PDA

View Full Version : is il-fb a game



92SqnGCJimbo
08-21-2004, 03:58 PM

92SqnGCJimbo
08-21-2004, 03:58 PM

robban75
08-21-2004, 04:01 PM
It's the best WWII flightsim in the world that is avaliable for us mortals, with some degree of arcade. But when looked at as a whole, it's THE WWII sim to beat! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

http://members.chello.se/unni/D-9.JPG

Oberleutnant Oskar-Walter Romm thoughts on his aircraft.

"I found the Fw 190D-9 to be greatly superior to those of my opponents. During dogfights at altitudes of between about 10,000 and 24,000ft, usual when meeting the Russians, I found that I could pull the D-9 into a tight turn and still retain my speed advantage. In the descent the Dora-9 picked up speed much more rapidly than the A type; in the dive it could leave the Russian Yak-3 and Yak-9 fighters standing."

TgD Thunderbolt56
08-21-2004, 04:06 PM
To some a game...to others, a way to transition into a vicarious lifestyle for a brief time. It really depends on how you look at it and sometimes how old you are. (no flames about age please)

TB


Our FB server info: http://www.greatergreen.com/il2

TheVoodooPriest
08-21-2004, 05:08 PM
To me this is a game (which simulates ww2 aerial combat) and i play it for my freetime entertainment and nothing more. In my opinion, those people who are crying for more (what they think is) realism and seem to be very unpleased for only beeing able to reconstruct ww2 combat on a computer instead of participating in it themselves, should really consider to get themselves a life. Or a time machine. I'm really glad that i don't have to live trough those times and can "fight" my virtual part-time enemys from the comfy armchair in my room instead of sitting in a crammed cockpit with real enemys all around me.
I really don't understand the attitude of some people on this board when they're discussing small and (to me) irrelevant details to death and complain about over- or undermodeled aspects of this or that plane. I never flew anything myself in real life, not to talk about historic warplanes, so because i have nothing to compare with, this is the most realistic simulation I ever played (notice the word played). This game is realistic enough, down to a degree where it gets (at least for me) frustrating. As I said before, for me Il-2 is mere entertainment, so I want to have fun with it and fun is what i get with almost (so-called) full real settings. But for me it is still a game and not my living. I have other things to do than compensate my bitterness about not being the ww2 flying ace from my unfullfilled dreams with a joystick in my hands...

_____
Guilt is what small people feel when running out of excuses for their behaviour...

Chuck_Older
08-21-2004, 05:13 PM
It's the sequel to Crimson Skies. I love the powerups http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

Weather_Man
08-21-2004, 05:49 PM
Considering you buy the game in the game section at the store, you install the game onto your PC much in the manner other games are installed, and play the game like you would any other game that utilizes a 3D game video card and joystick, I'd say it's a game.

http://banners.wunderground.com/banner/smalltemptr/language/www/US/TX/Dallas.gif

JG52_Helgstrand
08-21-2004, 08:49 PM
The people who call FB a SIM are just snobs who don't want the neighbours knowing they're obsessed with playing a game... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Hptm.Helgstrand Staffelfuhrer
JG52 Recruiting Officer
JG52 The Butcherbirds (http://www.geocities.com/jg52thebutcherbirds/)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v117/Helgstrand/NewSig_JG52.gif

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2004, 09:05 PM
It's both. That's patently obvious.

It's meant to be a sim, but for shrewd marketing reasons (which have moved many a box), it's set up so you can dial back and make it as arcade as you like.

Apparently, some people are so self-conscious at being beaten at "a game", they break out the training wheels and use them long after they should have progressed past that point. Excuses abound: about how a game is "fun" but a "sim" supposedly isn't (coulda fooled me-- I have a blast playing at high levels of realism); how it's about "my personal choice and comfort" and not about pretty standard physics and observable phenomena http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif; the list gets pretty long, and no doubt we'll see some below this post, too. Oh, wait, one more: the "it can't be real unless you die and throw away the CD to simulate your virutal death". That one's my favorite. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

Anything to avoid a challenge; especially to try and play the "game card", which gets trumped every time.

Gamer types are pathetic. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/34.gif

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2004, 09:14 PM
And, for the nimrods who insist it's not a sim... (and i actually had a debate today on HyperLobby with people who insisted it couldn't be a sim unless it was a "government approved flight simulator unit" rofl)...

