It’s perhaps the worst kept secret in the flight sim industry now that the next evolution of the IL-2 Sturmovik series would be centered around the Korean war from 1950-53. Today should put any doubts to rest as Korea IL-2 has just been officially revealed by the 1C Game Studios team.

Early jet air combat and the last of the propeller fighters

The Korean War era is an interesting time for those interested in the history of air combat. The last of the great propeller driven fighters, almost entirely derived from WWII from 5-years earlier, served in combat together with the first generations of jet fighter.

A teaser project reveal video was released today. It’s a 48-second teaser rather than a full-up trailer but it provides us some key visuals.

Developer Diary No 1 on a new Korea focused website gives us our first detailed overview of the project by 1C Game Studios.

Here are some key points:

  • Focused on the forces of the USA, North Korea, USSR, and China
  • New game engine with DirectX 12, PBR rendering, new atmospheric visualization, vegetation, effects and sound API
  • New aerodynamics, systems, and damage model
  • New AI ordering system and new radio system
  • Most work on the title is complete: New technologies, assets, and map are or are mostly complete
  • Some items such as the GUI and the game modes are under development
  • There’s a “skip time on the route” feature
  • Ability to walk (and swim)
  • Map is 440×400 km and four times more detailed than before
  • There will be functioning radars and infantry squads
  • Simplified flight modeling of bomber aircraft allow massed raids

One of the most interesting features I took away is that there’s a regiment commander system which puts you in charge of your squadron managing supplies, personnel and aircraft. That should be interesting.

Screenshots and aircraft

In addition to this dump of information, we’ve also got a bunch of new screenshots (some of which are below) and we’ve got confirmation that the new title will feature eight aircraft as part of the release.

EDIT: Because it got confusing I’m listing the aircraft in an actual list now.

  1. F-51D
  2. F-80C
  3. F-86A
  4. MiG-15bis
  5. Yak-9P (probably)
  6. F4U-4 (probably)
  7. B-29 (AI probably)
  8. IL-10

B-29, F-51D, F-80C Shooting Star, and MiG-15bis are in the screenshots and the F-86A was mentioned in the marketing material. The B-29 I don’t expect it to be flyable and the simplified flight model is probably in reference to it to enable those larger formations. In prior materials we’ve also seen the F4U Corsair, Yak-9 (very likely a 9P model) and the IL-10 which brings us to eight total aircraft (including one AI which I don’t think is counting in their marketing materials) and leaves one more unknown type.

The base product could be expanded with Commonwealth, Chinese and additional US Navy aircraft as well so there are possibilities for content that stretches into the future.

Thoughts

My first though is: finally! We’ve known for a considerable amount of time that they were doing Korea but for whatever reason they elected to not announce the product until now.

The short trailer was fine but I don’t think it quite showed enough to grab people’s full attention outside of the current community. Hopefully a follow-on trailer will show the full scale and scope of the project. Large formations of B-29s with F-86 and MiG-15 battles going on around might help underscore the differences between this new Korea title and Great Battles.

Visually I expected to see this leap a bit further forward than it appears to have. Don’t get me wrong, I think the new physically based rendering looks really good and the overall presentation is reasonably solid but I think I’m going to have to see this in person on my own PC to truly get a feel for the visuals. Great Battles did manage to punch above its weight thanks to a very consistent approach to their art style and so Korea may manage to do something similar while still advancing the product.

The arguments I’ve seen online about if its a new engine or an old engine upgraded I think are mostly academic. The important bits are going to be if they can do those large formations, make their world feel more alive and real, and offer up a fun Korean war era combat flight sim experience. Upgraded damage systems, upgraded aircraft systems, and improved visuals may combine together for a great experience.

Time will tell too what the single and multiplayer experience is intended to be. And just to put it out there in the universe… I really hope to goodness that this sim does not go down the road that the original IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad did with unlocked equipment and aircraft. There’s no evidence that they are but I just want to make that one clear.

Cautiously optimistic that this will be a fun and somewhat unique entry into the combat flight sim pantheon!

You can read all about the new product on their new website and they also have the first blog post that fills in some additional information too.


36 responses to “Korea IL-2 project revealed”

  1. Guess system requirements aren’t listed anywhere, Sham? I looked but saw nothing. Which is a tad odd considering they’ve said it’s more or less complete.

    That said, the new terrain and foliage look great compared to BoX which has some awful sprites, though the land-class could do with somewhat higher res tex’s. The aircraft themselves look amazing both in the eye-candy category as well as the huge increase in model geometry. Hell, the BoX birds have a lot of noticeably low-poly aspects to them (tri’s/vert’s) and I didn’t see anything in the 4K res screens on their site that stood out. Even the ground vehicles and trains look great.

