PDA

View Full Version : The eternal question : is FB better than the original IL2 ?



XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:16 AM
What a dull question !!! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

I've been hanging around here for a while, and at least once a day, I see somebody asking.

What do people expect ? Of course FB is worth buying. Same gameplay, same developpers, but more planes, better graphics, more features and more missions...

Man, I've never played IL2 at all (FB is my very first flight sim), but I've played a zillion games. And I've never seen so many people asking whether the latest evolution of a game is better than the old one... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I know, bad sequels can happen, but well, how often does a 2 year old game outclass a fresh new add-on ?

Just take a look at the screenshots, they speak for themselves...

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:16 AM
What a dull question !!! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

I've been hanging around here for a while, and at least once a day, I see somebody asking.

What do people expect ? Of course FB is worth buying. Same gameplay, same developpers, but more planes, better graphics, more features and more missions...

Man, I've never played IL2 at all (FB is my very first flight sim), but I've played a zillion games. And I've never seen so many people asking whether the latest evolution of a game is better than the old one... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I know, bad sequels can happen, but well, how often does a 2 year old game outclass a fresh new add-on ?

Just take a look at the screenshots, they speak for themselves...

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:22 AM
true...

S! Simon.
<center>


<marquee><font color="#000000">It's my attitude not my aptitude that determines my altitude.</font></marquee>
http://extremeone.4t.com/images/sig.jpg
<a href ="http://www.extremepossibilities.co.uk" target ="blank">http://www.extremepossibilities.co.uk</a>

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:37 AM
RE: The eternal question : is FB better than the original IL2 ?


Not if your name is RBJ.

He has issues with it.

Something to do with trim, apparently./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

<center><table bgcolor="black" width="400px"><tr><td>http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steve.gorman/banner2.jpg



<center> Click here for the greeting! (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steve.gorman/in-out.wav)</center>

<center>http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steve.gorman/moloko.jpg

<font size="+1">Horrorshow!</font></center>

</td></tr></table></center>

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:48 AM
As of right now, each game standing seperatly IL2 is a better game.I dont use trim.

The sound is 10 times better and physics are superior.


I really like the additional views i get in FB however.
FBattles should be better i believe after the patch.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:52 AM
in some ways IL2 is better

I have both and this weekend i spent most of my time on IL2



overall Fb is the better product for the mass market, flasher, more toys and nicer piccies the planes are also way easier for the yank and bank brigade (read mass market) to fly but some stuff in IL2 was better.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:58 AM
WTE_Galway wrote:
- in some ways IL2 is better
-

Of course an IL2 vet will be bound to regret some features, it's always like that. With the time I'm spending right now on FB, I guess I'd miss some of its features if Oleg came out with a Pacific war add-on. And despite the brand new graphics (see Lock on !), I could have nostalgia for my Yak1B /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

But still, I'd buy the Pacific war add-on (or any other)with my eyes closed /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 02:38 PM
"IL-2" is the better game for some.

Obviously they enjoy some really difficult challenges which no other people like, because it's damn difficult and pressing. They even have a name for it - "realism".

Ofcourse, I still don't understand why they'd name it "realism", because the last time I looked the dictionary, being hard and difficult was not a prerequisite for something being called "real".

They're pretty much determined that FB is an arcade game, because obviously the former game they played felt more hard, thus, "real" to them.

Guess it's really necessary to make a plane fly all crappy and terrible, and lose and bleed speed with shallow turns so they fumble and shake. Afterall, if flying a plane was so enjoyable and easy to manage, we'd all be flying one with just few hours of stick time in a game, right?

...

ps) but then, if the plane is supposed to do those sadistic things to itself, how'd the pilots ever shoot down anything, when they'd be busy managing their plane so it doesn't fall apart? Man, I knew pilots were special people, but I did not know they were demi-gods.


-----------
Due to pressure from the moderators, the sig returns to..

"It's the machine, not the man." - Materialist, and proud of it!

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 02:45 PM
Il2 is far superior as things stand right now. Il2 had sniper gunners, which FB has retained. Unfortunately FB has added sniper flak.

FB's netcode is clearly inferior to Il2's, for god only knows what reason.

FB's flight models are suspect (above and beyond the specific issues certain a/c have). I say "suspect" because nobody knows if Il2's twitchy ones or FB's easy ones are the authentic item. Has FB been dumbed down for the console brat-pack?

