PDA

View Full Version : Give us some real incentives to buy the PF



nearmiss
09-27-2004, 05:55 PM
I'd really like to read about some substantial improvements in the PF program that makes sense to some of that are experienced with the IL2 series. Not that I'm any guru, but I have been around since IL2.

I'm seeing all the same kinda blurbs with PF we saw with FB and AEP. In fact, I still haven't gotten over the fact that AEP was supposed to be a patch and it turned into a paid add-on.

Regardless, carrier landings is the only difference I read about in the sim. I did those in Jane's F/A-18 and CFS2 nothing to that after a week or so. What's been improved in the actual program,i.e., the AI, the weather, the skies, the clouds, the FMB, the comms, wingmen commands, the set in stone landing patterns, etc. They comms are still saying "he's going to hell" since IL2. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

If this is just a planes add-on, why don't you just call it that. It's not right identifying it as an all new product when it's the same old program with some new maps, planes and other "graphic stuff".

This is the last paragraph from the recent review at SimHQ...you can read it

CLICK HERE (http://www.simhq.com/_air2/air_033a.html)

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Overall it feels like a worthy add on to IL2:FB.It doesn’t feel like a new game, more of an updated add on but in reality that is what it is.I loved the series so I will of course love this game. I suspect the carrier heads will get off on trying to land on some of these ships. I imagine some of the more memorable battles will be recreated on Hyperlobby. I think a lot of people will enjoy this game, even more if some of the ships and aircraft promised make it into the game. Look for this title real soon.</span>


You talk about improvements look at these F4 terrains (http://www.simmersworld.com/files/screens/screens/deuk1.jpg)

and these (http://www.simmersworld.com/files/screens/screens/deuk3.jpg)

nearmiss
09-27-2004, 05:55 PM
I'd really like to read about some substantial improvements in the PF program that makes sense to some of that are experienced with the IL2 series. Not that I'm any guru, but I have been around since IL2.

I'm seeing all the same kinda blurbs with PF we saw with FB and AEP. In fact, I still haven't gotten over the fact that AEP was supposed to be a patch and it turned into a paid add-on.

Regardless, carrier landings is the only difference I read about in the sim. I did those in Jane's F/A-18 and CFS2 nothing to that after a week or so. What's been improved in the actual program,i.e., the AI, the weather, the skies, the clouds, the FMB, the comms, wingmen commands, the set in stone landing patterns, etc. They comms are still saying "he's going to hell" since IL2. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

If this is just a planes add-on, why don't you just call it that. It's not right identifying it as an all new product when it's the same old program with some new maps, planes and other "graphic stuff".

This is the last paragraph from the recent review at SimHQ...you can read it

CLICK HERE (http://www.simhq.com/_air2/air_033a.html)

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Overall it feels like a worthy add on to IL2:FB.It doesn’t feel like a new game, more of an updated add on but in reality that is what it is.I loved the series so I will of course love this game. I suspect the carrier heads will get off on trying to land on some of these ships. I imagine some of the more memorable battles will be recreated on Hyperlobby. I think a lot of people will enjoy this game, even more if some of the ships and aircraft promised make it into the game. Look for this title real soon.</span>


You talk about improvements look at these F4 terrains (http://www.simmersworld.com/files/screens/screens/deuk1.jpg)

and these (http://www.simmersworld.com/files/screens/screens/deuk3.jpg)

VF51_Flatspin
09-27-2004, 09:34 PM
I've landed on carriers in other sims too and from what I've 'read' we can throw all that to the wind...this will be more realistic than anything to date.

I also don't think it's much of a stretch calling it a new product with all the new planes and maps and carriers, etc...even if it did have the same basic engine - which I doubt it will.

VF-10_Snacky
09-27-2004, 09:37 PM
Well it is the same engine, but Carrier ops alone is enough to get my $40

VW-IceFire
09-27-2004, 09:40 PM
The new maps, scenarios, and the new features with the dynamic campaign generator are alone worth the price of admission.