    I’m really looking forward to this as I’m just burned out on the DCS missile age thing as well as their flippant attitude with regards to Razbam and more recently Heatblur.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Optimization tends to happen at the end, so they may not know the system requirements yet. System requirements are always tough anyway, because people differ in what performance and visuals they consider acceptable, so it is always at most a rough indication.

      Like

    2. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      Though a lot may be done, performance issues can creep into a project like this at any time. If I were them I’d be holding off on any system requirements until closer to the time of purchase as well. IF those requirements came out after people started purchasing things, then I’d have an issue with it.

      It is good to have options on the market.

      Like

  2. Not sure why you think they might reintroduce the unlocking system, when they made it clear that it was a mistake, so why would they attempt it again?

    And it is indeed the Yak-9P. Note that you list 7 airplanes, but incorrectly say “which brings us to six.”

    The 8th plane may be the F-84, which was the USAF’s primary strike aircraft during the Korean War. Most likely there will be a premium version of the game, as usual, so that means there is room for two mores planes. Many people are asking for the Meteor, so that might become a premium plane, but that is pure speculation.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      It’s something that was circulating today in a couple of discussions I was in. So I wanted to put it out there and I did qualify that as it not being something that they have suggested for this product. Sometimes everyone needs to be reminded how much of a disaster that was.

      I’m counting six flyables and I don’t know if they are counting it as eight total or not

      You’re right, the F-84 is a great option and actually one that I think I could see myself spending quite a bit of time in. Would be terrific fun to have the Meteor too!

      Like

      1. Just so you know, they already explicitly said on the forum that unlocking won’t be a ‘feature.’

        And by my count, you list 7 flyable airplanes in your article: F-51D, F-80C, MiG-15bis, F-86A, F4U Corsair, Yak-9P and the IL-10.

        Like

      2. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        That’s good. I’m glad that they’ve said that. It really was a terrible thing.

        Maybe it’s the jet lag. I’ll go back and count ☺️

        Like

      3. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        I redid my count and yes we have 7 and one missing plus the B-29 (which we all assume to be AI though LukeFF gave a bit of a circumspect answer).

        Like

  3. Absolutely thrilled about this announcement. Not sure why DCS didn’t pounce on this gaping hole for combat simmers. Lost opportunity.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      Absolutely. And they had a good core set of aircraft but they got distracted and did other things.

      Like

    2. it would be nice in DCS and they do after all have the MiG-15 and Sabre in game but let’s face it, despite the WWII excursion they are really looking at a late Cold War/post Cold War setup and one could easily argue it’s not a coherent timeline as they developing it as a sandbox rather than a focused theatre of operations

      Liked by 1 person

  4. I’m not sold on this yet.

    Constant MiG Alley action doesn’t really have much attraction for me so I’m going to wait it out to see how things progress. For the rest, Mustangs v LaGGs/Yaks and a fat Il-2 doesn’t really seem to offer much over the existing Il-2 series. A Corsair is always welcome, but no carriers or helicopters in the first instalment means that there’s only the jets that are really different.

    I also don’t see how them doing too many modules of the war with about seven plane types on one side. First Collector Plane – Po-2? That’ll be a big seller!

    Like

  5. if they are introducing commonwealth aircraft then the meteor and Sea Fury will/should make its way there.

    Korea – whilst has the allure of MiG alley ( and it does) for me it’s all about CAS. Would love to see some solid naval activity with the Corsair, skyraider and the Panther but haven’t seen anything about that – has anything been said about carriers?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      As far as I know, carriers are not in for this initial offering. But I do see potential here!

      Like

  6. This could be good, but I hope, by the grace of the Almighty, that the IL2 people finally finally finally realize it’s the 21st century and give us an actual mission editor. If this thing launches with their same archaic out-of-game developers tool built with stone knives and bear skins, I’m not buying nothing. And thus my rant.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. This’ll be interesting:

    ‘In the main game mode, the player will no longer be an ordinary pilot, concerned only with individual success in a series of combat missions — now the player will be a commander of an entire unit, and on his shoulders will rest not only the management of personnel, but also the planning of combat missions based on the situation and the management of the unit’s resources — the personnel and aircraft.’

    That can’t be Multi Player, surely? And if it’s Single Player then the AI is going to have be a thousand times better than that in GB, or in fact anything ever seen before. Otherwise when they cock it all up that’s you sent back Stateside or off to the gulag.

    Like

  8. this is fantastic news. I see a future of this and combat pilot while dcs slowly implodes.

    any guidance on when this might see a public release?

    Like

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      I’m guessing maybe 2025. Late 2025? It’ll be a little while I suspect.

      Like

  9. also they need to include the sexiest aircraft ever made – the sea fury

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      I’d LOVE the Sea Fury!

