PDA

View Full Version : SOW - I hope it feels like the original IL2



dbuff
06-24-2008, 08:10 AM
In that original game, there was more of a sense or feeling of controlling a real aircraft.

There was a update , maybe FB flight models that changed how the planes felt to fly. I really lost alot of excitment to the gamewhen that happened.

Here's to hopeing that SOW recaptures some of that feel of the orginal IL2 flying.

dbuff
06-24-2008, 08:10 AM
In that original game, there was more of a sense or feeling of controlling a real aircraft.

There was a update , maybe FB flight models that changed how the planes felt to fly. I really lost alot of excitment to the gamewhen that happened.

Here's to hopeing that SOW recaptures some of that feel of the orginal IL2 flying.

Airmail109
06-24-2008, 08:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dbuff:
In that original game, there was more of a sense or feeling of controlling a real aircraft.

There was a update , maybe FB flight models that changed how the planes felt to fly. I really lost alot of excitment to the gamewhen that happened.

Here's to hopeing that SOW recaptures some of that feel of the orginal IL2 flying. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Go back, install the original il2. The fm is pants compared to IL2 1946 with the exception of spins

mortoma
06-24-2008, 10:29 AM
Yeah right!! If SOW is as clunky as the original IL2, I wouldn't buy it. The original was ok at the time but I remember a P-39 and Mig-3 that were barely able to take off and the initial climb out was tough. You'd have to fly near the ground for a few miles just to build up speed and then climb about 100 feet per minute.

And then there was the FW-190, which was a POS all the way until Forgotten Battles came out.
Even a simple, easy manuever was near impossible without stalling and it felt like it didn't have any weight to it in a dive or a nose down to pick up speed. It was horrendous!!

NO THANKS!!!!

Xiolablu3
06-24-2008, 10:45 AM
You need to go back and install IL2 and get rid of those rose tinted memories.

IL2 : 1946 is leaps and bounds ahead.

TinyTim
06-24-2008, 11:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma:
And then there was the FW-190, which was a POS all the way until Forgotten Battles came out.
Even a simple, easy manuever was near impossible without stalling and it felt like it didn't have any weight to it in a dive or a nose down to pick up speed. It was horrendous!!

NO THANKS!!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not to mention even a Yak-1 could outdive it...

Metatron_123
06-24-2008, 11:28 AM
Agreed. Add to that the habit of the AI use turn and burn tacics regardless if it's a Bf-109 or La-5.

La-5 FN ruled supreme in those days because AI always tried to turn with it!

SeaFireLIV
06-24-2008, 12:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Metatron_123:
Agreed. Add to that the habit of the AI use turn and burn tacics regardless if it's a Bf-109 or La-5.

La-5 FN ruled supreme in those days because AI always tried to turn with it! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol. I remember that and in my newby days I thought it was fine going round in circles picking off 109s! Ah well, we learn eventually.

crucislancer
06-24-2008, 03:15 PM
I actually still have the original IL-2 on my HD. About once a month or so I'll run it just for the heck of it. IL-2 1946 blows it away, hands down.

AWL_Spinner
06-25-2008, 12:44 AM
I love the IL2 mission (I think it was the 'first' demo) where you scramble an FW-190 against an IL2 airfield attack.

Still play that sometimes, for old times' sake.

WTE_Galway
06-25-2008, 12:54 AM
The original IL2 was more challenging to fly ... just getting a 109 off the ground was an effort for new pilots and the spin on the P39 was vicious. There was a lot of allegations of "dumbing down" the game to appeal to a bigger market when FB was released.

But "more challenging" does not mean it had more accurate flight models. A lot of the "challenging" aspects were actually due to flaws that were fixed.


I will say one thing though .. the sound of a DB601 was much meatier in the original game.

dirkpit7
06-25-2008, 01:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma:
And then there was the FW-190, which was a POS all the way until Forgotten Battles came out.
Even a simple, easy manuever was near impossible without stalling and it felt like it didn't have any weight to it in a dive or a nose down to pick up speed. It was horrendous!!

NO THANKS!!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not to mention even a Yak-1 could outdive it... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think the Fw 190 is notably easier to fly in original IL-2. I was able to use it successfully in online server with 'relaxed' settings.

And yes, there's no question that 1946 is much better.

msalama
06-25-2008, 03:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">A lot of the "challenging" aspects were actually due to flaws that were fixed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

+1

I compared the original to v4.08 a while ago myself, and the original while admittedly harder is also much, much co****r. Felt pretty arcade in comparison, actually...

PS. I see the forum nanny still sucks logs http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Well how the h3ll should I put it then - "co4rser" maybe???