Plus I look forward to the carrier ops, flying some of the classics of the PTO, and the attack bombers. Low level runs in an A-20 sounds like a blast...especially when the target is a very small island filled with AAA http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Tater-SW-
09-27-2004, 10:03 PM
It's only $40, not like it takes loads of serious thinking. If I had a big SUV that'd be a tank of gas.

tater

lbhskier37
09-27-2004, 10:14 PM
or you could pay $40 for that new FPS game that adds so much more dimension to the one that came before it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

TgD Thunderbolt56
09-27-2004, 10:30 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1241.gif

Nice try, but the improved water, new flyables, maps and whatever little tweaks are included are plenty for me. It's just like opening the door to another theater...wait a minute, that's exactly what it is. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Giganoni
09-27-2004, 10:32 PM
Yeah, you can't leave out the new campaign system where you can actually DO something to change (or at least delay) the course of the war.

BfHeFwMe
09-28-2004, 12:03 AM
I'd at least wait till I played it a while to make such concrete statements about it's state. How do you happen to know?

Copperhead310th
09-28-2004, 12:04 AM
oh boy. Revtionist history.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif i'm like so thrilled.

you can bet some yo-yo will write a campaign that has the nazi's winning the war.
yippe. 3 cheers for the master race. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

chris455
09-28-2004, 12:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Copperhead310th:
oh boy. Revtionist history.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif i'm like so thrilled.

you can bet some yo-yo will write a campaign that has the nazi's winning the war.
yippe. 3 cheers for the master race. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right on Copperhead.

I'm glad I'm not he only one left that's happy with the way WWII turned out. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

TAGERT.
09-28-2004, 01:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
I'd really like to read about some substantial improvements in the PF program that makes sense to some of that are experienced with the IL2 series. Not that I'm any guru, but I have been around since IL2.

I'm seeing all the same kinda blurbs with PF we saw with FB and AEP. In fact, I still haven't gotten over the fact that AEP was supposed to be a patch and it turned into a paid add-on.

Regardless, carrier landings is the only difference I read about in the sim. I did those in Jane's F/A-18 and CFS2 nothing to that after a week or so. What's been improved in the actual program,i.e., the AI, the weather, the skies, the clouds, the FMB, the comms, wingmen commands, the set in stone landing patterns, etc. They comms are still saying "he's going to hell" since IL2. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

If this is just a planes add-on, why don't you just call it that. It's not right identifying it as an all new product when it's the same old program with some new maps, planes and other "graphic stuff". <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Been around sense IL2 huh? Well that makes you new than.. See.. in the past if a game maker mades something that caught on and thus sold alot.. They typically come out with an addon or another version of the game that makes use of the game engine with MINOR improvement. I know this is before you time.. but take a look at the RainBow 6 stuff.. Or way Way WAY before you time take a look at the Falcon 3.0 stuff. Same game engines.. minor improvments.. Basically same game with new missions and a few new weapons/planes. Now get this.. THAT IS WHAT GAME MAKERS HOPE AND PRAY FOR!! Something so good and so popular that people want more.. So the GIVE US MORE! It is cheap for them and good for us because they get more profit out of using a current developed prove engine and we get more of what we like. It is that simple.. Economics 101! The flip side is a game that nobody likes.. So nobody talks about it.. So nobody buys it.. So you dont see he game engine being used more than ONCE! Dam people.. Stop focusing on the negatives and take a GD look at what you got!!

Giganoni
09-28-2004, 01:51 AM
What kind of comments are those Copperhead? Chris? You don't like the idea of a campaign that flows? If I'm playing a dive bomber for the Americans and I fail along with my AI buddies to sink any Japanese carriers (I'm a crummy dive bomber anyway), but The Japanese sink two of mine, it should still be an American victory? I've been led to believe that this campaign system has a lot of potential at least for naval carrier actions where the effects of aircraft are more pronounced. I don't see how that could be anything, but more entertaining.

WOLFMondo
09-28-2004, 03:08 AM
PF is a whole new game. Had they tried to release another Aces I would have still bought it but been disappointed but PF is a great game by itself but added to FB/Aces its going to be a number of years till Battle of Britian or any other flight sim can come close to the amount of content and level of detail and quality Il2:FB/Aces/PF can offer.

Just look at the aircraft were getting, the potential updates, new maps, the new effects, the 128 player option!!!! What more do people want given the existing technology available?

Tully__
09-28-2004, 04:33 AM
I'm getting it, warts and all. I expect to thoroughly enjoy it.