Add all the other bugs and glitches that FB has introduced, along with it's appalling 'dynamic' campaign engine, and I'd say Il2 is the classic that FB failed to live up to.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 03:16 PM
IL2 = great
FB + Patch = the way it should have shipped
FB - Patch = runny poo-poo


Case closed.

Bring on the patch UBI so we can run a complete game instead of this uncooked steak you sold us in the pretty box.



<p align="center"> http://www.1stclassproperties.ca/mr/Spit.jpg
Tongue-tied & twisted,
just an earthbound misfit,
I.
</CENTER>
</p>

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 03:52 PM
Both great games but overall FB is better, sure there are FM and DM probs but as I fly 109's the game is much closer too reality in both the height of the average DF and the climb and dive of the 109 especially with manual prop, these fighters should be able too climb from takeoff this happens in FB in Il2 it took to long to build speed.

The graphics are also a notch above, but really it will be best to ask this after the patch remember Il2 was patched 4 times, best thing is to have both, as they are probably the best two flight sims out there.

JG4_Tiger

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 04:58 PM
In many wayes Il2 is better The Flight Physics keep people from doing dopy manuvers The trim is normal Like it should be


Im reinstalling it today !!!

<Center><div style="width:700;colorhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gifurple;font-size:14pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=black,strength=11)"><Center>
I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold
I am alive forevermore.
I am the Alpha and the Omega
the Begining and the End.</div> <center>

<center><FONT COLOR="white">ӚFJ M œ R D ˜ ӡ[/i]</FONT>

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 05:02 PM
If FB was never released I would be playing IL2 more then I am playing FB now.

So I think you know the answer.

<img src=http://lafayettefederation.com/screenshots/repository/turo/tn-Numbaone.jpg>
"The Force is strong with this one." -What an ace said of RayBanJockey during a fight when he was still a newbie.
<a href=http://www.theinformationminister.com/press.php?ID=612109283>news update</a>

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 05:22 PM
In, FB, I THINK the Flight Model is dumbed down
I KNOW the sound is borked
FB graphics are superb, but not massively better than original Il2 on my rig.

But having loads more planes counts for a lot in my book.
So it depends what you value most.

Roll on the patch!

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 08:06 PM
Hinomaru wrote:

Il2 had sniper gunners, which FB has retained.
- Unfortunately FB has added sniper flak.



I haven't played IL2 to tell about sniper gunners, but I'm 100% with you about sniper flak.

You can't fly over an airfield for 10 seconds without being sniped by a tiny flak gun aiming at you 1500 meters away.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 08:09 PM
I like FB better, because it has the La7.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<center>
Lavochkins Are Best
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto/kozedub2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 08:45 PM
Do you remember the gunners in the original IL-2(before patches) when you would shoot the tail and right wing of the Pe-2 and his gunner would flame you while falling down?

"An attack against a unit of Flying Fortresses was something like controlled suicide...Sometimes 50, Sometimes 80 machine guns were firing at you... You attempted to close you eyes & continue to fire, Frightened to death, Frightened to death."

Oberst Johannes Steinhoff (176 kills)

Ich bin ein Wurgerwhiner

1C Ankanor, Defender Of The Truth

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 08:55 PM
IL2 made me drooling
FB not

The Sun is Gone
But I Have a Light
<CENTER>http://images.flagspot.net/i/id%5eaforo.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 10:04 PM
IMHO IL2 is 90% the game FB is, better in some ways, worse in others. I'm in a good position to compare as I've been flying IL2 a lot lately OL as my compadre only has IL2.

In a lot of ways IL2 is harder, (as I discovered when I first tried to land my 109 after being accustomed to FB) but I don't know anything about realism. I suspect that harder is closer to realism because it takes practice and skill to get proficient. That's the way things work in the RW, right?

FB dose look a lot better w/ the hi res planes and objects, but the improvement is minimal in regards to the landscape. I guess that having to choose only one I'd go w/ FB, but if you've got IL2, your really not missing that much.




<center> http://www.4yourfuture.net/handshake.gif


"Altitude, speed, maneuver, fire!"-The "formula of Terror" of Aleksandr Pokryshkin, Three times awarded the rank of Hero of the Soviet Union

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 10:45 PM
It's much better.

In original IL-2 the non-AS versions of G6 were useless.
In original IL-2 the 13mm MG was useless.
In original IL-2 the Mk108 was deadly, but inaccurate.

