PDA

View Full Version : Has Anyone Had A Sim That Was Perfect Out Of The Box?



Fish40
03-08-2005, 04:41 PM
I know this might be slightly OT, but I was wondering if there was a sim(of any kind), that was perfect right out of the box. I'm not talking about technical bugs that a sim may have, but rather it's overall content. A sim is supposed to SIMULATE real life, weather it be flying , sailing, or what have you. A developer that wants to make a combat flight sim, whoever it is has access to tons of wartime footage showing AC, explosions, tracer fire, ect.. You would think that these would be modeled accordingly in the final product. However, at least in my experience, it took third party mods, to get it right. Even our very own IL2 series has it's shortcomeings. With each patch, there are more enhancements(more detailed splash effect, enhanced runway dust at takeoff, just to name a few) to make things more realistic. Should'nt it have been that way from the start? The last thing I want to do is point fingers at anyone in the industry. That's not the purpose of this thread. I was just curious if there was ever a sim that did'nt need to be "touched up" from the moment it came out of the box.

Fish40
03-08-2005, 04:41 PM
I know this might be slightly OT, but I was wondering if there was a sim(of any kind), that was perfect right out of the box. I'm not talking about technical bugs that a sim may have, but rather it's overall content. A sim is supposed to SIMULATE real life, weather it be flying , sailing, or what have you. A developer that wants to make a combat flight sim, whoever it is has access to tons of wartime footage showing AC, explosions, tracer fire, ect.. You would think that these would be modeled accordingly in the final product. However, at least in my experience, it took third party mods, to get it right. Even our very own IL2 series has it's shortcomeings. With each patch, there are more enhancements(more detailed splash effect, enhanced runway dust at takeoff, just to name a few) to make things more realistic. Should'nt it have been that way from the start? The last thing I want to do is point fingers at anyone in the industry. That's not the purpose of this thread. I was just curious if there was ever a sim that did'nt need to be "touched up" from the moment it came out of the box.

Chuck_Older
03-08-2005, 04:46 PM
http://www.websoft-solutions.net/nomex_coveralls_nomex_coveralls_p/g904n.htm

You may need to get your credit card ready for your replies


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif
I agree with you 100%

Fish40
03-08-2005, 05:03 PM
Thank's Chuck. I'm glad I'm not alone. I was, and still am afraid that I'm gonna get alot of flak over this topic. I certainly am not singleing out any one product, because I have several that fall into the catagory. I was just curious to find out.

Chuck_Older
03-08-2005, 05:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fish40:
I was, and still am afraid that I'm gonna get alot of flak over this topic. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, what do you care what small minded people think? That's their problem, not yours http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Fish40
03-08-2005, 05:14 PM
I hear you man, I just don't want to make any enemies!

tsisqua
03-08-2005, 05:35 PM
That bit about the Nomex coveralls took the cake, Chuck. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Nope, Fish. Never, imho.


Tsisqua

BlakJakOfSpades
03-08-2005, 05:36 PM
well as far as the eye candy stuff (splashes) i think its half computer power at the moment and half time. They just dont have enough time with their tight schedules to make sure everything is perfect, they could tweak forever and get it near perfect, but how would they get money in the mean time. Same with flight models, damage models whatever. As computers become more powerful they can implement new more realistic features (oleg mentioned new fm) and they dont have enough time to make sure its 100% accurate, however oleg does go the extra step in continuing to refine even after he has your money. thats why i think sims are never perfect out of the box, that and you cant please everyone.

BlakJakOfSpades
03-08-2005, 05:38 PM
P.S. is your campaign done yet chuck?

Chuck_Older
03-08-2005, 05:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tsisqua:
That bit about the Nomex coveralls took the cake, Chuck. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Nope, Fish. Never, imho.


Tsisqua <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you think THAT's funny, check out the link...and examine the right hand side that says "related products".