VVS-Manuc
09-28-2004, 04:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VF51_Flatspin:
I've landed on carriers in other sims too and from what I've 'read' we can throw all that to the wind...this will be more realistic than _anything_ to date.

I also don't think it's much of a stretch calling it a new product with all the new planes and maps and carriers, etc...even if it _did_ have the same basic engine - which I doubt it will. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The same "realism" as the landings in FB/AEP are now? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif Good joke

VVS-Manuc
09-28-2004, 04:46 AM
May be "complex engine management" is coming in PF? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

carguy_
09-28-2004, 05:14 AM
I`m willing to understand those who brag about that they have to pay another $30 for 70% the same stuff.Maybe you guys appreciate your hard earned money or maybe you just want to place another troll post here.

I`m rather happy that Maddox team took the effort to expand IL2 into such a fine MULTIPLE THEATER sim.Do not forget that it is hard work also even if a major part of the new stuff is made by the community.

I truely respect your opinions as to why not buy PF,but why the "Make me buy it" attitudde?Is there something wrong,then don`t buy it.I myself am not so interested in pacific theater but the urge to try out the new planes and the fun I get out of it says it all.

I`ve been here since IL2 days aswell and the whole picture of IL2 &gt;&gt;FB&gt;&gt;AEP&gt;&gt;&gt;PF evolution says one thing to me.D@MN GOOD FUN!!!!

Even Fallout2 hasn`t been on my HDD so long as this game,and I`m willing to keep it that way.

Biloxi72
09-28-2004, 07:15 AM
I have always loved alternate history. I loved "victorius German Arms" by gary gygax. I loved panzer general 2 where if i beat russia i could invade britian and then the US. I also enjoyed the game "fortress America". it is another look at history where one can see how lucky things turned out the way it did. I love the german whermacht during this time period because they were probably the best trained army in the world at that time. But no way am i a nazi lover or wished that the war came out then the way it did. BUt for GAMING purposes being able to alter history a bit will be great!

56th BMAC
09-28-2004, 07:43 AM
Go out one fewer time than normal and you will have the cash to buy PF. Damn good investment if you ask me. Carrier ops and the multi-player stuff alone make it more than worth it to me. I don't think it's too much to ask to float Oleg some money between now and when BoB is released. Look at it this way: divide the cost of IL2, FB, Aces and PF into the number of hours you've spent playing it. A cheaper addiction I have yet to find...

VF51_Flatspin
09-28-2004, 08:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 56th BMAC:
divide the cost of IL2, FB, Aces and PF into the number of hours you've spent playing it. A cheaper addiction I have yet to find... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL...well put!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

BSS_Goat
09-28-2004, 08:23 AM
and most people will go rent a movie to watch for max 2 hours and think your crazy for spending $50 on a game.

Movie for 2 hours = 1.50 per hour

Il2+Video card+RAM for 2 years @ 4 hours per week = .90 per hour

nearmiss
09-28-2004, 10:04 AM
Interesting responses

It's great everyone sees things differently.

The fact:

<span class="ev_code_PINK">It's all relative</span> http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

nearmiss
09-28-2004, 10:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TAGERT.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
I'd really like to read about some substantial improvements in the PF program that makes sense to some of that are experienced with the IL2 series. Not that I'm any guru, but I have been around since IL2.

I'm seeing all the same kinda blurbs with PF we saw with FB and AEP. In fact, I still haven't gotten over the fact that AEP was supposed to be a patch and it turned into a paid add-on.

Regardless, carrier landings is the only difference I read about in the sim. I did those in Jane's F/A-18 and CFS2 nothing to that after a week or so. What's been improved in the actual program,i.e., the AI, the weather, the skies, the clouds, the FMB, the comms, wingmen commands, the set in stone landing patterns, etc. They comms are still saying "he's going to hell" since IL2. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

