. GameOver.gr
    Feb 10, 2015
    70
    The excellent handling and the immense realism that Battle of Stalingrad offers, manages to balance out the poor single player campaign and some of its design flaws.
    Read full review
  3. PC PowerPlay
    Feb 8, 2015
    70
    The lack of content and generous helping of bugs can be easily forgiven thanks to the developer's high reputation. [Feb 2015, p.16]
See all critic reviews »