You can definitely learn a thing or two, about history, about plane types, about tactics, about aerodynamics (where the sim is accurate, which is a little spotty in some areas), about real world concepts like smash/energy, basic and advanced flight maneuvers, etc. All real world stuff that most of us will never experience in the here and now. And certainly can't truly experience, since that was over 60 years ago.

Not a sim? My ****.

heywooood
08-21-2004, 09:35 PM
WOW Stigler... stickin' up for the FB... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif

Whatever it is to you is a reflection of its versatility and scalability. It is a really deep program and has cultivated new warbird fans and THAT is the best thing about it IMO.



http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/ac_32_1.jpg
"Check your guns"

adlabs6
08-21-2004, 09:43 PM
As a computer entertainment software package, the IL2 product line has proven to be VERY entertaining. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v313/adlabs6/sig5.gif
My FB/FS2004 Pages (http://www.geocities.com/adlabs6/B/) | IL2skins.com (http://www.il2skins.com) | ScreenshotArt.com (http://www.screenshotart.com/home.php)

LEXX_Luthor
08-21-2004, 09:47 PM
its more like a stim

__________________
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A ...in Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

S 8
08-22-2004, 12:48 AM
And wich game would YOU call a real sim?As there is options for easy flying and such things in every game/sim I´ve flown.A "game" that´s simulate flying/driving in a more "realistic" manner,I would call a sim.A game is the collective name for all undercatergories.I wouldn´t say "Hey,there´s an animal" to a dog. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

nsu
08-22-2004, 01:22 AM
sorry, but the Plane FM is a Game, not historic!!!
all FM in the Game a change from IL2 Plane FM !
see the FM in the IL2 FB- Game not to historicel !!!
the Cockpits and the feeling is
the best WW2 Sim !
sorry for my bad english !!

Gruß NSU http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

WTE_Ibis
08-22-2004, 01:41 AM
Genau NSU, it's part sim, part game.
An attempt to entertain as accurately
as possible while still making a dollar.
It's the best available and likely to
be the best for some time.
Until B.O.B at least. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://server6.uploadit.org/files/Ibissix-schmile.JPG
http://premium.uploadit.org/Ibissix/MAKE-MY-DAY.jpg
Join us or oppose us, either way "MAKE MY DAY"

F19_Ob
08-22-2004, 02:53 AM
You can call it both sim and game, I use both.
I think "playing" is a very "serious" part of an adults life (not nescessarily computergames). http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif I also enjoy simulating past events in history.

In my opinion its possible to simulate several different aspects of airwarfare.
Many situations that pilots faced is possible to recreate to some extent. There are many combatsituations described in books that seem untestable any other way than in FB. There is no way to do it with real planes, and the real pilots wouldnt risk their lives and vintage planes by flying them to the limit or in dangerous areas covered with Flak and enemyfighters with live ammo.

Not being able to simulate isnt the fault of FB. Likely it is our own limitations in imagination and lateral thinking and above all, the limited ammount of time most working people have to spend on contemplating on these matters. (not flaming)


FB anyway makes my historical interests more enjoyable, and me a bit more geeky because this whole business is too interesting.

just a few thoughts http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

nsu
08-22-2004, 03:14 AM
In the time of the WW2, the axis against a predominance of the allies fought ( 1:20 ), to simulate something like that would not have any game fun !
so Oleg make a Play compensation !
so you can play 1:1 in IL2-FB Game !

Gruß NSU http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Cajun76
08-22-2004, 04:15 AM
I voted for sim/game, because that's what it is. Of course, nobody has specified what kind of sim. People throw around the word "sim", yet there are various degrees of sim. For these examples, I'll focus on flight sims.

