my profile | register | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
»  COMBATSIM.COM Forum Archive   » Game Discussions (Genre)   » Jets   » Oh, I think we may be screwed... (Page 1)

 
This topic is comprised of pages:  1  2 
 
Author Topic: Oh, I think we may be screwed...
mbaxter
Member
Member # 191

posted 01-19-2000 12:55 AM     Profile for mbaxter   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I'm wondering if I should give up on flight sims. There's a bad trend here. Let's review the recent contenders:

TAW - great potential but AI probs and other issues basically ruined the sim.
F4 - coulda been a contenda but never actually got fixed. Buggiest sim yet.
Flanker2 - no immersion factor for the most people, lots of bugs and other shortcomings. Very high customer return rates.
USAF - it they'd just kept everything that was good about FA with updated graphics it would've been awesome, but no, they screwed the pooch and turned out a piece of sh!t.
SH - lousy comms, lousy wingmen, lousy graphics, no mission builder, no campaign, unrealistic FM, etc.
F/A-18 - manages to have both lousy graphics AND the worst framerate of any sim (how'd they do that?) but sounds ok otherwise. Unfortunately F/A-18's flaws are of the show-stopping variety. In this day and age I won't put up with crap framerates in ANY game. Most others won't either.

It seems the flightsim world, once a bastion of some of the finest programming in the gaming world, is declining into mediocrity. All I want is decent graphics and framerate, solid wingmen and good comms, and a dynamic campaign or at least a useful mission builder. No sim has managed this since the days of F3, FA, EF2000, and other classics, which had all the key gameplay elements and good graphics for their day.

Oh well just some randomn thoughts, there's a good chance I'm wrong - it can happen!


Posts: 1687 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
mustang9
unregistered

posted 01-19-2000 01:00 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I returned F18 in one hour. What about F15.. pretty solid sim?
IP: Logged
Blaze
Member
Member # 198

posted 01-19-2000 01:51 AM     Profile for Blaze   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
"F/A-18 - manages to have both lousy graphics AND the worst framerate of any sim (how'd they do that?)"

By modeling the most detailed avionics suite ever found in a commercial sim?

Anyway, maybe you're better off looking for a new hobby.


Posts: 1556 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
TroyAir
Member
Member # 922

posted 01-19-2000 07:23 AM     Profile for TroyAir   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
>All I want is decent graphics and framerate,
solid wingmen and good comms, and a dynamic campaign or at least a useful mission builder.

No problem! I'll have it on your desk tomorrow. I'll call it "Air Warrior III" and I'll post it at www.airwarrior.com. In fact, I'll let you have the software for free. If you want to have a campaign in a VERY dynamic world, I'll charge you the low, low bargain discount rate of $9.95 a month and I'll let you spend as much time online as you want - unlimited!

Wingman comms? You bet! I'll even let you do it by VOICE COMMAND! Just tune your radio, hit the "Q" key, and bark out "Ok, Pcake! Let's go bust some noggins!" And your opponent will have all the skills of a human opponent (because he/she will BE a human!).

3D graphics? In there. Carrier operations? In there. WW1? Yep. WW2? Yep, Europe and Pacific. Korea? Yep. I'll even throw in some tanks, jeeps, trucks, and flakpanzers that you can tool around in and shoot people with.

Frame rate? I'm running it just fine on a 1996-vintage Aptiva hopped up to a Pentium200MMX with 48 Mb of RAM, so I know it'll run on a majority of PCs out there today.

Mission Builder? Well, I'm afraid I'm going to have to charge you for that. I don't know how much I'll have to charge - you'll have to take that up with the games retailers. But I tell you what - I'll throw in a full manual for you. How's that? I'll even include a funny newsreel clip on the cd, just to get a few laughs. Now that's a bargain!

Guns, bombs, and torpedoes abound. No missiles, though. Real men prefer to get in close.

Enjoy!