I had zero to do with that ad for the leather slave welding outfit. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Daiichidoku
03-08-2005, 05:41 PM
for its time, Janes WWII fighters was perfect OOTB

still holds up quite well, actually, and even retains some features lacking in FB/PF or stays superior to

Chuck_Older
03-08-2005, 05:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BlakJakOfSpades:
P.S. is your campaign done yet chuck? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ooooohh....ah....not yet. I screwed up a mission and I have to fix it, to be honest. It will be done soon http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif Playtesting can take a bit of time, but it's worth it, I have five playtesters finding the bugs

Chuck_Older
03-08-2005, 05:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
for its time, Janes WWII fighters was perfect OOTB

still holds up quite well, actually, and even retains some features lacking in FB/PF or stays superior to <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Gotta disagree

The campaign was completetly without historical base. I flew a misison in a P-38, then in a P-47, etc.

Huge flaw in my opinion

Fish6891
03-08-2005, 06:08 PM
Fish40........WTF? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

MEGILE
03-08-2005, 06:10 PM
Well it seems there are plenty more fish in the sea.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif11111111111111111111111111111 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111

PBNA-Boosher
03-08-2005, 06:12 PM
Get 'im! He's stealin' the fishie's name!

I remember some REALLY old games, Cosmo 1, 2, and 3 were perfect out of the box.

p1ngu666
03-08-2005, 06:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Megile:
Well it seems there are plenty more fish in the sea.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif11111111111111111111111111111 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Von_Rat
03-08-2005, 06:21 PM
hmmm ,,,,there's more fish to fry i see.

Chivas
03-08-2005, 06:27 PM
There will never be a perfect sim until we have the perfect computer. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Henkie_
03-08-2005, 06:34 PM
CFS3

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

LeadSpitter_
03-08-2005, 06:39 PM
Janes wwii fighters has to go down as the best and most complete flight sim out of the box for its time.

Daiichidoku
03-08-2005, 07:00 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 Daiichidoku:
for its time, Janes WWII fighters was perfect OOTB

still holds up quite well, actually, and even retains some features lacking in FB/PF or stays superior to <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Gotta disagree

The campaign was completetly without historical base. I flew a misison in a P-38, then in a P-47, etc.

Huge flaw in my opinion <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Im no expert on "battle of the bulge", but it seems to me that places and times and troop dispositions were based on RL...

but perhaps it was all ficticious in Janes, I dunno

as far as flying a 38, then 47 etc goes, I have no idea about that, either, if 38s for example were even present during BotB, but I think so


just what do you mean, chuck? that the missions were not based in reality, or perhaps that you dont agreee with flying different types during a campaign?



aside for any of that, theres no denying that Janes campaigns, or single missions, for that matter, were anything but fun, and sometimes extremely challenging to complete...certainly, FB fails to live up to the "fun" part of that...IMHO http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

civildog
03-08-2005, 07:12 PM
I would have to define "perfect out of the box" as meaning it ran right the first time, every time and you got a full manual (what I called buying games "by the pound") and you didn't get the feeling the game was half finished on release because it needed continuous patches to just run, rather than add features or fix minor issues.

Back in my day the worst thing you had to worry about was that "MS-DOS PC compatible" didn't always mean that.

So on my list would be:

EAW
Falcon 3.0 (believe it or not)
Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe
Thier Finest Hour
Aces over The Pacific
Pacific Air War Gold
it goes on, and on, and on....

I think Falcon 4.0 was the groundbreaker. It seemed to set the tolerance bar really high for what game buyers would tolerate as far as games needing patches for issues that should have been fixed in the first place prior to release. Ever since then game makers just take it for granted that custmers would pay 40-50.00 a game for incomplete programs on the expectation that patches would make it all ok later.

Ya know...there used to be a difference between "patches" (a fix for bugs) and "updates" (added features or compatibility).