There are two broad categories of sim to be found. There are study sims, like Falcon 4.0, Jane's F-15, Flanker and LOMAC. Then there are survey sims, like the CFS series, IL2/FB/AEP/PF and LOMAC. (Although it pains me to put CFSx in the same group. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif )

A study sim tries to simulate one plane to a very high detail. Usually it's the only a/c flyable. It's modeled in minute detail. You only get one or a couple of planes. (Did I mention there's only one or a few planes? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif)

A survey sim tries to simulate multiple planes, with broad, shared controls such as flaps, CEM and such, because to get so many planes under the hood, certain comprimises have to be made. It can still be pretty accurate, but the squeaky left wheel may not get modeled. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif IL2/FB/AEP has an incredible variety of a/c to fly, and with some badly needed medium and heavy bombers coming, it will have something for just about everyone. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

You may be wondering why LOMAC was included in both lists of examples. The thing that sets LOMAC apart from every other sim before, is that they made a conscious effort to bridge the gap between study and survey sims. Small number of flyables, modeled with a high degree of fidelity. LOMAC has raised the bar to another level by doing this. I would expect in the future that more sims will move in this direction, since the average PC is now becoming capable of doing so. It's an exciting time to be simming/gaming, and I hope these types of products stay accessable to a wide range of people.

On a side note, I just don't understand people like Stiglr. Here he's bashing people that want to play it thier way, which he finds 'arcadish' and beneath him. In another thread, he debates that using icons is more realistic that not using them. Interesting, one-sided discrimination. Maybe someone else's idea about no icons or no hud messages means Stiglr's an arcade noob. Do I really think that? No, I think you should play/sim how you want, and happan to agree with him (Stiglr) about icons being a realistic compromise. Personally, I like performing ACM, not stalking my prey, pretending to be Erich Hartmann. Btw, they say 80% of the pilots killed in WWII never saw thier attacker. That dosen't necessarily mean they were bounced, just maybe they didn't see the buddy of the guy they were after get on their six. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

IL2/FB/AEP/PF is a survey sim/game of WWII, the best there is imho. I think Oleg and crew, which includes some fine members of this community, have done an excellent job making an accessable yet challenging product that does the job of simulating WWII aerial combat quite well. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

oh, just my .02 http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Good hunting,
(56th)*Cajun76
http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/p47nh.jpg (http://www.airwarfare.com/)<Click for Mudmovers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
If you have trouble hitting your objective, your secondary targets are here and here,
an accordian factory and a mime school. Good luck, gentlemen. - Admiral Benson Hot Shots

Cajun76
08-22-2004, 04:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NSU:
In the time of the WW2, the axis against a predominance of the allies fought ( 1:20 ), to simulate something like that would not have any game fun !
so Oleg make a Play compensation !
so you can play 1:1 in IL2-FB Game !

Gruß NSU http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was going to leave NSU's previous post alone because it seemed unfounded and a bit ridiculous to me, but this is just too much. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif I guess back in 1940-41, when the Axis had many more planes than the Allies, I'm sure the Axis pilots refused to engage with superiour numbers. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif They most likey landed any extra planes so that it would be a 'fair' fight, right? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Heck, they probably grounded the Bf-109 when faced with the P-11, and strapped some MGs on crop dusters so the Poles wouldn't feel bad. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Now come on. Planes like the P-47 faced the western LW at the height of their strength, before the P-51s entered service. They faced very good a/c in situations where the LW had local numerical superoirity, and still managed to rack up a 4.6:1 kill ratio, mostly before they were switched to the ground pounding role. There weren't swarms of P-47s during the critical 6 odd months between the P-47s deployment and the P-51's arrival in force. The playing field heavily favoured the Germans, fighting over their turf, with large numbers of very competitive a/c to field. You make it sound like it was 20:1 the whole war, when it was most definately not.

But in the interest of your views, I demand Oleg change the game to let me rack up 4.6 LW a/c for every time I'm shot down. That would seem to fit your view. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

Good hunting,
(56th)*Cajun76
http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/p47nh.jpg (http://www.airwarfare.com/)&lt;Click for Mudmovers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
If you have trouble hitting your objective, your secondary targets are here and here,
an accordian factory and a mime school. Good luck, gentlemen. - Admiral Benson Hot Shots

nsu
08-22-2004, 05:25 AM
Does not forget, that the new German air force first 1933 was founded and thus those of the allies were behind far.
Without doubts it sufficed for the Poles, but after the west campaign the air force never again came to theirs should thickness, during the English already 1939 economical aid of the USA got.
You see the war in west, but the germans must see the war in west and ost!
The great war was in the east !