Posts: 78 | From: Tampa, Florida, USA | Registered: Nov 1999  |  IP: Logged
cid
Member
Member # 257

posted 01-19-2000 09:59 AM     Profile for cid   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
mustang9, you returned it in one hour? that's not much time to try it, much less download the CORRECT DRIVERS. I guess you got pissed by the way it installed, and couldn't bear the thought of actually playing.
Posts: 87 | From: jellico TN | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Impaler
Member
Member # 131

posted 01-19-2000 10:33 AM     Profile for Impaler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I guess mustang9 got home and could'nt open the box so had to return it.
Posts: 308 | From: an island in the pacific | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
SPOT
Member
Member # 453

posted 01-19-2000 10:39 AM     Profile for SPOT   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I'd have to disagree on F4 - as it was first released I would have to say it was unacceptable. But with the 1.08 patches I think it's a whole different ball game.

MBaxter you didn't mention HORNET/KOREA in your list. Sometime back I asked you if I should get it and you said wait for the Jane's product. Since I believe you now own both which do you think is better FM and avionics Janes or HORNET/KOREA?


Posts: 573 | From: | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
Major Tom
Member
Member # 1256

posted 01-19-2000 12:16 PM     Profile for Major Tom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I think Jet Warrior: Vietnam will be the solution we are looking for. Real human opponents with AI guys in the slots that you cant get filled.
Posts: 1352 | From: Prescott, AZ | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
Slowhand
unregistered

posted 01-19-2000 12:40 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by mustang9:
I returned F18 in one hour. What about F15.. pretty solid sim?

Yeah. I bet you did a really thorough
evaluation in one hour. Moron.


FWIW, the avionics and weapons modeling in
JF18 is the best to come along by far.

Not that I'd expect that to mean much to
you.


IP: Logged
Lucky_1
Member
Member # 352

posted 01-19-2000 01:12 PM     Profile for Lucky_1   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
mbaxter,

You left out Mig Alley. There is still hope with this game. It just plain old kicks *** !

------------------
Two beers, or not two beers. There is no question.


Posts: 635 | From: Knoxville, TN. | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Viking1
Member
Member # 5

posted 01-19-2000 03:02 PM     Profile for Viking1     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
TAW - great potential but AI probs and other issues basically ruined the sim.

Heh. I really loved it, especially after the first patch. Not perfect mind you.

F4 - coulda been a contenda but never actually got fixed. Buggiest sim yet.

With 1.08 it really is the best out there.

Flanker2 - no immersion factor for the most people, lots of bugs and other shortcomings. Very high customer return rates.

Great multiplayer sim.

USAF - it they'd just kept everything that was good about FA with updated graphics it would've been awesome, but no, they screwed the pooch and turned out a piece of sh!t.

Still think this one is great fun.

SH - lousy comms, lousy wingmen, lousy graphics, no mission builder, no campaign, unrealistic FM, etc.

Yeh a bit weak but gotta love that deck crew.

F/A-18 - manages to have both lousy graphics AND the worst framerate of any sim (how'd they do that?)

Heck, turn down the detail and start having some fun.

MiG Alley - Rowan's best yet. Can these guys do much better? I can't wait for BoB.


Posts: 917 | From: Kelowna BC CANADA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Viking1
Member
Member # 5

posted 01-19-2000 03:06 PM     Profile for Viking1     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Interesting post from another thread..