But I'm officially old in two more years (when the doc says I'll need bifocals) so what do I know?

blakduk
03-08-2005, 07:15 PM
There never will be a perfect simulation- if there were then it would be called 'reality' and people would argue over whose reality was correct.
I recall the first time i saw 'Star Wars' as a kid and thought it was 'a perfect movie'. Now i watch it and laugh at the quaint special effects and tawdry dialogue. Games are the same- the first time i played 'Falcon' i was stunned that i could fly past mountains and blow up trucks (the mountains were pyramids and the trucks were boxes on wheels, but hey i was using an Amiga). Likewise with IL2- atmospheric clouds and almost believable forests!
As the technology improves of 'suspension of disbelief' becomes harder to achieve- our expectations keep rising. I curse that i was born too late to enjoy full simulation (its coming i'm told).
The next generation will be arguing over whether the G-force simulation is accurate!!!!

RedNeckerson
03-08-2005, 07:25 PM
In 1998 Janes WWII Fighters was indeed perfect - right out of the box.


It remains one of the greatest sim experiences ever, especially for it's day. **** it was good.

civildog
03-08-2005, 07:29 PM
Don't start with the G-forces! Falcon 4 punished you by gradually building up lower g tolerances in your "pilot" the more g's you pulled over the course of a mission. Thats' a wee too much "realism". I mean, why can't there be a "grunt, push, fart" keypress to help your pilot resist g like the real pilots do, then?

Whizbang_66
03-08-2005, 08:22 PM
Ummm, I loved EAW but it was hardly perfect out of the box. It required a follow up patch just to give it limited high res. support, which only worked for the "virtual" cockpits.

I bought the Aces Collection, and had a couple fun years with those unpatched.

My vote for it's time:

"Chuck Yeager's Air Combat"

I'm still haunted by Chuck saying:
"Ok,...get up and try again"

wayno7777
03-08-2005, 10:39 PM
I agree with Jane's. Still run it now and then.
Btw Chuck, gotta a kick out of the Nomex ad.
I still have my Nomex 2 piece flight suits. Course I can't get in them anymore. Have to start working out again... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

mortoma
03-08-2005, 11:31 PM
I don't believe I ever patched EAW and I don't remember any patches availabe for it when it was still in the hands of Microprose, that is. It was good in it's day, far better than CSF1.

Skycat_2
03-08-2005, 11:34 PM
As much as I love Jane's WWII Fighters (I'm a die-hard fanboy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ), I agree it wasn't the perfect sim. It was a pretty fine ride, though, and the best WWII tactical air combat sim of its time. The fact that its stock pilot careers jumped the player around plane types between missions is only one of many criticisms I could present.

I'd say that "B-17: The Mighty Eighth" came about as close to a 'perfect sim' as I've ever seen ... perfect, that is, if you were solely interested in replicating the operation and management of a B-17 bomber and crew. However, there was a patch issued for that game so maybe it doesn't meet the 'out of the box' criteria.

Skycat_2
03-08-2005, 11:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mortoma:
I don't believe I ever patched EAW and I don't remember any patches availabe for it when it was still in the hands of Microprose, that is. It was good in it's day, far better than CSF1. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I just happened to install EAW tonight. The version I have is a re-release that is copyright 2001 by Infogrames and comes with a v1.2 patch on the disc. To be fair, I don't see Microprose's name anywhere on the box so your observation may be true.

RedDeth
03-08-2005, 11:55 PM
janes world war two fighters out of box was most fun flight sim. more fun than F.B.

very exciting game. much better than the original il2 out of the box.

janes has add on cds for free that make the graphics possibly better than fb. and many many new planes including russian.

but out of box best flight game online hands down was Janes WW2 Fighters.

Old_Canuck
03-09-2005, 12:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Henkie_:
CFS3

LOL http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Henkie_ I have to agree with you. CFS3 was ahead of it's time. No other sim in the industry could match it for it's ability to pause in mid game -- sometimes due to flak -- so the player could take his or her time to get that "situational awareness." I don't know why people knock it so much in this forum. It was awesome the way the P-47 exploded if the nosewheel came down a little too hard ... just like the real thing. Many other features come to mind which brings back that warm fuzzy feeling when it first came out of the box and those first few hours of trouble-free play ran into weeks of carefree laughter.