Gruß NSU http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

[This message was edited by NSU on Sun August 22 2004 at 04:42 AM.]

Cajun76
08-22-2004, 05:56 AM
The Brits didn't 'win' the BoB, they survived it. Had Hitler and the "Fat One" not switched from destroying the RAF to bombing London, things might have turned out differently. Thankfully, again and again, they were tactically blind and ignorant. You mentioned 20:1 odds against the Axis. This included the BoB as well? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The Germans also had better numbers for the Battle of France, and, especially in the beginning of the Russian campaign, were able to frequently get local air superiority vs the VVS.

I have yet to see anything proving Oleg made a "play comprimise" in regards to the way the game is done. If your refering to online, he has no control over how people build thier maps. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Good hunting,
(56th)*Cajun76
http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/p47nh.jpg (http://www.airwarfare.com/)&lt;Click for Mudmovers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
If you have trouble hitting your objective, your secondary targets are here and here,
an accordian factory and a mime school. Good luck, gentlemen. - Admiral Benson Hot Shots

bazzaah2
08-22-2004, 06:13 AM
yep, true to say that we Brits owe much to Goering's stupidity and and Hitler's vanity (and vice versa) to have gotten through the BoB.

Il2 is both a sim and a game at the same time. A very good sim but owing to certain engine limitations it is arguably more succesful as a game than as a sim. I hope that BoB will correct some of the ageing game engine's shortcomings.

One thing is that Il2/FB/AEP has been the only game installed on my PC for the last couple of years and is the only thing that I play now. I gave up on X2 because the way the spacecraft flew bored me to death and I longed for some realism http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

Nothing comes close in terms of depth, immersion etc and has also renewed a childhood interest in WW2 history, as well PC operation, screen art (sometimes) etc etc. Amzing and am sure I'm not the only one!

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_05.gif

Crashing online as :FI:SpinyNorman

Normally Spiny Norman was wont to be about
twelve feet from snout to tail, but when Dinsdale was depressed Norman could be
anything up to eight hundred yards long.

Chuck_Older
08-22-2004, 06:50 AM
Anybody remember the cheatcode for the laser cannon upgrade?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2004, 10:45 AM
NSU, because the simulation is not always accurate or correct doesn't mean it's not a sim. Accuracy is not a prerequisite for a simulation. The attempt at accuracy, is.

Look, I'll be far ahead of you in line to point out failings and mistakes (and yes, even bias) in the modeling. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif But, even I have to admit that Oleg's team is at least making some attempt at accuracy. Thus, it is still a sim.

Spinnetti
08-22-2004, 11:20 AM
Yep,

If you can't get killed in the normal operation of the activity, its just a game...

FIREwaLKER
08-22-2004, 11:46 AM
Its a Sim for a few Planes, but look at Yak-3P, Ki84, La7, or Spitfire (and now P-47 too) there is no real FM. P47 turns like a later 109. Also some planes have unbelievable DM, it needs to many hits to destroy them (Lagg, P-47....). This two ME-109 guns are only for fun i think!

But its a fun to play IL2, i fly never fly this overplanes, its no fun to make kills with them.
Its such a good feeling to kill a Spit with a FW-190 in 1vs1 fight. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

panther3485
08-22-2004, 11:53 AM
Hi guys!

Here's my take on the 'game vs. sim' question:

On one hand, IL-2/FB (and some others of similar high quality) can be considered as games because in general structure and function, they work in much the same way as other PC gaming products and also serve the same basic purpose, i.e. entertainment.

On the other hand, they can also be thought of as simulations because they make a genuine and serious effort to accurately reproduce real life historical aircraft and campaigns. A great deal of painstaking research has been undertaken in the attempt to achieve this. So, as well as merely entertaining, with a certain mindset on the part of the player/simmer, they can also be very educational.

Naturally, compromises have to be made to suit the home computer and the product has to be marketed to appeal to a reasonable range of potential buyers within the general category.

Settings are available to suit a wide range of preferences and skill levels, so how much of a simulation you get can vary a great deal.

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

Changing subjects completely, some previous posts have touched on whether the British 'won' the Battle of Britian or merely 'survived' it.

In any battle or campaign, the question of winning or losing depends on the aims and objectives of the protagonists.