Ghostrider2, I am going to try not to seem like I'm flaming your post, but it seems you are overlooking at least one VERY important thing about Janes F/A-18 that cannot be matched in Falcon 4. Weapons modeling and electronic warfare. Falcon 4 fails badly when it comes to weapons modeling. They claimed it was going to be the most realistic sim ever, but how can that be? I guess you never noticed that you can fire an AMRAAM at a fighter sized target from 40 miles and even if the target turns tail and runs directly away from it at mach 1+ on the deck, the missile will still catch the target and even turn and maneuver with it after having flown even 50 miles! That's just for starters. Take the AIM-9P for example. A rear aspect only missile that can fire from close range head on???? It's already clear that the entire BVR aspect of F/A-18 was done with some serious care, and is HIGHLY realistic.
I guess you're just not one who cares much about air combat realism or maybe you don't know what realistic is. That seems to be the case considering your statement with regards to F/A-18 not having a ground-breaking flight model. Tell me this... do you really know anything about how you would model an aircraft's performance envelope? Do you know anything about flight dynamics? Do you even know anything about static flight performance for that matter? I am a second year aerospace engineering major and I don't know all that much at this point when it comes to what you would need to know to even come close to modeling an aircraft like the F/A-18 in a PC simulation. To tell you the truth, I probably won't have a grasp on the finer aspects of aerospace until I get at least a masters degree in aerospace. If you are further along in this field than I am, tell me and I'll appologize.

Another little tidbit of information on the topic of the flight model in F/A-18. My sister introduced me to an aerospace engineer a couple of years ago who works at the Patuxent River Naval Air Station in Maryland. I managed to get a chance to accompany him to work when I was down in Maryland visiting family. This guy is working on the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and the Joint Strike Fighter. I was able to see a VERY small piece of what actually went on with the real development of the aircraft and was able to get some good info out of him about the Super Hornet. One thing he told me was that the Super Hornet had some low speed handling problems that showed themselves most when it came to landing the bird. Now you'd think that wouldn't really be something you'd see in a sim like JF-18, now would you? But low and behold, the Jane's Super Hornet has some fairly nasty traits at low speed. Did you ever notice that once you drop below a certain speed, the nose gets heavy and a hard pull up maneuver is not really possible unless you gain more airspeed? In fact, even a slight nose-up adjustment takes a little bit too much forcing in JF-18. And get below, say, 130knts or so and what happens??? Yeah... the thing starts to get real mushy and hard to control. You've even got the nose oscilations. To model something like that as well as this sim does is no easy task. Falcon 4's flight model is good, but it lacks some of the fine dynamics that the programmers put into Jane's F/A-18. It's the stuff you would only notice when you flew at the edge of the envelope where things are so nice a peachy.

I'm not going to go any further even though I could. Plain and simple, Jane's F/A-18 IS a breakthrough in flight modeling, weapons modeling, avionics modeling, electronic warfare modeling, and AI I am told as well. Ask yourself this... how hard was it to shoot down a MiG-29 at 30+ miles out with an AMRAAM in Falcon 4? Hehehe... if you came back with any more than 1 miss out of 6 launches, you are really bad!!!

-Raptor


Posts: 917 | From: Kelowna BC CANADA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
TDog
Member
Member # 571

posted 01-19-2000 03:25 PM     Profile for TDog   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Mbaxter;
I think your supposition is correct, if you can't find enough to enjoy in any of those games you mentioned, you should quit.

------------------
If you want something done right..... just forget it! - Geddy Lee


Posts: 154 | From: Mequon, WI, USA | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
mustang9
unregistered

posted 01-19-2000 03:57 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Funny how people have "internet balls".. you are the morons.. you jumped on a failed game and want to kid yourselves that its GREAT.. please.. ill check back when/if they patch it all up and then we will talk.. itll then.. F you .. all you F18 lovers
IP: Logged
mbaxter
Member
Member # 191

posted 01-19-2000 05:44 PM     Profile for mbaxter   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I'll say. Some of you guys really need to get over yourselves.

Len, you made some very good points above. If it were not for the graphics and framerate issues, I would have high praise for F/A-18. It's shame, but perhaps this sim will be more playable when I upgrade to a 1GHz P-III. For now I'm stuck with a Celeron 466 w/128 RAM with a V2 and TNT2 Ultra. This rig has given me outstanding performance on all my other games though, including F4, so it seems F/A-18's code is not well optimized.