FatBoyHK
03-09-2005, 12:35 AM
SWOTL is the best, if the "right-out-of-the-box" requirment stands. It is the best in its age, and AFAIK it didn't have any aftermarket patch..... just 4 tour of duty addons, which give you 4 more planes.

MaxMhz
03-09-2005, 12:39 AM
This one was and still is perfect in any aspect you named
http://fshistory.simflight.com/fsvault/fs1-apple.htm
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

And oh yeah - finaly someone who will agree with me - <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">there is no evolution</span>

TAGERT.
03-09-2005, 12:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fish40:
I know this might be slightly OT, but I was wondering if there was a sim(of any kind), that was perfect right out of the box. I'm not talking about technical bugs that a sim may have, but rather it's overall content. A sim is supposed to SIMULATE real life, weather it be flying , sailing, or what have you. A developer that wants to make a combat flight sim, whoever it is has access to tons of wartime footage showing AC, explosions, tracer fire, ect.. You would think that these would be modeled accordingly in the final product. However, at least in my experience, it took third party mods, to get it right. Even our very own IL2 series has it's shortcomeings. With each patch, there are more enhancements(more detailed splash effect, enhanced runway dust at takeoff, just to name a few) to make things more realistic. Should'nt it have been that way from the start? The last thing I want to do is point fingers at anyone in the industry. That's not the purpose of this thread. I was just curious if there was ever a sim that did'nt need to be "touched up" from the moment it came out of the box. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I think Leasuer Suit Larry did a pertty good job simulating my life

Fish40
03-09-2005, 03:45 AM
Thanks for the response guys. I'm glad it was'nt that bad a roasting! Believe it or not, Jane's WWII Fighters is one sim I don't own! With all the raves it's been getting, I'd like to give it a try, if I could ever find a copy. Is it still available online? Some valid points about more powerful comps., and developer time limits were raised, and those surely play their part. It's funny, that the motto for CFS3 is "As Real As It Gets". I must say though, that after a half a dozen mods, and an addon pack, it is alot closer. Mabey I'm just expecting too much. I mean, after all, these are just games, not real life.

Airmail109
03-09-2005, 04:35 AM
Janes....good? ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRHAHAHAHAHHAHH.......ARRRRRRRR RRRRRRHAHAHHHAHAHH http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif..........HOHOHOHOH..........ROFL! Its very arcadey.

Chuck_Older
03-09-2005, 10:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
<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 Daiichidoku:
for its time, Janes WWII fighters was perfect OOTB

still holds up quite well, actually, and even retains some features lacking in FB/PF or stays superior to <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Gotta disagree

The campaign was completetly without historical base. I flew a misison in a P-38, then in a P-47, etc.

Huge flaw in my opinion <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Im no expert on "battle of the bulge", but it seems to me that places and times and troop dispositions were based on RL...

but perhaps it was all ficticious in Janes, I dunno

as far as flying a 38, then 47 etc goes, I have no idea about that, either, if 38s for example were even present during BotB, but I think so


just what do you mean, chuck? that the missions were not based in reality, or perhaps that you dont agreee with flying different types during a campaign?



aside for any of that, theres no denying that Janes campaigns, or single missions, for that matter, were anything but fun, and sometimes extremely challenging to complete...certainly, FB fails to live up to the "fun" part of that...IMHO http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, you just flew the a/c that was for that mission

It's as if the USAAF squadrons just had a bunch of different planes laying about, and you picked the best one for the job...which isn't quite accurate, wouldn't you agree? Or was there a unit that had pilots flying a P-38 in one mission, a P-47 in the next, and the very next one was a P-51 mission?