In the case of the BoB, the aims and objectives were as follows:

Germany -

To bring RAF Fighter Command to battle and destroy it, or at least render it ineffective, so that the Luftwaffe could enjoy air superiority over the English Channel and the south-east portion of England.

Having gained the required air superiority, the Germans would be in a better position to effectively disrupt Channel shipping and generally make things difficult for the Royal Navy, which would have lost much of its protection in this area. They would also be able to raid southern and south-eastern England with relative impunity, bombing at will.

After the fall of France and the loss of much of the best part of the British army before Dunkirk, Hitler was surprised at the continued and stubborn British defiance. He wanted the British to be cowed into submission or at least brought to the negotiating table. Why? To achieve his strategic objective, a free hand in Europe and to be able to deal with the Soviet Union without the threat of interference from the West or the potential disaster of a two-front war.

The most effective way of doing this, he felt, would be to convince the British that there was a serious threat of invasion. An essential prerequisite was the destruction of Fighter Command.


Britain -

The first objective was to effectively resist the German air assault, by the most efficient possible use of fighter aircraft and pilots, assisted by modern, state-of-the-art detection and communications combined with first-class command and control.

Expanding on this first objective, the British hoped to give the Luftwaffe a 'bloody nose' and inflict such losses upon it that the Germans would abandon large-scale daylight attacks. Ideally, the battle should end with the Germans weaker than when they started and the British stronger.

Strategically, the British wanted to prove to the World, and particularly to the United States, that they COULD take the punishment and that the Germans COULD be thwarted. They hoped that by convincingly resisting and ending the battle 'still on their feet', the USA might eventually join the effort and help put an end to Hitler's ambitions.

The 'whys and wherefores' of how the Germans largely failed to achieve their objectives, and of how the British largely succeeded in theirs, make an interesting discussion in their own right. Another day, perhaps!

Failure to subdue Britian was a serious setback for the Germans, sowing some critical seeds for their eventual defeat.

Fighter Command did reach a crisis at the midpoint of the battle, but finished stronger than it started. The fact that this was greatly helped by German mistakes does not, in my view, diminish the value of the achievement. War is unforgiving of mistakes!

For the British, in this most serious and testing of situations, to survive the fight and be in better shape at the end of it WAS a victory, by any reasonable measure.

Best regards to all,

panther3485

China Flanker 1
08-22-2004, 11:59 AM
it is not a game or a sim it is a sport http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

http://www.chinapro.com/888/dngs.gif

Cajun76
08-22-2004, 12:47 PM
I knew I should have mentioned that I in no way was taking away from the people in the battle, and 'surviving' http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif was an important acheivement in itself. Just because someone 'survives' something, dosen't mean they didn't 'win'. (If I manage to 'survive', I'm getting to the top of Mt. Fuji, Japan next year) My real intent was to show that the Allies did not, in fact, have a 20:1 numerical advantage throughout the war, as NSU tried to imply. The British were on their knees and being bled dry. And if one calls the midpoint of the battle the point where the LW switched to bombing London, then it's easy to say they were stronger than when they started. That's just what they needed, because the losses were not sustainable by RAF, or the LW for that matter. Yet if the radar and communications had been targeted in conjunction with FC and had continued a bit longer, FC would most likely have been pretty much wiped out. That's the reason they fought so hard, and why it was a victory. Those were desperate times. I have great respect for the airmen involved and I know it's (BoB) a sensitive subject, and a matter of great pride for some. Maybe my staement should read more like "The british won the Battle by surviving it." They did 'win', but it wasn't the complete, defined victory that "won the BoB" implies. Hard fought, by both sides, and I'm glad the British were still standing when it was over. V for Victory! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Good hunting,
(56th)*Cajun76
http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/p47nh.jpg (http://www.airwarfare.com/)&lt;Click for Mudmovers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
If you have trouble hitting your objective, your secondary targets are here and here,
an accordian factory and a mime school. Good luck, gentlemen. - Admiral Benson Hot Shots

WTE_Galway
08-22-2004, 05:28 PM
in order to enhance my gaming pleasure i do the following

- wear a WWII surplus flying helmel and goggles
- take a shot of schnapps or vodka before playin
- place a large fan near my monitor pointing at my face to simulate wind in open cockpit planes like the I16
- during thuderstorms have my girlfriend thow water at me
- when my emgine catches fire have her blow smoke in my face
- i use a rotating office chair for flying so that if i accidently get in a spin I can simulate it by having her spin me around rapidly

javierib
08-22-2004, 07:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
And, for the nimrods who insist it's not a sim... (and i actually had a debate today on HyperLobby with people who insisted it couldn't be a sim unless it was a "government approved flight simulator unit" rofl)...