In FB:
All 109's are lethal. Even with bombrack! G6/AS with Mk108 is more sluggish than G6/AS with bombrack...
The 13mm MG is lethal (the rifle-caliber MG is useless against early war opponents).
Mk108 is crap. It's inaccurate, ineffective, and smells bad.

This will all (hopefully) be fixed in the Patch. Little birds have told me that in every single test version of the next Patch the Mk108 is one nasty mother. And Hurris stall, and obey the virtual laws of nature.. ;-)

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 10:49 PM
RayBanJockey wrote:
- If FB was never released I would be playing IL2 more
- then I am playing FB now.

You're just angry because all the scientific research put into throttle, angle and slider settings went to waste.

Wait for the patch and jump into a latewar 109 and you will be able to attract females again.

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 01:07 AM
"Has FB been dumbed down for the console brat-pack?"

- Would Leonardo Da Vinci have painted a mustache on his Mona Lisa if an art critic thought he should do so?





-----------
Due to pressure from the moderators, the sig returns to..

"It's the machine, not the man." - Materialist, and proud of it!

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 01:49 PM
"- Would Leonardo Da Vinci have painted a mustache on his Mona Lisa if an art critic thought he should do so?"

He would have done if he'd been working on Ubi's nickel.

Zayets
07-07-2003, 02:22 PM
If somebody would ask me i would say that before FB patch comes , to buy IL2 (see it today with 7.50 euros in other places is 15 euros) and have all the patches and add-ons. When patch for fB will come out , wait for 2 weeks or so to see the reaction of ppl here , and then go for it. meanwhile maybe even FB will drop in price ( I see it with 29.95 euros , I bought it for 39.95 which is a high price for an add-on).
IL2 has better sounds , plays like a dream on my machine , i like the FM of all planes. FB hs more CEM and new planes. dynamic campaign I consider it a drawback , not an advantage. We were forced to pay for an add on lotta money. You can see that very clearly that UBI knows alot how the money are made. Personally i consider myself fooled by UBI /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
Zayets out

http://www.emicad.nl/~justdoit/il2/logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:13 PM
How ironic that a thread that was started to say that this "eternal question" is boring has turned into a thread discussing this very question.... is that Alanis Morissette I hear in the background /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
CG

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:26 PM
In my mind, if more people played IL-2 with me, then I would play that over FB. With that said, I still play FB, but this is because this is where the people are at. I only play online.... I can't play online by myself /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Right now, IL-2 > FB (My opinion of course)

After the patch..... we will see, hopefully my mind does a full 180, but only time will tell.

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:33 PM
Cold_Gambler wrote:
- How ironic that a thread that was started to say
- that this "eternal question" is boring has turned
- into a thread discussing this very question....



Who said the eternal question was boring ?

I was just saying that a brand new add-on has every reason to be better, and that there was no need to ask... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 06:26 PM
I have had IL-2 for a year now but shyed away from FB because of the high price and the fact that i would fail my exams if i bought it http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif (at uni at the mo).

I've abandoned the campaign because it's a bit wooden and have gone for making my own missions in various theatres (mostly in the IL-2).

From what I hear about the 'dumbed down' FM, I'm not sure i want to part with IL-2. The tempremental aircraft like the P-39 are a joy to fly when you do it right. Alos, early Yaks and the LaGG-3 seem sufficiently outclassed to make them an intersting choice for a mission (that could just be my ineptitude).

Another big plus is my system isn't great, and it runs nicely, only chopping a bit when i get over Berlin.

I would love FB for the CEM, new aircraft and maps (esp Leningrad, although my system probably won't take it), but it seems like even the patch might not change all I would like it to. I shall wait and see what the reaction is here, and maybe for a drop in price, before i buy.

Sm

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 08:44 PM
There can be no question that FB is WORSE than the original IL-2.

No matter what you say about the planeset expansion and the eyecandy, they don't make up for a significantly worse flight and damage model, and that is exactly what FB offers us today.

Then, factor in the many problems online/coop play now has, compared to the original and you've taken out at least half of the utility of the sim. (If you count online and boxed scenario play equally). It's even worse if you, like me, value online competition much more than boxed campaigns and scenarios against AI. (oh, and the AI is significantly worse, as well).