If this is just a planes add-on, why don't you just call it that. It's not right identifying it as an all new product when it's the same old program with some new maps, planes and other "graphic stuff". <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Been around sense IL2 huh? Well that makes you new than.. See.. in the past if a game maker mades something that caught on and thus sold alot.. They typically come out with an addon or another version of the game that makes use of the game engine with MINOR improvement. I know this is before you time.. but take a look at the RainBow 6 stuff.. Or way Way WAY before you time take a look at the Falcon 3.0 stuff. Same game engines.. minor improvments.. Basically same game with new missions and a few new weapons/planes. Now get this.. THAT IS WHAT GAME MAKERS HOPE AND PRAY FOR!! Something so good and so popular that people want more.. So the GIVE US MORE! It is cheap for them and good for us because they get more profit out of using a current developed prove engine and we get more of what we like. It is that simple.. Economics 101! The flip side is a game that nobody likes.. So nobody talks about it.. So nobody buys it.. So you dont see he game engine being used more than ONCE! Dam people.. Stop focusing on the negatives and take a GD look at what you got!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You know Tagert...your sig says it all. When I read your response it sounds just like the guys picture you have in your sig...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Dam people..http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif Stop focusing on the negatives and take a GD look at what you got!
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/4ALL2SEE/PICTURES/UBI_FORUMS/MyUbiSig.jpg
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lighten up, forums are about opinions.

Fliegeroffizier
09-28-2004, 11:39 AM
I always look at it like this: hereabouts to go to a movie in a theater/cinema runs about $8.00 for a ticket, $4.50 for a Coke, $4.50 for Popcorn, $2.00 for Gasoline to and from...$19.00, let's call it $20....and that would be $40 if you bring the spouse or a date...and you get less than two hours of entertainment. Add a basic dinner and a drink before or after the movie, and you are into it for at least $80.

So, $40 bucks to buy PF for even just one or two evenings of 'flying' a state-of-the-art, historically accurate, flight sim seems like a Very good deal. For simplicity sake, say you 'fly' a mere 8 hours per week for one year(before an upgrade or new product replaces it on your harddrive) and it works out to be a ridiculous $.08(Eight Cents) per hour!!!! And many of us "fly" a LOT more than that, so it works out to Truly be a mere few pennies...

How can anybody complain about that!?


[Now, on the other hand, the $50 I spent on CFS3 I consider to have been a TOTAL Waste. It's a matter of truth in advertising, or lack thereof]

RocketRobin__
09-28-2004, 12:28 PM
I think the idea of carrier warfare is pretty cool and has a great deal of value.
The fact that you can sink enemy carriers and thus eliminate spawn points will bring a new dynamic to team based warefare.

I.e. a victory condition where you have to use advanced tactics and focus on team oriented game play, or lose. This implies greatly enhanced competition and for me, competition is what online play is all about.

Furball games are good fun and fine practice, but they don't lend themselves to the thrills that a clear team victory can provide.

Chuck_Older
09-28-2004, 12:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by chris455:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Copperhead310th:
oh boy. Revtionist history.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif i'm like so thrilled.

you can bet some yo-yo will write a campaign that has the nazi's winning the war.
yippe. 3 cheers for the master race. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right on Copperhead.

I'm glad I'm not he only one left that's happy with the way WWII turned out. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's not Revisionist History. That term is thrown around a LOT here, but that scenario isn't revisionist.

It's fantasy. I'm not joking. Revisionism puts what happened in another light. Typically it means you look at past events with information and values that are in place today. Which of course sickens me.

But Revisionist History is pretty much an abused term around here. I have been called a revisionist because of statments I made concerning how the war affected the world to the present day. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif Again, not revisionism, just an observation.

Thud-487BS
09-28-2004, 01:26 PM
Simply put, that's $40 less my wife can spend on worthless e-bay stuff in November. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

owlwatcher
09-28-2004, 01:49 PM
We really do need some incentives.
I say there should be some girly calanders from the 40s.
Plus as a added bonus Some girly posters from the same period.

That would be worth 40 dollars. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

steve_v
09-28-2004, 06:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
It's only $40, not like it takes loads of serious thinking. If I had a big SUV that'd be a tank of gas.

tater <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif I have a V-6 Toyota Camry and it takes US$36 to fill up. Just can't wait to go sliding across carrier decks attempting to land. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

TAGERT.
09-28-2004, 08:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
You know Tagert...your sig says it all. When I read your response it sounds just like the guys picture you have in your sig... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>You know.. that statement would upset me if someone I respected had said it. As for the topic at hand.. I'm sorry your so upset with my reply that you have to resort to personal insults. But it does not change the fact that your focusing on the negatives and ignoring the positives.. Nor does it change the fact that you were totally wrong to say "it's not right identifying it as an all new product" as if they were trying to pull a fast one. The simple truth is in your economics 101 book that you never opened up. Many sim makers have done it in the past.. And by it I mean using a game engine more than once with minor improvements. Which by the way I think Madox and ubi have made very clear.. Yet you missed it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
Lighten up, forums are about opinions. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Lighten up? Ok, I wont say you sound like Hitler when you disagree with me. As for forums and opinions, it is not a one way street.. If your going to put it out there.. Do so knowing that there is a good chance not everyone will agree with you.