      Like

  10. Also, Skyraider, please.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Dookie Monster Avatar
    Dookie Monster

    One addition can be made to your plane list, the main website’s page mentions the Tu-2 in the description for “Rich Game World”.

    Like

  12. I do hope they make a real benchmark in flysims as we did see with RB, IL-2 Maddox, RoF and FS2020. Not a another (combat) flysim copy from a copy. That unlocking system, thats more a question for Jason Williams flysim, more interesting how they will handle VR, as here 1C also made a decision that was negative for VR users.

    https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-differences-between-forward-deferred-rendering-scenarios-you?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios&utm_campaign=share_via

    If the link does work google for “forward deferred rendering VR”

    Think the Korea war is a very good theater of war, only for increasing the sales it needs after the Northern America, the other big market in combat fly sims, the UK.

    Like

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      “That unlocking system, thats more a question for Jason Williams.” Jason will never put an unlock system in Combat Pilot. He knows the market and the community very well.

      Hopefully they do make a new benchmark for combat flight sims. The market has gotten pretty interesting.

      Like

      1. Jason was at that time the BoS project leader and under his leadership the unlock was being introduced. While we all know how demanding Jason is.
        I do not think the new generation at 1C wil go for the unlock.

        Like

      2. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        Hi Unknown. That’s not accurate. The unlocks were implemented when Albert (LOFT) was the producer on the project. Jason took over in 2016 and removal of the unlock system came shortly thereafter.

        You can read about those changes and the timeline of Jason’s tenure in these updates:
        https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/168-developer-diary/?do=findComment&comment=378896
        https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/168-developer-diary/?do=findComment&comment=475296

        There has been misinformation shared on this in the past so I wanted to make sure the record was straight on that. Everyone will, of course, have an opinion on Jason’s tenure but this is one of the things that he did early on when he had the chance.

        I do hope and think that Albert has since learned that this was not a good design decision. I want to reinforce that I hope that the future product will avoid that kind of system and go with something more in-keeping with combat sims as a sandbox environment.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Sorry mate, still no prove, while it’s all very clear on Jasons dictator behavior. Maybe not recognized in the US where the boss is the boss, but in N-Europe the way he is acting is typical Stalin style.

        Do not get me wrong, I’m a fan of Jason as he did safe RoF and did push BoX forward, but on the other hand I’m absolutely not a fan of the behavior of Jason.

        It’s a pity we can not open the old official RoF forum, because this was a huge source of how he was involved into BoX.

        note: I can not hook to the last post.

        Like

      4. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        I’m not going to argue this because it was very clear and straightforward. The decision was made before he was executive producer. It was changed when he became executive producer. It’s cut and dry.

        Like

    2. While he also claims he is nothing more then a consultant at 1C or executive producer from 2012 as can be read here https://www.linkedin.com/in/jasonvwil?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=ios_app

      But your right nothing to be argued on what title he did have at that period, fact is he was at that time also involved into the unlock failure. I’m not defending 1C or dislike Jason, but blaming 1C completely for the unlocks is not right.

      Like

      1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        The bottom line is that the person who was in-charge of the product at 1CGS (remember that 1C was a publisher and not the game studio), and who is again in charge of the product, is responsible. I will be watching closely and hoping that they do not make the same mistake again – bottom line.

        Like

  13. Bought.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Apparently we have time travelers here (it’s not yet for sale).

      Liked by 1 person

  14. HyperTextHero Avatar
    HyperTextHero

    Last time I flew in this theater was in Rowan Software’s Mig Alley back in 2000 or so: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiG_Alley_(video_game)

    Looking forward to trying it, especially the Sabre and CAS with F-51.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Premature criticism aside – I am very excited for this. Il2 has it’s shortcomings (as does DCS and every sim) but all-in-all it’s a fantastic sim with a great legacy. In fact it’s the ONLY WWII sim we have right now, if we don’t count DCS modules. I think it’s highly unlikely this will be a flop.

    Korea is also a fantastic theatre to explore. It’s a large scale war, we have jets, we have props, we have ground and sea units.

    I think this has a lot of potential.

    My only request would be clicky-cockpits that we didn’t have in Great Battles. Some could care less for it – but for me it’s a huge part of the immersion. The cold-and-dark starts feel like you are actually inside the plane and it makes you feel more in-tune with it’s individual systems…. my opinion.

    If you are able to walk around and get in your plane, I think this may be included.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Q: “Out of curiosity, will the playable planes of IL-2 Korea have clickable cockpits?” LukeFF: “No”

      https://steamcommunity.com/app/307960/discussions/0/4353373595127045273/

      Liked by 1 person

      1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        Good info!

        Like

Leave a reply to ShamrockOneFive Cancel reply

Trending