PDA

View Full Version : What are we qualified to say about patches?



Jumoschwanz
10-19-2005, 01:00 AM
In the general discussion forum, a long time pilot of this simulator made a statement about how he had flown several models of aircraft after the release of 4.02, and he stated how thier flight models now "seemed about right"!

Right compared to what? All the hours he has in the actual real aircraft of each type?

This past year, on one of the forums on this website, there was an article posted on a private pilot's experience with an opportunity he had to fly one of the Spanish-built bf109s. He was pretty cockshure of his abilities. Well he just about crashed the plane on take-off, did a emergency circuit of the airfield and a landing in which he ruined the brakes of the aircraft. He opinion of himself as a pilot was completely shattered, the flying of this craft had abslolutely nothing to do with any preconception he had.

So if a virtual simulation pilot has no credible opinion, or an actual pilot who has no experience with heavy and monsterously powerful WWII fighters cannot guess what it is like to fly them, then we sure as sh it cannot make any statements like "they seem about right", that have any meaning at all, in fact it is laughable.

The only thing a virtual sim pilot is qualified to compare a current patch to, is the last patch he just overwrote on his hard-drive, that is still fresh in his memory, and note any changes.
We cannot even use the words "right" or "wrong" to talk about them at all. Say you like it or dislike it, but realise this is a personal opinion and doesn't mean jack squat outside your skull.

Just trust that the obviously very learned and smart group of people that created and develop this sim do the best they can and that is one he ll of a lot better than any of you can do. What is that? oh you will have your own superior flight sim out soon? I can hardly wait to try it! UNtil then though, you have no credibility do you?

I will take the fact that that group of developers of this flight sim, along with the research and input of the real pilots they are in touch with are doing just fine. And I sure am not going to say ANYTHING they have done "seems right" or wrong or anything.

All I can tell you, ever, is how a new patch feels to a lowly virtual pilot, compared only to the last patch I just overwrote. And my memory of that is fast fading. When I go back an run patches of this sim from a year or four years ago, I am astonished at what I do not remember. I cannot trust what is in my head at all.

So take opinions on this sim and it's patches with a open eye, most of them are total bu ll****, especially ones proclaming good, bad, right or wrong. None of these things exist in this virtual world, there is only the "different".

Thanks for your time,

Jumoschwanz

SeaFireLIV
10-19-2005, 02:04 AM
Originally posted by Jumoschwanz:


So take opinions on this sim and it's patches with a open eye, most of them are total bu ll****, especially ones proclaming good, bad, right or wrong. None of these things exist in this virtual world, there is only the "different".

Thanks for your time,

Jumoschwanz

And this is the guy who assumed Axis music was biased... hmmm.

madsarmy
10-19-2005, 02:04 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Well said Jumo.

EJGrOst_Caspar
10-19-2005, 02:35 AM
100% agreed.

andycapp
10-19-2005, 03:26 AM
What is the average person qualified to say anything about anything? But we do all the time?
I don€t know anything about politics but I still vote because I have an opinion.

Lighten up it€s an enthusiasts forum.

F19_Orheim
10-19-2005, 03:43 AM
well spoken.. hear hear

stansdds
10-19-2005, 05:19 AM
Well said! Far too many "experts" with absolutely no experience outside of a computer. It's hard enough to find real pilots who have time in real Corsairs, Hellcats, Spitfires, etc. who can or will give their opinion, but sim flying by itself is difficult.

I have a little stick time in a Piper Super Cub and I have been a passenger in a B-17G and a B-25J as well as commuter twin turbo props and passenger jets and it's not the same as a computer sim, never will be. Real aircraft give you little vibrations and you can feel what the aircraft is doing. You also have a very wide field of view. You can spend $30,000 and buy a portable surround projection unit and get the field of view, but you still won't get the feel.

Cajun76
10-19-2005, 05:52 AM
While in some respects your post is dead on, you have to realize the context he was using. (Read the same post you did I believe)

It "felt right" becuase it seems to match the info he has, which is expansive I believe, including tests and pilots accounts on the type. I don't want to speak for him, but when he fired up the particular plane in question, it performed as he expected it to according to the data/info/accounts he's seen over the years.

For instance, if you lived and breathed books and accounts of the Fw-190, and then got into the sim version and it rolled like a Hurricane Mk1 in a 400mph dive with an aileron missing, it probably wouldn't meet your expectations of how the Wulf handles. A patch comes along, and suddenly, the feared Focke Wulf just "feels" like it ought to, like you've read/heard about for years. Now, it "feels" spot on, even never having flown a real Butcher Bird yourself. That's the kind of remark he was trying to make, imho.

arcadeace
10-19-2005, 06:43 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
And this is the guy who assumed Axis music was biased... hmmm.