Snootles
09-28-2004, 08:35 PM
Oeyh!

Considering how much I enjoy FB/AEP, I would pay full price for a simple "Il-2 with Pacific planes, maps, and carrier ops" deal. The truth is we are getting more than that. The whole system is being revamped and improved.

No, it's not perfect. Tell me about a flying game that is and I'll tell you to get real http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif.

LEXX_Luthor
09-28-2004, 08:51 PM
nearmiss is having a bad waypoint day.

You know how you wake up all your waypoints are messed up and you just can't get them right.

Snootles
09-28-2004, 09:03 PM
Sorta how I felt this afternoon. My compass was all wonky.

Bearcat99
09-28-2004, 09:58 PM
Are you kidding? Why... flying alone under these FMs is another world.. combat even more so.. carrier landings?? Pffft!! Ill take it sign me up!!! The expanded plane set??!! PFTTT!! The best thing smokin... with,if you read between the lines of Olegs post yesterday, flyable bombers.. at least 2 others on the way. PUUHHH LEASE!!! Nearmiss you will be panting at the mailbox or your local retailer like the rest of us.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif Convince me... YA RIIIIGHT!!!! LMAO!!! And you know what.. I dont even try to convince people anymore.. I tell them it is the best d@mn WW2 sim on the market bar none with a community as talented and diverse as any buch of yahoos anywhere. It takes a lot of system resources and will wind up bringing you hours of enjoyment. More fun than a trip to DisneyWorld IMO and a hell of a lot less costly.. now excuse me.. I have some airfields to bomb.... LMAO!!!

aminx
09-28-2004, 10:07 PM
a big incentive will be no flyable torp bombers
aminx

Stickmonkey1
09-29-2004, 12:38 PM
I think I would agree with nearmiss to an extent - by that I mean that there are enough features to qualify this as a new game, but are they necessarilty the right ones?

I would like to see a better AI since I have yet to fly online, and few more problems ironed out in the FMs of some aircraft. I AM very interested in the prospect of PF and will probably buy it, but I am failing at the moment to get too excited. For me it looks as though it will be an expansion and not much more.

Time may prove me wrong however... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

nearmiss
09-29-2004, 01:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TAGERT.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
You know Tagert...your sig says it all. When I read your response it sounds just like the guys picture you have in your sig... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>You know.. that statement would upset me if someone I respected had said it. As for the topic at hand.. I'm sorry your so upset with my reply that you have to resort to personal insults. But it does not change the fact that your focusing on the negatives and ignoring the positives.. Nor does it change the fact that you were totally wrong to say "it's not right identifying it as an all new product" as if they were trying to pull a fast one. The simple truth is in your economics 101 book that you never opened up. Many sim makers have done it in the past.. And by it I mean using a game engine more than once with minor improvements. Which by the way I think Madox and ubi have made very clear.. Yet you missed it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
Lighten up, forums are about opinions. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Lighten up? Ok, I wont say you sound like Hitler when you disagree with me. As for forums and opinions, it is not a one way street.. If your going to put it out there.. Do so knowing that there is a good chance not everyone will agree with you. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">==============================</span>
Your right, I did say you sound like the guy in the picture. You never ending blocks of verbiage create an image of someone ranting and raving with little consideration for the reader.

<span class="ev_code_PINK">That may have been a bit harsh</span>, but you're out of line with this kind of talk

<span class="ev_code_PINK">Dam people.. Stop focusing on the negatives and take a GD look at what you got!!

Dam people.. Stop focusing on the negatives and take a GD look at what you got!!
</span>

<span class="ev_code_PINK">Profanity and double exclamation points, so what does that sound like. Sounds like a rant to me.</span>

Again, the above comment along with your not using paragraphs to separate your thoughts in your writing brought to mind your sig picture.