You can definitely learn a thing or two, about history, about plane types, about tactics, about aerodynamics (where the sim is accurate, which is a little spotty in some areas), about real world concepts like smash/energy, basic and advanced flight maneuvers, etc. All real world stuff that most of us will never experience in the here and now. And certainly can't truly experience, since that was over 60 years ago.

Not a sim? My ****.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, I think they're correct...the correct term for IL2 should be "emulator"

The12342sainT
08-22-2004, 08:39 PM
Everythings a game. Il2 is a video game, it is a flight simulation and a good one in my opinion.
I fly IL2 as a simulation of flight in an airoplane and consider this a fun game. Put that in your oxygen supply and breathe deeply.

"He that falls in love with himself will have no rivals."
~ Benjamin Franklin

wayno7777
08-22-2004, 09:21 PM
I would say that it is a flight simulation game. A hybrid. It has elements of each.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v224/wayno77/Dux_Wreck.jpg
Any landing you can walk away from is a good one!

panther3485
08-23-2004, 12:24 AM
Hi there, Cajun76

Thank you, you're a true gentleperson!

Yes, some people could get carried away and interpret 'won' in the more total sense of completely destroying your enemy. But clearly, this should not be the case with the British achievement in BoB.

While there was arguably some prospect of the Luftwaffe destroying the RAF (if they had played their cards right, which thankfully they didn't), there was no prospect of the British destroying the Luftwaffe. The best they could hope for was to survive the assault, inflict a bloody nose on the Germans and still be in fighting shape at the end of it. This they did, and it was the essence of their victory, not to mention the implications for the final outcome of the war.

As for destroying the Luftwaffe, that would come later, with large helpings of assistance from their allies, notably the USA. Britain's survival as an opponent of Nazi Germany was unquestionably a key element in the eventual victory and in 1940, that key element pivoted on the outcome of BoB.

"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few!" Winston Spencer Churchill

Of course, more trials were to follow and the road to victory would still be a long and uncertain one. The Battle of the Atlantic would reach its height before either the Soviet Union or the USA could offer much direct help and this critical struggle would bring Britain possibly even closer to the brink of defeat before the tide irrevocably turned.

Yes indeed, they were dark and desperate days.

Pleasure communicating with you!

Hope you enjoy your sim/gaming!

Best regards,
panther3485

GAU-8
08-23-2004, 12:46 AM
any program that uses points in the end... is a game. not that it matters really. game or sim, im hooked.

Jasko76
08-23-2004, 01:10 AM
What a BS thread! YEs, of course it's a game. Oleg and boys have been sitting many nights and days, writing the code so that we may pretend being WWII pilots. However, it's also a SIMULATION since it rather accurately depicts WWII era aircraft, has advanced FM, DM and is historically very correct. So, I guess it's both a game and a simulation, as all simulations are games.

Regards,

Jasko
http://users.skynet.be/orbus/Images/husein_kapetan.jpg

I rulez - You not!

GAU-8
08-23-2004, 01:39 AM
i agree

CORTO.M
08-23-2004, 04:28 AM
IT IS A GAME!
FM/DM IS ARCADE!
EVIDENCE: FM CHANGES AFTER EVERY PATCH!

Cajun76
08-23-2004, 05:22 AM
It's refreshing not to get bombarded by rhetoric and chest beating, panther3485, the pleasure is mine. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif I agree with Jasko as well, this started out as a troll post/poll.

If it were a pure sim, there would be no "Refly" button.

If it were a pure game, there would be no effort at FM or DM.

This isn't Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, and it's not a million dollar, full motion, one plane only simulator.

IL2 is neither. It is better than both, imho.