Yah, 3133T forum SW this http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

mortoma
06-25-2008, 01:28 PM
You mean the word a-r-s-e is filtered now?? Even if it's within a legit word? ****??

mortoma
06-25-2008, 01:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dirkpit7:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma:
And then there was the FW-190, which was a POS all the way until Forgotten Battles came out.
Even a simple, easy manuever was near impossible without stalling and it felt like it didn't have any weight to it in a dive or a nose down to pick up speed. It was horrendous!!

NO THANKS!!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not to mention even a Yak-1 could outdive it... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think the Fw 190 is notably easier to fly in original IL-2. I was able to use it successfully in online server with 'relaxed' settings.

And yes, there's no question that 1946 is much better. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Just because the original stinky FM of the 190 suited your flying style better back then does not mean it was right. It's much more fluid and dynamic to fly now and has some heft to it when losing altitude. The high speed turn and zoom climb are much better now, like they should be. While the low speed turn is still bad, like it should be. The old FM had terrible turn at all speeds and no "dynamicism" for diving, or if attempting to zoom up with retained energy. One could not build much energy with it to begin with. It was almost like it was a "dead" FM or something. Far better now.


Flight models are not to be judged by how much you like them, or how you learn to exploit them after flying them for a while. They are to be judged by how freekin' accurate they are compared to real life!!

dbuff
06-26-2008, 01:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WTE_Galway:
The original IL2 was more challenging to fly ... just getting a 109 off the ground was an effort for new pilots and the spin on the P39 was vicious. There was a lot of allegations of "dumbing down" the game to appeal to a bigger market when FB was released.

But "more challenging" does not mean it had more accurate flight models. A lot of the "challenging" aspects were actually due to flaws that were fixed.


I will say one thing though .. the sound of a DB601 was much meatier in the original game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sir, I think you understanding what I say.

To others, I did not mention FM.

I say its two seperate aspects of game.
Both important.

K_Freddie
06-26-2008, 02:48 PM
I hope SOW brings in full torque...
The smile on my face and I see an a/c spinning out from level flight behind me... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif NOOOOB

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Chris0382
06-27-2008, 05:22 AM
I hope the ground objects are bigger and if its not in the new IL-2 console version, it will disappoint.

Sirrith
06-27-2008, 07:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dirkpit7:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma:
And then there was the FW-190, which was a POS all the way until Forgotten Battles came out.
Even a simple, easy manuever was near impossible without stalling and it felt like it didn't have any weight to it in a dive or a nose down to pick up speed. It was horrendous!!

NO THANKS!!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not to mention even a Yak-1 could outdive it... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think the Fw 190 is notably easier to fly in original IL-2. I was able to use it successfully in online server with 'relaxed' settings.

And yes, there's no question that 1946 is much better. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Just because the original stinky FM of the 190 suited your flying style better back then does not mean it was right. It's much more fluid and dynamic to fly now and has some heft to it when losing altitude. The high speed turn and zoom climb are much better now, like they should be. While the low speed turn is still bad, like it should be. The old FM had terrible turn at all speeds and no "dynamicism" for diving, or if attempting to zoom up with retained energy. One could not build much energy with it to begin with. It was almost like it was a "dead" FM or something. Far better now.


Flight models are not to be judged by how much you like them, or how you learn to exploit them after flying them for a while. They are to be judged by how freekin' accurate they are compared to real life!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
He isnt saying it was more accurate, he's just saying he found it much easier to fly. He even says 1946 is much better, which I take to include realism.

SeaFireLIV
06-27-2008, 09:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sirrith:

He isnt saying it was more accurate, he's just saying he found it much easier to fly. He even says 1946 is much better, which I take to include realism. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then what was the point of him wanting it to be more like IL2? That would be going backwards.

He also says it gives a feeling of controlling real aircraft. Is that an `I think` feeling, or a `I`ve flown real WWII birds` feeling?

I ask you since you appear to be his spokesman.

tagTaken2
06-28-2008, 11:47 PM
I'm with the original poster.

The FMs now may be more 'accurate', but IMHFO, a lot of the soul has gone.

Sirrith
06-29-2008, 12:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sirrith:

He isnt saying it was more accurate, he's just saying he found it much easier to fly. He even says 1946 is much better, which I take to include realism. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then what was the point of him wanting it to be more like IL2? That would be going backwards.

He also says it gives a feeling of controlling real aircraft. Is that an `I think` feeling, or a `I`ve flown real WWII birds` feeling?

I ask you since you appear to be his spokesman. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong person mate. I was talking about dirkpit7, not the OP.

slipBall
06-29-2008, 12:43 AM
I know the "feeling" that he refers to, and would agree that it was very enjoyable. I have more than a few hour's of flight time to compare to. I'm not sure though that those birds, with all of their mighty horsepower would have behaved the way that they do on climb out. It certainly is the feeling of low horsepower aircraft that I have piloted