You should also more carefully read what other posters are saying before you respond to them as you've responded herein.

You've personalized this whole thing, I am not put off by your responses, nor do I care if your opinions differ from mine.

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Maybe you should go back and read one of my responses on this thread, before your long-winded abuses. </span>

Interesting responses

It's great everyone sees things differently.

The fact:

It's all relative

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">============================</span>

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">I'm not going any further with you on this, and I certainly wouldn't work myself up anymore if I were you. This is just a forums, and there will always be disagreements among posters.
</span>

Obi_Kwiet
09-29-2004, 08:42 PM
Incentive? How about 20 new planes that have been painstakingly modled to a detail unknown in other sims? How about a bunch of new maps, that, from what I hear, take a long time to make? How about a major overhaul to the code to get it to take full advantage of today hard ware? That right there would be 150$ as an add-on for CFS. And for all you know, we may even get some nice campaigns. For all this nice engine, though I can't really complain, but I do sort of miss alot of immersion. I hope they fix that. Oh, well, for 40$ I'm still getting the deal of a life time.


EDIT: For all you ingrates whining about you game, heh you just got served. Warning for language. ownage (http://www.leftcorner.com/swg/ff/ff6.htm)

Snootles
09-29-2004, 09:48 PM
Didn't they say the total of new flyables would exceed 40. Just wondering where you got 20 from.

TAGERT.
09-29-2004, 09:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
Your right, I did say you sound like the guy in the picture. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Agreed 100%

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
You never ending blocks of verbiage create an image of someone ranting and raving with little consideration for the reader. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You know.. that statement would upset me if someone I respected had said it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
That may have been a bit harsh <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>More childish than harsh really.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
, but you're out of line with this kind of talk <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Disagree 100%

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
Profanity and double exclamation points, so what does that sound like. Sounds like a rant to me. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Disagree 100% In light of the multitudes of morons whining about one bad aspect when surrounded by hundreds of good aspects.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
Again, the above comment along with your not using paragraphs to separate your thoughts in your writing brought to mind your sig picture. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>In light of all the errors you have made on this subject and others I'm convinced there are a lot of things ratting around in your thoughts.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
You should also more carefully read what other posters are saying before you respond to them as you've responded herein. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Likewise.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
You've personalized this whole thing, <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Only after your Hitler comments.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
I am not put off by your responses, nor do I care if your opinions differ from mine. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Likewise.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
Maybe you should go back and read one of my responses on this thread, before your long-winded abuses. [/color]Just what part is it you feel I got wrong?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by nearmiss:
I'm not going any further with you on this, <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Promise?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
and I certainly wouldn't work myself up anymore if I were you. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Certainly not as much as you did

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
This is just a forums, and there will always be disagreements among posters. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Yet you seem to have a problem with people who disagree with yours.

PS nice use of colors!

actionhank1786
09-30-2004, 02:17 AM
"The aircraft that I have flown feel roughly equivalent to their real world contemporaries but I am sure there will be some arguments when the game comes out. "
Haha that was my favorite part from the "Preview" mislabelled a Review. What's he waiting on? People are picking apart the game already. I've said it before, and i'll say it again. This game is nothing "new" it isnt going to be what the first Il-2 was when it came onto the scene. What it will be, is one of the best damn Pacific Theater games you can get your hands on currently. Dont like it? Program your own.

Fehler
09-30-2004, 02:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by chris455:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Copperhead310th:
oh boy. Revtionist history.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif i'm like so thrilled.

you can bet some yo-yo will write a campaign that has the nazi's winning the war.
yippe. 3 cheers for the master race. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right on Copperhead.

I'm glad I'm not he only one left that's happy with the way WWII turned out. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

WRONG! Why to you play a game? For competition and challenge. What challenge is there when the outcome is predetermined?

Statements like this make me wonder if you guys think that people that fly axis IN A FREAKING GAME are secretly evil Nazis! I always fly axis (Unless the numbers are overwhelmingly lopsided for them) Am I evil? ROFL! I am an American, and outside of playing war games, I have to ask you guys, have YOU ever taken a REAL bullet for your country? Have you seen anything other than "Pixel combat?"

