PDA

View Full Version : "Sorry, but unfortunately this is THE BEST flyable WWII sim-aircraft"



TILLIO
04-25-2004, 01:45 PM
I love IL2FB, actually the number one air combat simulator but...

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gifdo you know the B25 by MAAM (Mid Atantic Air Museum)only for...(sigh!)...Flight Simulator 2004 ? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

I hate CFS3 but if CFS4 will be a combat version of FS2004 ?... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Again, think about war missions over London or Berlin with quality as Venice (Lago addon for fs2004)or New York (Megascenery addon for fs2004)!!!

TILLIO
04-25-2004, 01:45 PM
I love IL2FB, actually the number one air combat simulator but...

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gifdo you know the B25 by MAAM (Mid Atantic Air Museum)only for...(sigh!)...Flight Simulator 2004 ? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

I hate CFS3 but if CFS4 will be a combat version of FS2004 ?... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Again, think about war missions over London or Berlin with quality as Venice (Lago addon for fs2004)or New York (Megascenery addon for fs2004)!!!

VMF-214_HaVoK
04-25-2004, 01:52 PM
Remember the hype around CFS 3? It was supposed to be the combat sim of all sims. But just plain sucked in just about everyway.
So when you talk about CFS 4 being so good, I can only say...I will believe it when I see it. And no I dont mean screens and movies only actual gameplay will convince me. I have been fooled with screens, videos, and all the hype before.
=S=
www.vmf-214.net (http://www.vmf-214.net)
(The Original BlackSheep Squadron of IL-2)

http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/images/hellcat_head_short.jpg

Capt.LoneRanger
04-25-2004, 02:02 PM
I hate CFS3 but if CFS4 will be a combat version of FS2004 ?...


Then we would have crappy CFS3 with dynamic weather, DX9 and slower FPS than LOMAC. No thanks.

I'm always open for new things, but looking at the evolution of CFS, well, maybe they'll surprise us this time?

greets
Capt.LoneRanger

http://www.imageshack.us/img1/7182/1703abcdefg.gif

Deathreaper666
04-25-2004, 02:05 PM
The only sim that can really complete with IL-2 FB is going to be BOB. Nothing Micro$$$$ puts out will compare. That is the reality of this situation and most flight simmers understand this.

--------------
Death is certain, look forward to it.
--------------

TILLIO
04-25-2004, 02:13 PM
Capt.LoneRanger say:
"slower FPS than LOMAC"
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

Actually my lomac stay in the box

Chuck_Older
04-25-2004, 02:15 PM
CFS3 stung me BAD. I had been seeing ads for it for months before it's release, in Air And Space Smithsonian, so I was practically salivating.

Ah, a fool and his money soon wear soiled pajamas, or however that saying goes... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Not ONLY did the CFS3 box almost- ALMOST tell an outright LIE about the system reqs (no mention of needing a download to play if you meet the minimums but don't have a certain M$ file), but I beleive that CFS3 still has the distiction of being- correct me please if I am mistaken- the only MS entertainment title that ever got patched?

I am sure that MS had great things in mind for CFS3 and that they got carried away by trying to be "all things to all people". but obviosuly they failed. Skill points? Buying squadron aircraft? PRESTIGE?? My prestige is how many victories I get, not a point system! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif

The campaign, ooo, the campaign, now that REALLy hurts. I gotta say, one of my best simming moments came on a mission in a P-47 over Normandy on June 6th 1944, in CFS3. But the P-47...has the ...gunsight...in the wrong place, oh God. And on one mission, i destroyed a ship at drydock, but not the harbor facility. Next mission, the ship was still destroyed in it's berth! that was nice. But the negatives fo far outweighed the positives that I can't like CFS3. And beleive me, i try. When I upgraded to my present system (one that blew away the system suggestion on the CFS3 box), I still drop frames and can't run at full graphics.