I think there may be hope for F/A-18, though. I noticed that F4's framerates improved after some optimization in 1.08. So maybe the same can be done eventually for F/A-18. But still, the terrain is poor and sadly we're stuck with that.

TAW I never could get into. Mainly because of the AI. I got tired of watching my guys refuse to refuel, chasing the tanker until the whole strike package crashes into the desert. Also I found the scenarios to be so rediculous that it was hard to get immersed in them. I wish DID had chosen a different theatre, somewhere with some credible nations. I'm sorry but fighting the vast Somali airforce was a little hard to swallow..

USAF I think could have been really fun were it not for the horrible AI (crashing for no reason, etc) and the screwy controls. There may be hope for this game, though, if Jane's/Pixel has good intentions.

Overall I find that the only recent sim I really play anymore is F4, despite the bad AI. I like the TE's especially. I still play LB2 and FA online sometimes, too. But the others have all been shelved.

TroyAir - thanks for the tip on Air Warrior. I've heard good things about it from other folks, too. I'll have to try it out.

SPOT - I was wrong about ecommending Jane's F/A-18. That was before the game even came out and I was naively believing the hyped previews of the sim. Preferences differ but for now I'd recommend against both Jane's F/A-18 and Hornet Korea. Hornet Korea just isn't much fun. In HK the plane graphics are good but the terrain and sense of speed is very weak, and there is no comms to speak of. There's just not much immersion factor by today's standards. I haven't played DI's Super Hornet, but it doesn't sound like much fun either.

Lucky_1 - I'm interested in Mig Alley. Haven't bought it because I'm deterred by the large number of complaints about non-working friendly AI and twitchy flight models. I think I'll just try it out anyway, though. (What's $50 bucks, eh?)


Posts: 1687 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Major Tom
Member
Member # 1256

posted 01-19-2000 06:08 PM     Profile for Major Tom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
-bax

There is nothing wrong with the flight models in MiG Alley. In fact MiG Alley has in my opinion, the best flight model out there right now. Just speaking from my experience in high performence and aerobatic aircraft. Accelerated stalls, snap rolls, flat spins and some damn evil spins you cant get out of The AI is very good, all aspects of it, period.

People who complain of "twitchy" flight characteristics in MiG Alley, probably have crummy and innacurate joysticks. Or they stupidly slam the joystick around like you see in the movies. If you calmly pull your joystick all the way back when flying in MiG Alley, it acts as though the pilot gripped his B8 with both hands and pulled back with all his might.

You do that in real life in a prop or subsonic jet, you get into an accelerated stall, then go into a BAD spin.

When you hear the air rushing over your aircraft in MiG Alley, it's gods way of telling you to back off. The joystick doesn't talk to you and burble like in real life. Instead you have to listen to the aircraft in MiG Alley. IE, When you hear creaking, that means your wings are going to rip off.

The feeling of flight is right on.

MiG Alley is the best simulation I've played since SWOTL, USNF, or CYAC.


Posts: 1352 | From: Prescott, AZ | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
Marauder
Member
Member # 700

posted 01-19-2000 06:50 PM     Profile for Marauder   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Hey Viking! I am 2nd year Aerospace Engineer too !

And yes do not know all that either.


Posts: 160 | From: | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
Marauder
Member
Member # 700

posted 01-19-2000 06:52 PM     Profile for Marauder   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
LO nevermind I think that was Raptor
Posts: 160 | From: | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
Major Tom
Member
Member # 1256

posted 01-19-2000 07:49 PM     Profile for Major Tom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I got a dog named Major.
Posts: 1352 | From: Prescott, AZ | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
Ghostrider
Member
Member # 2062

posted 01-20-2000 02:53 AM     Profile for Ghostrider   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Major Tom:
-bax

There is nothing wrong with the flight models in MiG Alley. In fact MiG Alley has in my opinion, the best flight model out there right now. Just speaking from my experience in high performence and aerobatic aircraft. Accelerated stalls, snap rolls, flat spins and some damn evil spins you cant get out of The AI is very good, all aspects of it, period.