I didn't like that part

womenfly
03-09-2005, 10:38 AM
<span class="ev_code_PINK">Yes, I did once..... but the disc was empty ... </span>http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Skycat_2
03-09-2005, 12:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fish40:
Believe it or not, Jane's WWII Fighters is one sim I don't own! With all the raves it's been getting, I'd like to give it a try, if I could ever find a copy. Is it still available online? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is, but only as 'used' copies or perhaps a lucky E-Bay copy that is unopened. Jane's WWII Fighters was released in 1998 but was discontinued from publication in 2001, even after devolving to a $10 budget 'jewel case' version. More copies seem to be appearing for sale, however, probably in part because old Simheads have embraced the IL-2 series or moved into other interests.

I've seen online vendors ask what I think have been ridiculously high prices for JWW2F -- up to $40 -- but a recent E-bay auction (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=80328&item=5750877042&rd=1) is encouraging in that the buyer got both WWII Fighters and CFS-1 for less than $7. I'd say look around and buy cheap.

Here are some versions that might be out there:
1. The original release from 1998; comes in a box and includes printed manual and key reference card. You'll have to download the last official patch which is version 1.08. You can get that at ww2fighters.org (http://www.ww2fighters.org/), an independant fan community site.
2. The original release as part of a 3-title bundle called "Ultimate Flight IV" that also includes Jane's F-15 and Commanche Gold. Most people don't know about that avenue. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif You should get the printed manual and keycard in this collection.
3. "EA Classics" boxed version, c. 2000. This version is only slightly different, only in that the v1.08 patch comes on the CD-ROM and the CD's interface panel is changed. The real game is the same, however. The manual is included as a PDF on the disc, but you get the printed key reference card.
4. "EA Classics" jewel case version. This is the same version as the boxed version but does not include a printed key card. I'd guess that this would be the version that you'd be most likely to find as used or unopened, simply because it flooded the budget racks at a cheap price.

When WWII Fighters was released, it was groundbreaking for being so visually exciting: 3-D cockpits, lens flare, orange sunsets, glowing full moon. Damage to your aircraft was rendered visually -- truly innovative at that time -- and individual squads of planes had either distinctive tail codes or unit shields.
The engines really had great sounds, as did the flak, guns, hit sounds, and ambient ground sounds. The terrain was covered with running troops (and deer) and vehicles that engaged each other in primitive tank battles.
As you flew, your virtual head was slammed around by G-forces, and you'd hear yourself 'groan' as you succumbed to black-outs and redouts. Damage to your cockpit caused holes and even blood to appear on the glass; gaping holes showed where your instruments had been shot out. If your engine was hit, a sheet of oil might obscure your frontal view.
Jane's WWIIF was also notable in that it came with a Full Mission Builder that in some ways still beats the FMB in FB/AEP: in addition to placing aircraft and ground objects, you could assign trigger events at various waypoints. The game also had a Quick Mission dogfight generator very similar to FB/AEP's, but without ground attack as an option.

I think it is no small coincidence that IL-2 ended up being so visually similar to WWII Fighters, as Oleg Maddox himself used to name WWII Fighters as one of his favorite games in his bio. I'd say the original IL-2 was 40% WWII Fighters, 30% European Air War, 20% Fighter Squadron: Screamin' Demons, and 10% 1C:MG own home-grown innovations.

However, the IL-2 series has set the bar high for what simmers expect, and many of the 'classic' older sims won't deliver if you don't consider them in their proper historic context. WWII Fighters might be disappointing to you if you consider that:
1. It only has seven flyable planes: P-38J, P-47D, P-51D, Spitfire Mk.IX, Bf-109G, Fw-190A, and Me-262A.
2. Only one map is included, the Ardennes in winter. It is a large map however.
3. AI planes tend to crash into each other in formation or upon landing at the home airfield.
4. Piloting is simplified and doesn't require any understanding of prop pitch, air/fuel control, or trim control. The FMs are very forgiving and devoid of spins and energy bleed. I don't think that torque is even modeled. You really don't get a feeling of flying a big mass of aluminum and steel through the sky.
5. Damage modeling is fairly generalized and really doesn't account for various airframe systems. Sure, you get flap failures, shot off wings and burning engines ... but the subtleties like hydraulic failure and fuel leaks are missing.
6. The AI will loop-the-loop you to death. Even the Me-262 is a turn fighter.
7. Modding -- even skin repainting -- was not supported by the designers. The game was closed archetecture by default and needed to be 'cracked' by modders. Even today the mods are fairly limited and most 'new' aircraft depend on unchangeable characteristics of the planes they replace.