MS has got a LOT of catchup to do in terms of customer satisfication with a lot of people into flight sims, who want a combat flight sim, and I wonder if their reputation in the genre can really make a comeback anytime soon.

All they really had to do was not fall flat on their face with CFS3, and somehow, they snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. talk about reaching too far...is it a strategy sim? A combat flight sim? a Role playing game? What?

I like the Il*2 series first and foremost because it does the basics right.

*****************************
The hillsides ring with, "Free the People",
Or can I hear the echoes from the days of '39?
~ Clash

carguy_
04-25-2004, 02:19 PM
I`ve read some nice reviews and 98% state that CFS3 looks like from 1994 compared to IL2[the one that was released in 2002].

I don`t think M$ is heading for a revolution in combat sims.

http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sig23d.jpg

BuzzU
04-25-2004, 02:35 PM
B-25 looks good. To bad M$ didn't make it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buzz
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto/anderson9.jpg

TILLIO
04-25-2004, 02:44 PM
Hi BuzzU !
Finally a comment about the B25 http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
Do It's possible that all you don't know this Amazing work ? I love his sound !
P.S. The MAAM have the original airplane !

I repeat: I agree a negative judgement about CFS3 but I'm really curious about the next cfs !

arcadeace
04-25-2004, 02:47 PM
If MS uses the same scenery generator as in FS2004 then they're off on the right foot, but that's not a combat sim. I understand what you're saying, with no expectations lets just hope.

They put out very good sims in CFS1 and 2. They changed philosophy with 3 and geared it more towards accommodating a broad, user-friendly market, less concerned with serious simmers. It didn't succeed. I don't agree with many former users that we should expect another failure, the designers have heard the complaints loud and clear.

If they get it right it could be an awesome sim and great addition to the enthusiast community. BoB might have competition. I'm hoping with no illusions ...I have no problem wanting them to succeed.

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/222_1082457373_222_1082441075_airaces.jpg

XyZspineZyX
04-25-2004, 02:49 PM
Microsloth has no credibility in the flight sim world. Despite the fact that they have incredible resources, they cannot produce a top quality flight sim, because it's way too far away from their core product.

You'll always get a better product from people whose livelihood depends on making a good *flight sim*.

TooCooL34
04-25-2004, 02:50 PM
I love B-25 and eager to fly it in FB.
But expect combat version FS2004 to be better than FB because of addon B-25? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif
Seriously, are you fishing?

-----------------

=815=TooCooL34,=815=Squadron

-= 8 1 5 =- FB Dedi Server is coming soon. (with AEP Dedicated Server)
100Mb IDC line, P4 2.8G server.
Full real but limited icon, minimap path and spdbar.
You can expect something, since I run the server myself. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

maxim26
04-25-2004, 03:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TILLIO:
Capt.LoneRanger say:
"slower FPS than LOMAC"
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

Actually my lomac stay in the box<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Low FPS in Lomac is a myth! I run Lock On on Athlon 1600+, Radeon 9500 non pro and i'm getting 30 FPS. In FB i'm getting 40. You actually can't tell the difference in 10 FPS. Plus Lomac has thet amazing graphics, especially cockpits. The aircrufts, thet were released later in FB, like Ki, Mustang and Spitfire have good cockpits too. But earlier aircruft like suck. Thet's the reason i dont fly Lags and Yaks any more.

And if you will compare IL2 and Lomac with MSFS2004, Microsoft sim has worse cockpits. Plus it's rediculas feature - the panals. If you need to read your guages you have to switch from 3D cockpit to 2D panal.

OJ_79
04-25-2004, 04:51 PM
Just so you know - apparently CFS and FSxxxx are made by totally different programming teams within M$.

That is why one sucks and one rules.

Beats me why they don't get the FS team to put out a CFS.

Tata, OJ

x6BL_Brando
04-25-2004, 04:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> So when you talk about CFS 4 being so good, I can only say...I will believe it when I see it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I won't even be looking

initjust
04-25-2004, 05:12 PM
I know what I understand by the term "simulator" but I am not sure what you all understand.