People who complain of "twitchy" flight characteristics in MiG Alley, probably have crummy and innacurate joysticks. Or they stupidly slam the joystick around like you see in the movies. If you calmly pull your joystick all the way back when flying in MiG Alley, it acts as though the pilot gripped his B8 with both hands and pulled back with all his might.

You do that in real life in a prop or subsonic jet, you get into an accelerated stall, then go into a BAD spin.

When you hear the air rushing over your aircraft in MiG Alley, it's gods way of telling you to back off. The joystick doesn't talk to you and burble like in real life. Instead you have to listen to the aircraft in MiG Alley. IE, When you hear creaking, that means your wings are going to rip off.

The feeling of flight is right on.

MiG Alley is the best simulation I've played since SWOTL, USNF, or CYAC.



I too have wondered about folks' complaints on "twitchy" joysticks. Like you I also have many thousands of hours in fighter aircraft going back to the old F2 Fury and no joystick feels the same as a real control stick. As far as slamming throttles etc, in real aircraft it would be Hello compressor stall. Hell even Chuck Yeager said it's the man and not the aircraft.


Posts: 75 | From: Wash, Pa. | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Caveman
Member
Member # 677

posted 01-20-2000 08:15 AM     Profile for Caveman   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Question then... Why did Andy Bush (whom we all know has thousands of hours in fighter aircraft) say that he thought the flight model in MA was "unrealistic" because it departed so easily and violently. I don't have his exact phraseology, but it was somewhere along the lines of: "if the jets flew as depicted in MA, there wouldn't have been many airmen left after the war... cause they all would have crashed there planes after an accelarated stall prior to engaging the enemy..."

I'd love to get MA as it seems that most like it. I tried the demo and was a bit underwhelmed -- is the game better?

As far as the whole issue of our hobby "going down the tubes", I don't think so. I've been simming for about 16 years or so (I got into it again about a year ago after a 10 year break), and I am constanly amazed at every new sim that comes out... When you really understand what we are getting for such little money, it really is amazing...


Posts: 118 | From: Huntsville, AL, USA | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
warrior
Member
Member # 482

posted 01-20-2000 09:14 AM     Profile for warrior   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I've never played any of the recent sims you all talked about so all I know about them I got from the message boards, reviews and pics. But I won't comment on them.
I only play 2 sims; TAW and Falcon 4.0
I love each one for their different aspects.
TAW I really like for the fun factor. OK, it doesn't have the radar model or flight model of Falcon 4, not to mention damage modelling or comms.
But it's just great fun, that simple.
Load out your aircraft, manage the entire flight, take off and raise hell with your 16-plane flight. Then, when I put my plane down on the runway 1,5 hours later, I'm really happy with myself and feel I DID something.
Falcon 4 I'm still getting into and taking all my time for. I really love this because it FEELS realistic ( Of course, I can't tell)
Basically, noone in here can tell. Not even a pilot, there's no real in-depth way you can compare real-life flying with a PC screen.
Falcon 4 keeps amazing me with how it feels as on the overall, and I never even fired a single missile ( maybe that'll put me back on the ground)
Len mentions how effective missiles are in Falcon 4.0; very much too effective.
Then in that aspcet TAW is more realistic because there too, only an average of 50% of missiles hit.
There are so many aspects a sim has to cover and simmers have different expectations for each aspect. This makes the perfect sim impossible and gives us the guarantee there is something to nag about.
For me, the all-time favourite is, and I don't think it'll ever change, EF2000
I installed it again after more than a year, installed TACTCOM and got into the game.
Ooouuuh it felt so good!
Dated graphics but wonderful sound & feeling of speed and manoeuvrability were a dream!
Then again, I don't know what made EF2000 appeal to me so much but the delicate balance between gameplay and realism was just what the sim-market needed.
TAW failed because realism took a dive ( damn, I hate those landings and lousy AI)
I'm now waiting for Typhoon and praising they don't mess that one up. I'm skipping most sims now cause despite some very pleased reactions, there's also too much nagging and I just don't like Jane's, no matter what. Hey, so I am biased... shoot me

The simworld isn't dying... it's just re-discovering itself.