In the end, I still love WWII Fighters for its high-adrenaline feel and its slick presentation (You'll love the Swing music in the opening museum lobby interface). However, I'm also sentimentally attached to it because it was my first WWII air combat sim. I was hooked because of the tanks/vehicles and I spent hours either strafing them or just setting up little wars to watch for my own entertainment. I'd still recommend WWII Fighters as a 'fun' sim, and once you get it modded up it looks as good or better than any title out there. However, WWII Fighter's limited features and narrow focus might not appeal to increasingly sophisticated sim audiences who have cut their teeth on the IL-2 series.

robban75
03-09-2005, 12:18 PM
F/A-18 Interceptor for the Amiga 500 was pretty much a flawless sim, and outstanding for its time.

http://amiga.emucamp.com/fa18interc_2.gif

Korolov
03-09-2005, 01:28 PM
Longbow 2 - I played my out of the box version constantly with no problems.

Same for the first Longbow and DI's Apache.

Da_Godfatha
03-09-2005, 01:51 PM
Privateer!!! That far back, before patches became a programmers crutch.

thefarb2
03-09-2005, 02:11 PM
I love EA's Formula 1 Challenge 99-02. It never has been patched and does not need it. the others before it did have problems though. F1 2002 was ok but need what it got when the F1C came out and it's great. I even prefer F1C to the many mods, of which there are some really good ones.

Bearcat99
03-09-2005, 03:31 PM
No..

FoolTrottel
03-09-2005, 03:44 PM
I'm with Whizbang_66:

"Chuck Yeager's Air Combat!!"

I'm still haunted by him saying:
"It's a great day for flying!"

Daiichidoku
03-09-2005, 08:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
It's as if the USAAF squadrons just had a bunch of different planes laying about, and you picked the best one for the job...which isn't quite accurate, wouldn't you agree? Or was there a unit that had pilots flying a P-38 in one mission, a P-47 in the next, and the very next one was a P-51 mission?

I didn't like that part <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


True enuff....

however, to compensate, one could easily and quickly insert whatever type they wished ( of the massive 5 choices http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ) with Janes (that ignorant ****) superior mission builder....recreating the whole campaign or single missions that appealed to you

Daiichidoku
03-09-2005, 08:59 PM
Its still beyond me why Oleg went with "scoring points" insted of (as in, for example) Janes team/individual kill/loss ratio counter

better chat interface (admittedly easier to produce with 8 players max tho)

and the no cockpit instument pop-ups were the COOLEST

oh, and the victory crosses/ribbons that ammassed on fuselage /tails

and pilot voices (with mild language turned off)
british-"my kites been pranged!"
german-"I'll see you in HELL!"
american-"you son-of-a-b i t c h!"

airframe creaks under high G

only ONE arrow in no-cockpit (toggleable with tgt window feature)

tgt window...could be an exploit to clearly see enemy attitude, but oh-so cool to see your fire hitting him up close

sometimes I even start an abortive install of my disc just to hear he swing music only heard for install

different guns in ac toggleable (P38 50s/20mm, 190 7.9/20mm/30mm, and STILL lacking in FB, this was a RL feature of 190s)

bomb/rocket loadouts toggleable "train" or "salvo"

ammo counter in all types (tho sadly not toggleable for immersion purposes, still quite handy)

P 38 had NO torque! hahaa (although, with no dual engine controls, single engine 38 could not climb with no prop feather feature)

P 38s had more accurate compressability effects....and so did 109s! hehehehe

the list goes on and on...the pros tower mightily over any cons Janes may have had

Waldo.Pepper
03-09-2005, 09:38 PM
Yeppers.

Balance of Power.