Please do not take this as an attack on IL2 or IL2:FB but there are some things that I consider to be absolutely critical if a game is to be classified as a "simulator" and several of what I consider to be key elements just do not exist in IL2 or IL2:FB.

Among the things that I consider to be critical are things that allow the user to "simulate" or create realistic flight/navigation conditions over realistic terrain where the features (cities, towns, mountains, rivers, roads, islands, lakes, oceans, airbases) are very nearly exactly as they appear on a real world atlas or accurate map.

If real world conditions that affect and impact piloting and navigation are not present can it really be considered a "simulator" or is it just a really nice and well designed game?

As I said this is not an attack on UBI or Maddox so please don't feel like you need to jump to their defence. My only point is that, for me, there are some very critical elements blaringly absent from IL2 that, if they were present, would make it a true "simulator" and not just a great game.

Initjust

HarryVoyager
04-25-2004, 05:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by maxim26:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TILLIO:
Capt.LoneRanger say:
"slower FPS than LOMAC"
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

Actually my lomac stay in the box<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Low FPS in Lomac is a myth! I run Lock On on Athlon 1600+, Radeon 9500 non pro and i'm getting 30 FPS. In FB i'm getting 40. You actually can't tell the difference in 10 FPS. Plus Lomac has thet amazing graphics, especially cockpits. The aircrufts, thet were released later in FB, like Ki, Mustang and Spitfire have good cockpits too. But earlier aircruft like suck. Thet's the reason i dont fly Lags and Yaks any more.

And if you will compare IL2 and Lomac with MSFS2004, Microsoft sim has worse cockpits. Plus it's rediculas feature - the panals. If you need to read your guages you have to switch from 3D cockpit to 2D panal.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

For the people without an ATI 9X00 based card, turning on all the features can bring the frame rate to a crawl. I think the point the original poster was trying to make is that CFS3 was slower than even LOMAC with full details is, without the redeming features, self-shadows, etc.

On the side topic of navigation, there is every indication that Il-2, on full real, accurately simulates the difficulty of navigation most pilots were put under in the Eastern Front. There really wasn't that much to navigate buy, and nobody really spend that much money of navigation equipment for their aircraft.

Harry Voyager

pourshot
04-25-2004, 06:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by initjust:

I know what I understand by the term "simulator" but I am not sure what you all understand.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Perhaps what people meen to say is that IL2 is the best COMBAT simulator,All the nice looking citys and realistic scenery are great but not at the expense of FPS.

I just had a idea can you imagine how scared Macroshyte would be if oleg built a game to compete with FSxxxx http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/784.gif

http://members.optusnet.com.au/~andycarroll68/mybaby.jpeg.JPG
Ride It Like Ya Stole It

XyZspineZyX
04-25-2004, 06:07 PM
il2 could learn something from cfs-cfs3 and their series. Plus the community is cooler in cfs!!

initjust
04-25-2004, 06:25 PM
I should have said "combat simulator" instead of just "simulator".

I consider the piloting and navigation issues to be critical aspects of any combat sim since the majority of the time pilots spent was getting to and from their target areas and the amount of time spent in actual combat was a small percentage of the total mission time.

I realize that most who play any brand of air combat game would find it boring to spend a couple of hours flying to the target area and back but that was a huge part of the WWII pilot's life and it shoould be a critical aspect of any WWII "sim".

After all, if you don't need to navigate taking wind, altitude/air density, mag declination and other factors into account to get to and from the target area how effective is the game at simulating real WWII conditions?

And, if a game doesn't allow for these aspects of piloting (these skills were at least as important to the survival of a WWII combat pilot as dogfighting was) then it really is not a "simulator".

pourshot
04-25-2004, 06:33 PM
I know what your saying but MOST people want to have fun and I personaly dont find navigation all that fun.

http://members.optusnet.com.au/~andycarroll68/mybaby.jpeg.JPG
Ride It Like Ya Stole It

pourshot
04-25-2004, 06:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Yes_I_rule:
il2 could learn something from cfs-cfs3 and their series. Plus the community is cooler in cfs!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Like what, how to be full of cheats ?