Yes, there have been significant additions with FB (more fighters, flyable bombers, bombsights, new maps) but the potential of these can only be realized *IF* the patch(es) rectify the glaring FM and netcode problems. (and this is a big *IF* now that the patch seems to be a bigger challenge to Oleg's team than originally thought)

If this does in fact happen (and if Oleg's history is any indication, I think it will), then FB will be a great addition to the IL-2 system. If it *doesn't* happen, then FB will have stopped the momentum of IL-2, and some of us will have to make a hard choice between settling for an expanded, but markedly inferior sim, or the original version, which is shorter on the planeset and some interesting features, but is a FAR better *flight sim*.

For those who are "pure gamers", who can overlook FM and realism issues, I'd guess FB is better: it has more features, more planes, and more eye candy. If you don't see the woeful inadequacies in the FM, damage model, AI routines, or just don't care because you're too busy "blowing sh** up", then FB is better simply because it has more in the box than IL-2 did.

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 06:08 AM
I like FB better....it has the Jug, It runs better on my system, and to me the graphics are better. The sound ...welllllll IL2 had better sound..I like the FB sounds I just wish they would stay put...

<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

michapma
07-08-2003, 08:19 AM
Stiglr, I think you contradicted yourself. You said, "There can be no question that FB is WORSE than the original IL-2." Then you said, "For those who are 'pure gamers', who can overlook FM and realism issues, I'd guess FB is better."

I'm just calling you on this because it really is subjective. As has been pointed out by others and by you inadvertently, it depends on what you value more. Furthermore, some of those issues you named are not just relevant to pure gamers, and what do you mean exactly by "realism issues"?

I do agree with you about the flight models, but not the damage models. They will be refined, but I don't find them to be so awful in comparison to IL-2. More detailed, if you ask me, even if they aren't yet "perfect." We don't know what's happened with the flight models yet... /i/smilies/16x16_robot-sad.gif

The graphics and especially TrackIR support in FB are a significant improvement over IL-2.

Why do you feel that the "patch seems to be a bigger challenge to Oleg's team than originally thought"? I have the impression that they're putting more into it than originally thought, and that's why it took longer.

We agree in a lot of ways, though. I just wanted to clarify. /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif

Cheers,
Mike

<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="10"><tr valign="middle" bgcolor="#3e463b"><td height="40" colspan="3" align="center">The ongoing IL-2 User's Guide project (http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~chapman/il2guide/)</a></td></tr><tr bgcolor="#515e2f"><td width="40%">FB engine management:
Manifold Pressure sucks (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182081-1.html)
Those Marvelous Props (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182082-1.html)
Mixture Magic (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182084-1.html)
Putting It All Together (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182085-1.html)
Those Fire-Breathing Turbos (Part 1 of 6) (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182102-1.html)</td><td align="center">

SKULLS_Chap

<a href="http://www.skulls98.netfirms.com/il2/index.html" target="_blank" style="color: #191970; font-size: medium">The
SKULLS</a></p></td><td width="40%" align="right" valign="top">Hardware:
Flight Simulation Performance Analyzed (http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_062a.html)
Building a home-made throttle quadrant step by step (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=zkavv)
Sound Can Be Hazardous for Games (http://www6.tomshardware.com/game/20030405/index.html)</td></tr></table>

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 11:32 AM
I just wasted seven minutes of my life.

Someone call me when the patch is out. This forum is toast until then.

<center>http://banners.wunderground.com/banner/gizmotimetemp_both/language/www/US/TX/Dallas.gif </center>

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 11:42 AM
Seven minutes on this little thread ? I can see why you're bored !

Be ready to spend the night on a 109 vs 190 thread /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 03:36 PM
LOL, Stiglr didn't like IL-2, either, so no wonder he doesn't like FB.

I like FB. Just a tad more energy bleed and it'll be perfect.

IL-2 was a bit too twitchy, IMHO, with IL-2's barely able to lift off the ground with standard loads, LaGG's overheating at cruise, and the P-39 a spin-o-matic stall fest of fun. It was a blast, though, and I really enjoyed it.

FB ain't perfect, but neither was IL-2 when it came out.

Black dots, anyone?

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 04:16 PM
This is a no brainer.

http://sunstarentertainment.maddsites.com/images/asshat.gif



Message Edited on 07/08/0308:19AM by UCLANUPE

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 04:33 PM
UCLANUPE wrote:
- This is a no brainer.
-
-
-
<imgsrc="http://sunstarentertainment.maddsites.com/ima
- ges/asshat.gif">
-
-
-
-




<img src=http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-D9-29_small.jpg>
"yeah whatever"