It is more accessible, has more planes, strives for realism and accuracy, is priced better than the competition, with free updates sometimes including corrections regarding performance/accuracy and additions from the community and can run on the average home PC.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>FIREwaLKER:
Its a Sim for a few Planes, but look at Yak-3P, Ki84, La7, or Spitfire (and now P-47 too) there is no real FM. P47 turns like a later 109. Also some planes have unbelievable DM, it needs to many hits to destroy them (Lagg, P-47....). This two ME-109 guns are only for fun i think!

But its a fun to play IL2, i fly never fly this overplanes, its no fun to make kills with them.
Its such a good feeling to kill a Spit with a FW-190 in 1vs1 fight. :Wink: <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Finally, I never thought I'd see the day the P-47 would be mentioned in the same breath as the La-7, Yak-3 and Ki-84 as far as overmoddeling go. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif Of course, no data, and it seems, no understanding of the P-47s historic strengths and weaknesses. Those of us who have been flying it a long time have worked very hard to minimize it weaknesses, since for a long while it had none of it's historic strengths. It was also one of the, if not THE toughest single engine fighter of the war. 546,000 combat sorties with combat loss rate of only 0.7 percent. Some seem to think it was cannon fodder. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Far from it. It was a damn good a/c, and the sim reflects this. A poorly flown P-47 or Fw-190 is generally an easy kill. A well flown one is a handfull. Think about it. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

My 0.02 http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

Good hunting,
(56th)*Cajun76
http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/p47nh.jpg (http://www.airwarfare.com/)&lt;Click for Mudmovers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
If you have trouble hitting your objective, your secondary targets are here and here,
an accordian factory and a mime school. Good luck, gentlemen. - Admiral Benson Hot Shots

Zayets
08-23-2004, 06:13 AM
A game.
A sim is what you see on Discovery when real pilots learn to use real planes.Is a game that I enjoy playing.Best ever spent money for me.Never played a game so much and with so much intesity.But is still a game,neverthless.

Zayets out

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v399/Zayets/sigP47.jpg

Cajun76
08-23-2004, 07:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CORTO.M:
IT IS A GAME!
FM/DM IS ARCADE!
EVIDENCE: FM CHANGES AFTER EVERY PATCH!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's a sim and a game, and you prove my point quite well. Sim/games try to refine the FM, like IL2 does. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

Games like Crimson Skies don't. If you think Crimson Skies is on par with IL2, you should try Secret Weapons over Normandy. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif

Good hunting,
(56th)*Cajun76
http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/p47nh.jpg (http://www.airwarfare.com/)&lt;Click for Mudmovers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
If you have trouble hitting your objective, your secondary targets are here and here,
an accordian factory and a mime school. Good luck, gentlemen. - Admiral Benson Hot Shots

Chuck_Older
08-23-2004, 10:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cajun76:
. If you think Crimson Skies is on par with IL2, you should try Secret Weapons over Normandy. _<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

...or you could try taking more medication, and more often

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

TheEngine88
08-23-2004, 10:36 AM
I would say for some, it is a game (my self included), for others, it is a sim. But for a chosen, self-important few, it is a way to attempt to make up for some personal deficiencies by dogmatically and fanatically adhering to only "one" set of settings as the be-all and end-all of this game. That, and it gives them an oppourtunity to look down their noses at many on this forum, when i suspect that in real life, they are usually the ones looked down upon. Obviously, they are overcompensating for something...

"Pain Fades, Glory lasts forever, Chicks dig scars."

Cajun76
08-23-2004, 12:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cajun76:
. If you think Crimson Skies is on par with IL2, you should try Secret Weapons over Normandy. _<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

...or you could try taking more medication, and more often

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The straightjacket means I take what the docs give me, no more, no less. Occaisionally I get a bit of finger, though..... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

Good hunting,
(56th)*Cajun76
http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/p47nh.jpg (http://www.airwarfare.com/)&lt;Click for Mudmovers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
If you have trouble hitting your objective, your secondary targets are here and here,
an accordian factory and a mime school. Good luck, gentlemen. - Admiral Benson Hot Shots

gates123
08-23-2004, 01:30 PM
Well if you were able to take this game back 62 years and offer it to a rookie pilot with 5 total flight hrs, I bet HE would call it a sim.

http://www.fightingcolors.com/custompagestuff/b17visibility72.jpg
Did anyone see that or was it just me?