Revisionist theorists.. LOL! I seriously doubt anyone that I know that flys this game wishes that the Empire of Japan or Nazi Germany had won the war. But I do enjoy a game that I have even a very slight chance of winning. That is why I would enjoy the ability to have my actions actually count in a dynamic setting. Oh, this would also apply to dedicated allied flyers as battles like Coral Sea was not really viewed as a U.S. victory. Maybe you guys could "Win" that scenario. Or perhaps you could protect the Yorktown at Midway and it wouldnt get lost at that battle. Ah, when I put it in those terms, then I bet you are more than willing to want a dynamic campaign that would allow for alternative outcomes to real historic events. But wouldnt that make you revisionist theorists? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

It's a game, based on history, but still nothing more than entertainment. Open your eyes for a change.

aminx
09-30-2004, 05:34 AM
they dont care about us
aminx

nearmiss
09-30-2004, 08:42 AM
Here is a link to the Pacific Fighters review at SIMHQ

CLICK TO READ REVIEW (http://simhq.com/_air2/air_033a.html)

This is the last paragraph from the recent review at SimHQ...you can read it there as well

Overall it feels like a worthy add on to IL2:FB.It doesn’t feel like a new game, more of an updated add on but in reality that is what it is.I loved the series so I will of course love this game. I suspect the carrier heads will get off on trying to land on some of these ships. I imagine some of the more memorable battles will be recreated on Hyperlobby. I think a lot of people will enjoy this game, even more if some of the ships and aircraft promised make it into the game. Look for this title real soon.

TAGERT.
09-30-2004, 09:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
Here is a link to the Pacific Fighters review at SIMHQ

http://simhq.com/_air2/air_033a.html

This is the last paragraph from the recent review at SimHQ...you can read it there as well

Overall it feels like a worthy add on to IL2:FB.It doesn’t feel like a new game, more of an updated add on but in reality that is what it is.I loved the series so I will of course love this game. I suspect the carrier heads will get off on trying to land on some of these ships. I imagine some of the more memorable battles will be recreated on Hyperlobby. I think a lot of people will enjoy this game, even more if some of the ships and aircraft promised make it into the game. Look for this title real soon. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Not one thing suprising there either.. Well to people with reasonable expectation and understand the value (PROS) of making use of an existing game engine vs. the downside (CONS) of a whole new engine. If you dont know about the PROS and CONS feel free to ask.. Ill learn yah! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

actionhank1786
09-30-2004, 09:43 AM
"Boo hooo no one went out, developed a brand new engine that's as good as Half Life 2! no one wrote me a letter asking me what all of the planes I think should be flyable, regardless of developers time constraints and lack of cockpit date, boo hoo I can tell from the video the planes dont fly right, waaaa"

actionhank1786
09-30-2004, 09:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nearmiss:
Here is a link to the Pacific Fighters review at SIMHQ

http://simhq.com/_air2/air_033a.html

This is the last paragraph from the recent review at SimHQ...you can read it there as well

Overall it feels like a worthy add on to IL2:FB.It doesn’t feel like a new game, more of an updated add on but in reality that is what it is.I loved the series so I will of course love this game. I suspect the carrier heads will get off on trying to land on some of these ships. I imagine some of the more memorable battles will be recreated on Hyperlobby. I think a lot of people will enjoy this game, even more if some of the ships and aircraft promised make it into the game. Look for this title real soon. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's a preview damnit! Are you even reading the thing. It's a beta build of he game!

nearmiss
09-30-2004, 09:52 AM
I'm a little amazed by the fact that there is a five page review on SimHQ and about a half page blurb on UbiSoft.

I'm wondering when UbiSoft is going to step up to the plate and take some hits.

SKULLS_CoyMS
09-30-2004, 11:11 AM
Yes Ubi step up......and get a big thanks from all us who are eagerly awaiting a old game on an outdated engine,with all the wrong planes,and all the wrong maps,and so greatly over priced......
when its released you can find me...waiting in line,money in hand........and I'll be saying ,thank you,thank you...all the way home

actionhank1786
10-01-2004, 09:49 AM
I'll be standing in Electronics Boutique watching them open the Ubi Soft box, and pull out Pacific Fighters, all the while hyperventalating into a brown paper bag