Lol

Jumo you have to get over your own bias that you have none. I agree with some of your points here but you have opinions as much as the rest. Relax it, we're all superior thinkers http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Chuck_Older
10-19-2005, 09:46 AM
What are we qualified to say? How about "<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Thanks</span>"

LEXX_Luthor
10-19-2005, 10:14 AM
Thanks Jurmo. As always, very minimalist. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Nobody at this webboard has "real life" experience with World War 2 combat flying, and more importantly, WW2 pilot training. We all stand on the same ground as far as our experience goes, which is why we often see "real life" pilots here contradicting each other. Significantly, they NEVER flame each other or get into little spats here. They know this really is a play game compared to what they do up there in the real sky.

One thing we have seen:: the "real life" pilots often see PC combat flight simming as a way to "escape" from their real life jobs (especially commerical pilots) and so are often seen willing to make the most weird claims. I saw at sinhq a commercial pilot posting that No Cockpit view was more realistic to real life viewing ability. This is an example of wanting to "get away" from the stressful day (and night/bad weather) job of flying real airplanes in blind soup. But then I can't blame them. World War 2 USA pilots Whined like stuck piggs for No Cockpit view and they got it in the form of bubble canopies later in the war. Japanese pilots Whined like stuck piggs for no canopy on Ki-27 and the Army relented to them and ordered Nakijima to remove the canopy.

Soviet pilots Whined like stuck piggs about the poor forward-high view of I-5 and Polikarpov gave them the gull wing I-15. Then the pilots Whined like stuck piggs about poor forward-side view so Polikarpov gave them back the straight top wing of I-152. The pilots then Whined like stuck piggs about lack of forward-high view in I-152 so Polikarpov threw up his hands and gave them the gull wing I-153. A bit over dramatized perhaps, but this is what happened.

Oleg modded one thing with perfect Hristoical accuracy -- the Whining like stuck piggs. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Jumoschwanz
10-19-2005, 10:52 AM
Well if the guy was comparing the plane in this sim to history books he has read that is fine. But you can find as much contradiction in history books as anywhere else, and poeple probably read what they want to. I like the 109 fighter, so I like to read that it could hang in a turn with a Spit for at least long enough to get a shot off, and I like to read how great it was at high alt. Then an old WWII pilot tells me how all the german aircraft in WWII were junk because they had wooden props and tails and other compromises because of material shortages, he said they were all deathtraps

Likewise you can read great stuff on the FW190, but then you can also read flight tests of captured planes that compare it very unfavourably to most allied craft.

And sure, I am as much a mo ron as anyone else, but wherever the truth springs from, even from a cesspool, it will stand by itself.

Jumoschwanz

crazyivan1970
10-19-2005, 10:56 AM
Interesting discussion, but please keep it civil

Krt_Bong
10-19-2005, 02:45 PM
Originally posted by Jumoschwanz:
. ..Then an old WWII pilot tells me how all the german aircraft in WWII were junk because they had wooden props and tails and other compromises because of material shortages, he said they were all deathtraps

Likewise you can read great stuff on the FW190, but then you can also read flight tests of captured planes that compare it very unfavourably to most allied craft...


Jumoschwanz
I talked to and Old WW2 fighter Pilot once signing Books at an Airshow in Lakeland he told how he had been shot down by an Fw and ended up in a Prison camp near a Luftwaffe Base at the end of the War but Germany was losing and the Guards not wanting to hang around left their posts and he Escaped in a Fw 190 parked at the edge of the field, he was lucky he managed to land where he could be re-patriated before being shot down (I think he said it was a interesting airplane but he preferred the Mustang) His name was R.A."Bob" Hoover..

cpirrmann
10-19-2005, 05:20 PM
the "real life" pilots often see PC combat flight simming as a way to "escape" from their real life jobs (especially commerical pilots) and so are often seen willing to make the most weird claims. I saw at sinhq a commercial pilot posting that No Cockpit view was more realistic to real life viewing ability. This is an example of wanting to "get away" from the stressful day (and night/bad weather) job of flying real airplanes in blind soup.

Maybe, but not in my cae. I fly real airplanes not sims to escape from the drudgery of life. I haven't had the opportunity to fly high performance fighters so I can't comment on how they fly in IL2 and I haven't. I will say that I agree with the statement of No Cockpit view being most realistic, because in real life you have situational awareness and vision ranges you just can't simulate on a PC. (I fly with cockpit on and switch view direction frequently). I fly IL2 et al for recreation, enjoyment, the opportunity to fly planes I otherwise couldn't in situations impossible now, and it also keeps my flying skills sharper than they would be otherwise. But some take this sim/game too seriously. I've been playing since the first IL2 came out and I enjoy this too much to become a whiner. If I get shot down, I jump back in and try again, not complain that my plane should've been able to out climb or out turn my opponent. Anyone who reads aviation history knows that the machine is only a fraction of the equation leading to aerial victory. I'm also a prgrammer, so I am in awe of what's been done in this sim and have a good idea of the work involved. Some of us need to cut back on the caffeine I think. For now, if I survive the next mission, I'll sit back, cruise back to base and enjoy the view.

arcadeace
10-19-2005, 06:02 PM
I€m glad you€ve taken the time to post cpirrmann. I€m not a real pilot but can easily understand where you€re coming from.