Posts: 27 | From: Turnhout, Belgium | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
Raptor
Member
Member # 1428

posted 01-20-2000 10:06 AM     Profile for Raptor   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by mustang9:
I returned F18 in one hour. What about F15.. pretty solid sim?

No, I think he just couldn't count up to 18... he can only count up to 15... so he thought it was F15 v.2 or something... but then he realized it was a number he never seen before... so... pop, back to the store.. hehehe

[This message has been edited by Raptor (edited 01-20-2000).]


Posts: 162 | From: San Francisco, CA USA | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
Phil47
Member
Member # 658

posted 01-20-2000 10:36 AM     Profile for Phil47     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Roll on a, a new version of EF2000.The best combat sim to date.Failing that I will have to carry on with MS2000 or FU111..Who cares if I can't shoot anyone.I'll just take myself off in a Lear jet to the Carribean for a a few bottles of single malt Scotch and a handful of brunettes under the nearest palm tree.
Posts: 340 | From: | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
daveb
Member
Member # 173

posted 01-20-2000 12:36 PM     Profile for daveb   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Ah but Phil that copy of F15 I mentioned will be on its way to you soon so forget about the brunettes and keep taking the hard stuff

BTW I didn't want to send it over Xmas but now is a good time so look out for it in the next couple of days!

------------------
Best wishes,
Dave B.


Posts: 613 | From: Windsor, UK | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Major Tom
Member
Member # 1256

posted 01-20-2000 02:24 PM     Profile for Major Tom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I think Andy's comments where based on the un realistic motion of our flight simulator sticks. For Andy, the full motion of our sticks might be akin to slight motions on a real B8 type grip.

Most sims do a good job of not letting the user get into accelerated stalls, by not modeling the really drastic manuvers you can do with a real stick.

Like I said, calmly moving your MS sidewinder full back registers in MiG Alley as really grabing that sucker and pulling with all your might.

The jets Andy flew are not totaly different from what you have in MiG Alley. But you get a more seat of your pants, WWII style ride out of a F-84. I bet neither me or Andy have been in anything close to a Korean war era aircraft. Back in my home town there is a guy with privately owned 2 seater Goshawk Navy Training jet. Maybe I could pay him a few (hundred) bucks to take me up in it for a few hours. Then I'd be much more endowed to speak on the subject of Korean war like aircraft.

I suggest you get a good accurate stick and throttle for MiG Alley.

such as a...
Thrustmaster F-22 Pro
Thrustmaster X-Fighter
CH Fighterstick
CH Combatstick USB
Suncom Talon

If at all possible aviod the use of Microsoft sticks with MiG Alley. I never personally much cared for them anyhow.

This will make things much easier than if you purchase your run of the mill bargin basement Logitech.


Posts: 1352 | From: Prescott, AZ | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
leafer
Member
Member # 6

posted 01-20-2000 04:33 PM     Profile for leafer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Nope, he said the spins in MA are exaggerated and no pilot would fly them in real life (something like that). I remember he said that itís like theyíre there to convince the player. Sort of like, here they are and they are hard to fly, therefore it must be realistic.

Not trying to start anything. Just telling you what he said. Iím thinking of getting the U.S. version.


Posts: 803 | From: Alhambra, CA U.S.A | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Major Tom
Member
Member # 1256

posted 01-20-2000 05:58 PM     Profile for Major Tom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I'd whole heartedly recommend you get the US version. Just dont patch it

I dont find the MiG Alley planes hard at all to fly. Infact if you treat them with care, they are rather tame.