And why are you here if you dont like it just a troll maybe?

http://members.optusnet.com.au/~andycarroll68/mybaby.jpeg.JPG
Ride It Like Ya Stole It

Old_Canuck
04-25-2004, 06:37 PM
Heh heh ... M$$$ trolls are multiplying faster than bacteria in here http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif

OC

"You don't stop playing because you grow old, you grow old because you stop playing."

jensenpark
04-25-2004, 06:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Yes_I_rule:
il2 could learn something from cfs-cfs3 and their series. Plus the community is cooler in cfs!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Congrats on receiving first place for lamest comment ever made on this forum...

http://www.corsair-web.com/thistler/rtfoxint.jpg
Buzz Beurling flying his last sortie over Malta, Oct.24, 1942

SwingerSpecial
04-25-2004, 06:43 PM
IMHO - I've never understood the hype about the graphics on Flight Simulator series. I just recently took another look at FS 2004, and quite frankly, graphically it looked like crap compared to IL2. But that's just my opinion.

Bearcat99
04-25-2004, 06:45 PM
Posted: 01/20/04
Microsoft has recently posted a job offering on their official site seeking a 3D programmer for "version 4 of the highly successful Combat Flight Simulator franchise." The position is being offered by ACES Studio, the development studio that also created Combat Flight Sim 2 and 3. The position asks for a person who can "make gamers feel the heat from explosions and choke in their engine smoke," and "contribute to game features [and] outside graphics."

Given that the series switched theaters every game (CFS 1 & 3 being European, CFS 2 being Pacific), it is expected that the game will take place in the Pacific War. Rumors have it that the game will be based on the quirky Combat Flight Simulator 3 engine instead of the highly acclaimed Flight Simulator 2004 engine, and that the game will focus on the later stages of World War II, which would be a welcome departure from predominantly early Pacific War games like Microprose's 1942 and CFS 2.

The Combat Flight Sim games have been released every two years around the holiday season, so CFS 4 will likely see a holiday 2004 release. Stay tuned for more details as they come!

I found this after typing Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator 4 in my browaser.

Needless to say....... If it is done under the CFS3 engine then they are idiots. CFS3 doesnt run well under its own engine http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif

AFAIC there is no WW2 Flight sim out BUT FB. I dont count IL2 because IL2 is in a class by itself.. and FB is its successor. MS sims have nice scenery as far as objects go.. but when it comes to ground textures down low...puhhh lease... they BITE!!! You get that mottled splotchy cr@p and it is no where NEAR as nice as FB. The ONLY thing CFS has over FB is the size and diversity of its maps.. which is directly related to being in the general flight sim business for so long. I for one will not buy another MS sim. I bought FS 2000 after 911.. I flew it @ 6 times. I bought CFS1,2 &3. 1 I flew often.. it was my first online sim... 2 I flew a bit.. but all my buds were in 1 so thats where i spent most of my time. I never really got into 2. 3 just palne sucks... period... FS2002 & 2004? They may be nice but I never flew FS 2000... why should I buy 2002 or 2004? I dont collect sims anymore. If I dont fly it I dont buy it. The only thing that would make me buy FS2004 would be if I decided to go for my pilots license. CFS3? Why in the world would I want to buy or even use a sim where I have to go all over frickin creation to get all the 3rd party pieces to make the d@mn thing run right? Dont get me wrong now.. I DO own CFS3 because I bought it when it came out and it was the worse piece of software I ever bought. Let them come out with CFS4.. they will make a mint.. all those CFS die hards who fly CFS3 will buy it and maybe... have something to brag about. Me? No thanks.. I have all the sim I need right here and coming in PF and BoB. For CFS4 to be any good it will have to be better than this.. and I just dont see that happening.........ESPECIALLY from Microsoft.