This sim can€t be enjoyed by many here if they don€t believe they know what its all about. It cannot be accepted its too far from reality.

Its hard to imagine if members had enough humility to realize they're not even close to WWII pilots and that its just a great piece of software to have fun. That will never happen http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

johann63
10-19-2005, 08:16 PM
Jumo

Very interesting point and well written.

Though in my opinion an important component of this forum or any game forum is to state your opinion of what the game is like. Agreed some folks could maybe state their opinions in a more thoughtful manor but

its all just opinions about a computer game. A fine game it is but its just a game.

That being said this game "feels" right to me. But I do have a comfy chair. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Obi_Kwiet
10-19-2005, 08:36 PM
Yes! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif What diffrence does it make an aircraft in the game is ever so slighty diffrent than it was in RL? Just play the darn game! 40$ does not entitle you to 5 years of intensive reasearch on weather the FMs for 120+ AC are 100% perfect. It's a game featuring sixty year old aircraft that have little flight characteristic info. It's not a 5,000,000$ a millitary training sim.

TacticalYak3
10-19-2005, 10:45 PM
There are no absolutes is the problem, or at least gives opportunity for endless debate.

I agree that Maddox Games has done a terrific job, especially given the large volume of planes they have included in the IL-2 series.

In the end all we gamers are entitled to is whether we like it or not. I personally like the latest patch, and that's all that matters. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Interesting discussion.

AWPasha
10-20-2005, 03:12 AM
This isn't the best sim ever made, by a long shot.

It's Pretty. It's best used as a screensaver, if you care to afford the space on your drives.


Pasha

Kuna15
10-20-2005, 03:44 AM
Originally posted by andycapp:
What is the average person qualified to say anything about anything? But we do all the time?
I don€t know anything about politics but I still vote because I have an opinion.

Lighten up it€s an enthusiasts forum.

That is true, we can see it on regular basis. We all have some opinion whether we want to admit or not.
And therefore we are all a bit biased (it isn't so bad thing IMHO http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif), some more some less.

I like your last sentence, "it€s an enthusiasts forum", it says a lot. In most cases we should take it easy... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Good thread, BTW.

Tully__
10-20-2005, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by AWPasha:
This isn't the best sim ever made, by a long shot.

It's Pretty. It's best used as a screensaver, if you care to afford the space on your drives.


Pasha PM for you Pasha, please take note.

Stigler_9_JG52
10-20-2005, 02:34 PM
Jumoschwanz, your entire train of thought is as laughable as you say our right to have an opinion about the FM is.

Let's start at the top. You can also say about Oleg himself and every member of his staff that created the sim that "they haven't flown any [or at best, many] of the aircraft in question". So, by that standard almost nobody remotely connected with the sim has that viewpoint or experience. Even real WWII vets had experience in one or 2 of our 100+ models. Few people who ever lived could claim broad enough experience to comment on more than one or two aircraft types. So, let's dispense with that.

Second, although of course there is difference of opinion in printed matter, pilot accounts and even test flights (!!), you can't really discount this kind of data offhand, nor can you bash someone for using it as a frame of reference. In some cases, it's all we have.

Thirdly, it doesn't require anyone to design their own sim to have a valid opinion as to how good or bad this one is. You need not be a carpenter or contractor, for example, to hold the opinion that your suddenly-moldy house was poorly constructed; you need not be an automotive engineer to hold the opinion that your car is poorly designed if you're one of several people nationwide who suffered near identical fires or system failures. Common sense and observation are just fine, thanks.

It is entirely fair and valid to have read a number of independent sources that arrive at something close to a consensus, such as "Plane X handled this way, and could turn this quickly" and use it as a rough comparison, especially when the IL-2 version of the plane is markedly different. Despite "Got Track?" quips from TAGERT, it really doesn't require a rocket scientist to notice some of the more glaring problems with some of the planes and some of the flight modeling. Perhaps to closely quantify how much off it is does require some more scientific methods and tools... but just to notice something's wrong? Nah.

To sum it up and answer your original question, "What are we qualified to say about patches?": I'd say, whatever we want to. And a little discussion and research amongst ourselves will quickly uncover what's close to true, what's total BS, and what is basically just sycophantic f*nboi-ism.