Posts: 1352 | From: Prescott, AZ | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
STINGER_MAN
Member
Member # 2114

posted 01-20-2000 06:12 PM     Profile for STINGER_MAN   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
FLIGHT SIM MFG'S ARE TO INVOLED IN EYE CANDY!

If you can rember back in the good old days when FS'S (flight sims) were created more for the pure fact of the combat, flight model,and pure imerision and had wonderful frame rates. But now today EVERYONE seams to demand the most beatiful landscape to look at
which puts such high demands on the core of the pc (THE PROCESSOR)CPU that it reduces the frame rate so much they are becomeing less and less to enjoy.
If sim makers Janes among others would go back to the old stile of sim making
strickly for the pure purpose of COMBAT with
a little less EYE CANDY they would be a lot more fun to play, and isint that wnat it's all about FUN!!!

One more commit about JF18, I read where the same team that maid F15 also did JF18, If thats so how come it runs with such a slow FR
and only has a STUPID UNREAL LOOKING 3D COCKPIT. I mean to me this is just plan RUSH TO THE SHELVES VERY POOR DESIGN PLANING.

Watch your six

Stingerman


Posts: 15 | From: SAN JOSE,CA,US | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
bahabhabh
unregistered

posted 01-20-2000 09:29 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
There needs to be some super sim with a development team of 400 professionals. Of course, it wouldn't be very profitable, but still...
IP: Logged
Major Tom
Member
Member # 1256

posted 01-20-2000 09:45 PM     Profile for Major Tom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
The thing about it is that really good graphics aren't nessiarily taxing on your CPU. Look at EF2000 and JSF. Still look great yet even when they were brand new they didn't make any framerate hits on your system.

Janes F/A-18 is slow on most modern machines, yet it doesn't look 1/2 as good as JSF. I think that sloppy programing is to blame for framerate hits.

When the F4 team started cleaning up the code, the sims framerates (perticularly in the campaing) went throught the celing.


Posts: 1352 | From: Prescott, AZ | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
President Of the USA
unregistered

posted 01-20-2000 10:28 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Well, I think it's because many people are crying for immersion in their sims. Graphics are a key area where immersion is involved. They can make an area look like you're really there flying over it, or make it feel like you're flying over a massive plain of either green, tan, or blue cement.
IP: Logged
arrow
Member
Member # 321

posted 01-21-2000 08:59 AM     Profile for arrow   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Complain complain complain complain complain.

This sucks, this is bad, this is not good, this is awful, this is crap, this is **** .

Ah, the good old days, but now it's so different, all is bad, all is screwed, all is money, all is wrong, all is missing.

You know what ? I have them all.

I have the buggy F4, I have the not-immersive F2, I have the slow and ugly F/A 18, I have the muddy Superhornet, and some others.

And I'm enjoying them all.

Ha ha ha.

Really, I'm happy with them. When I sit in front of my PC and I don't know which one to play. Do I want F4 bugs ? Or the blue slowliness of F/A 18 ? Or do I need some lack of immersion with F2 ...?

Then I fire up one of them and it's simming time. I fly, and I scare, and I fight, and I land (when all goes well).

And I'm satisfied, and I'm feeling great, and I love them all.

Maybe I'm not hardcore as you. Or maybe it's just that I fly sim only since 15 years.

But guys, really, if you only could realize what are you missing...


Posts: 350 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
leafer
Member
Member # 6

posted 01-21-2000 09:59 AM     Profile for leafer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Arrow,

good post.


Posts: 803 | From: Alhambra, CA U.S.A | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Major Tom
Member
Member # 1256

posted 01-21-2000 12:46 PM     Profile for Major Tom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I've been simming since Flight Simulator. Too many years and too many computers to bother counting. I'm serious, I've owned so much flight sim and flight sim related crap in these last...well since Flight Simulator came out.

I forget about the bad sims in time, and remember the good ones.