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/bookstore/tuskegeebondposter.jpg (http://tuskegeeairmen.org/airmen/who.html)[/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>vflyer@comcast.net [/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>99thPursuit Squadron IL2 Forgotten Battles (http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat)[/list]
UDQMG (http://www.uberdemon.com/index2.html) | HYPERLOBBY (http://hyperfighter.jinak.cz/) | IL2 Manager (http://www.checksix-fr.com/bibliotheque/detail_fichier.php?ID=1353) | MUDMOVERS (http://www.mudmovers.com/)

XyZspineZyX
04-25-2004, 06:52 PM
I hear what you guys are saying about wind, airpressure, navigation and the like, but actually, those are little nits to pick.

Right now, we don't even have EARTH GRAVITY properly simulated: planes known to have problems with energy can loop around with abandon.

The visual system (unless one uses icons) does not permit historical use of a height advantage (in fact, it penalizes it), and is centered on "looking good" rather than simulating the combat environment...

The weapons system changes with each new version, such that almost NOBODY is satisfied with the cannon, the MG, or any other weapon.

To make it short and sweet, this system merely looks good, but falls far short of a *great* simulation. Still, it's progress made... but let's halt the coronation for the time being until we get this tightened up, shall we?

AdEridanus
04-25-2004, 07:47 PM
I have not owned IL2 FB for long. Actually, my first IL2 game was the gold pack when it came out in March. In that short period I have had more fun with IL2 than with CFS1, CFS2, CFS3, and Jane's WW2 Fighters combined. There's the key. I had fun.

What brought me here was the overall failure of CFS3. It had such potential, and the appeal was there (after I had tweaked everyhting possible and cut her down to about 50%). But in the end it failed. Microsoft had no support, the forum was one large firestorm of flaming, and I was exchanging a FPS per tracer round... no dice. I actually traded in CFS3 for CFS2!

I still call FS2k4 my home for civilian flight simming, but I'll be surprised if another WW2 combat flight sim supplants IL2FB for me. And for those who think this community is worse than CFS's, you need to lay off on the mercury consumption. This is one of the better forums I've frequented. Thanks for all the help!

BTW, one day a man came into my place of work wtih a CFS3 hat on. Thinking it odd, I asked him where he came by it. It turns out he was an area rep for the game, and then he asked me,"do you have it? how do you like it?" I was honest, and only as cruel as neccessary, since he wasn't really at fault! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif
After a brief and bitter struggle, he kind of looked down and said... "yeah".

Good Times!

JG7_Rall
04-25-2004, 08:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SwingerSpecial:
IMHO - I've never understood the hype about the graphics on Flight Simulator series. I just recently took another look at FS 2004, and quite frankly, graphically it looked like crap compared to IL2. But that's just my opinion.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree. I am able to play FS2004 with everything maxed out and it doesn't seem as good as IL2...

"Son, never ask a man if he is a fighter pilot. If he is, he'll let you know. If he isn't, don't embarrass him."
Badges!? We don't needs no stinkin' badges!

tfu_iain1
04-25-2004, 08:23 PM
true, although FS2004 has its problems, it is in a niche that no other game really fulfills like it, that of civilian aircraft sim.

i expect they can't really use the FS2004 engine for cfs4 because it doesnt really contain a damage model, especially for the scenerey generator- its one thing to generate scenery, but to generate a workable damage model as well? and even worse, to retro-fit one to an engine that has already been made?

itll be interesting to see if a pacific cfs comes out at about the same time as pacific fighters, and to compare them. also, does anyone actually have any hard figures on the numbers of sales of IL2-FB vs CFS3? at a guess id say cfs3 has probably sold more just out of being in more shops, and having more awareness among consumers who arent total plane nuts like most of us are. i hope im wrong tho

TooCooL34
04-25-2004, 08:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG7_Rall:
I agree. I am able to play FS2004 with everything maxed out and it doesn't seem as good as IL2...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Couldn't agree more.
Despite of huge avionics and textures, most of the things in FS went wrong.
Maybe all the numbers in code could be correct, but it failed to deliver sensation of flight. Actually, I can't feel anything in FS. Too far from real flight for me.