Posts: 1352 | From: Prescott, AZ | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
DaleReeck
Member
Member # 1021

posted 01-23-2000 09:48 PM     Profile for DaleReeck   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
"Janes F/A-18 is slow on most modern machines, yet it doesn't look 1/2 as good as JSF. I think that sloppy programing is to blame for framerate hits."

That's because those sims don't have nearly as much sophistication in flight modeling and avionics as F-18 does. Every feature added to a sim takes a toll on framerates. Jesus H. You people bitch if a sim is missing stuff like terrain masking, then bitch again after its added and framerates go down. You can't have it both ways. F-18's framerates aren't low because of poor programming or lack of optimization. Coming from the same team that did F-15, I doubt they suddenly forgot how to program. Jane's F-18's framrerates are crappy because they have added more background stuff (flight model, avionics and AI) than any other sim. If you don't believe that, try testing AIM-9 heat spoofing or radar beaming. Or checking out the multiple modes of weapon systems like HARMs or Harpoons. How many sims model stuff like this to this detail? Well, we finally get a sim that does delve into some of this, yet that's still not good enough for some people because frame rates get hit. Plus the 3D cockpit and 16 bit color don't help framerates either. Instead of just taking F-15 and turning it into an F-18, Jane's decided to push the envelope and really add new modeling and features, not just clone F-15. So, in the end, Jane's can't please some of you no matter what they do.


Posts: 327 | From: Cheektowaga NY USA | Registered: Nov 1999  |  IP: Logged
Boxcar
Member
Member # 1919

posted 01-23-2000 10:13 PM     Profile for Boxcar   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
To Major Tom,
I`m curious have you used the Suncom stick with Mig Alley. I have the MSSP and know that it is sensitive but I can`t seem to give up on the rudder twist feature. I love the sim and have grown to love it above any other. I owned a suncom once but returned it because of the spiking issue but I sure loved the stiff feel of it.

Boxcar


Posts: 317 | From: Vancouver,B.C.,Canada | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
mbaxter
Member
Member # 191

posted 01-24-2000 02:19 AM     Profile for mbaxter   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I'm not so sure. F4 has just as much, if not more, going on it its "background" as compared to F/A-18, yet its framerates don't suffer so much. Oh, and F4 looks a HELL of a lot better, too. I could be wrong but I don't think Jane's F/A-18's framerates are really justified. Don't forget that F4 showed a big improvement after being optimized. I suspect F/A-18 needs a similiar tweaking as the MPS boys did to F4 with patch 1.08.
Posts: 1687 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Major Tom
Member
Member # 1256

posted 01-24-2000 02:35 PM     Profile for Major Tom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Boxcar, you know what you might want to use with MiG Alley? A Thrustmaster X-fighter, Attack Trottle, and CH Pro Pedals.

Right now I'm using a Suncom SFS Throttle, X-Fighter and Pro Pedals. The X-Fighter HAT is non functional with the Suncom, but I've been toying with the idea of getting an attack throttle so the HAT would be functional.

No other stick compares to the X-fighters performence in MiG Alley. The X-fighter gets progressively harder to use move when you get to the outer corners of it's limit's. In MiG Alley it's almost like the stick talks back to you like a real B8 would.


Posts: 1352 | From: Prescott, AZ | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
DaleReeck
Member
Member # 1021

posted 01-24-2000 03:03 PM     Profile for DaleReeck   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
mbaxter,

F4 does do alot of stuff right, but there is also a fair amount of stuff missing from F4. Things like beaming, terrain masking and missile performance are off or completely missing. Deployment modes of missiles like the AMRAAM and HARM are also missing or simplified. While F4 is the best overall sim in my opinion, F-18 is the most technically accurate - which is why frame rates suck.


Posts: 327 | From: Cheektowaga NY USA | Registered: Nov 1999  |  IP: Logged

All times are MST (US)
This topic is comprised of pages:  1  2 
 

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | COMBATSIM.COM Home

© COMBATSIM.COM, INC. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin Board 6.04b

Sponsor
© 2014 COMBATSIM.COM - All Rights Reserved