-----------------

=815=TooCooL34,=815=Squadron

-= 8 1 5 =- FB Dedi Server is coming soon. (with AEP Dedicated Server)
100Mb IDC line, P4 2.8G server.
Full real but limited icon, minimap path and spdbar.
You can expect something, since I run the server myself. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

XyZspineZyX
04-25-2004, 08:59 PM
Microsoft's flight sims will sell better because of who makes them. M$ can basically force itself onto the shelves, and can afford to advertise and "push" its product more than any software manufacturer on earth.

Like so many other things, it has little to do with its relative quality.

mentalFlaws
04-25-2004, 09:21 PM
After CFS3 CFS4 could come with a real Spit MkIX and I still wouldnt buy it. Microsuck..never again

XyZspineZyX
04-25-2004, 09:45 PM
I always buy both sims but the american, british, and Ruskie members of this Forum SUUUUUCK!!! Germans Rule! CFS forum rules!

And so does crazy ivans moderation, or lack of it!

Ban me, so what!!!!!!!

And its not "uber" its ........."ueber" MORONS

Bearcat99
04-25-2004, 09:52 PM
Children.... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif why do thier parents let some of them have computers.... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif
Shouldnt you be doing homework?

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/bookstore/tuskegeebondposter.jpg (http://tuskegeeairmen.org/airmen/who.html)[/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>vflyer@comcast.net [/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>99thPursuit Squadron IL2 Forgotten Battles (http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat)[/list]
UDQMG (http://www.uberdemon.com/index2.html) | HYPERLOBBY (http://hyperfighter.jinak.cz/) | IL2 Manager (http://www.checksix-fr.com/bibliotheque/detail_fichier.php?ID=1353) | MUDMOVERS (http://www.mudmovers.com/)

XyZspineZyX
04-25-2004, 10:30 PM
Do better than that! This forum is so PC and boring!~

Tiger27
04-25-2004, 11:24 PM
So boring but you are still here?

Dolemite-
04-25-2004, 11:34 PM
http://www.bushwood.net/shack/caddy107.JPG

___________________________________________
Flying on HL as -Dolemite-
http://www.talonse.com/supergreg.swf &lt;----- ya wont regret it

Korolov
04-25-2004, 11:54 PM
Never tried CFS, and don't intend to either. I'm most addicted to the gunnery and damage model of FB - undermodeled, overmodeled, whatever - it just hooks me. Throw in flight models that are challenging to master, and you can't put it down.

I doubt the CFS series has either.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

XyZspineZyX
04-26-2004, 12:13 AM
I have no issue with the Game. I just think a lot of you are, to use your own stupid verbage, uber *******s

WOLFMondo
04-26-2004, 12:40 AM
I didn't like CFS3 cause it lacked atmosphere and when flying It always seemed rather detached. Not a great description I know but it felt like that.

http://bill.nickdafish.com/sig/mondo.jpg
Wolfgaming.net. Where the Gameplay is teamplay (http://www.wolfgaming.net)

Capt.LoneRanger
04-26-2004, 01:48 AM
I run LOMAC with a comfortable 30-40 FPS on a 9800pro, so I can't complain either.
I play IL2FB with 40-60 FPS on full settings.

But it is a fact, that LOMAC is built for tomorrows PCs (which is quite good for it's longlivety, btw), but did you ever play FS2004 on full details? It's definately slower as LOMAC, even if you set the minimum FPS higher than 25.

You should also remember, that flying on the open sky is not the thing that's the problem. It's when you're low and in an area with a lot of details, like cities. And there, my LOMAC still runs faster than FS2004.

greets
Capt.LoneRanger

http://www.imageshack.us/img1/7182/1703abcdefg.gif