PDA

View Full Version : What's the difference?



XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 01:09 AM
I've been seeing commercials for MS flight simulator and I'm curious. What's the difference between the simulator and the combat simulator? I always just assumed they had superior weather and physics in lieu of DM and bullet physics. But really, what's the difference?






<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
07-27-2003, 01:09 AM
I've been seeing commercials for MS flight simulator and I'm curious. What's the difference between the simulator and the combat simulator? I always just assumed they had superior weather and physics in lieu of DM and bullet physics. But really, what's the difference?






<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
07-27-2003, 01:20 AM
Dending on the variant, not much. Then again, very much.

Most are back compatible, meaning CFS1 planes will work in CFS2 but not the other way around. FS98 planes will work in CFS1 & 2. FS2000 planes will work in CFS2 (I think) and vice versa. Not sure how CFS3 (which sucks) and FS2002 (which is great) work out.

The terrain in FS2002 is Haagen-Dazs! (LA Int. at 1600x1200x32 colour with all sliders maxed is incredible!) Terrain in CFS3 it sucked big time. CFS2 was good for terrain, FS2000 was pretty good too but bad frame rates. Weather seemed better in the civy flight sims.

A great series all in all. But low FPS in FS2000 and all out suckability in CFS3 were the ,low points. CFS1 rocked!

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 01:26 AM
georgeo76 wrote:
- I've been seeing commercials for MS flight simulator
- and I'm curious. What's the difference between the
- simulator and the combat simulator? I always just
- assumed they had superior weather and physics in
- lieu of DM and bullet physics. But really, what's
- the difference?

The biggest dif I noticed in CFS3 was that nifty Person Outside Standing around waiting to fly the plane... It was really kewl.. You can tell they spend alot of time on that Person Outside Standing around what with that little knife on his leg and all.. Such a neat idea and so much time and money spent on that Person Outside Standing around that I could not understand why they called it Combat Flight Simulator III (C.F.S.3.) when it should have been called Person Outside Standing (P.O.S.)



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 01:29 AM
How cruel. How funny. How true. LOL!

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 01:34 AM
Beirut wrote:
- How cruel. How funny. How true. LOL!

Ah, good, you caught it! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif I thought for a min folks might thik I was serious! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 01:49 AM
Hiliarious!

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 01:56 AM
If you're talking about Microsoft Flight Simulator 2002, it is quite simply the best PC flight simulator on the market - at least until 2004 (which is basically the same sim with several added features) comes out in a few more days.

Even straight out of the box it beats everything else. But nobody uses it straight out of the box. You can get all sorts of add-ons to make the terrain more accurate and add detail, you can get freeware and payware add-on planes enormously better than the stock ones, and so on. This thing is even used by some flight schools - with flight models changed to make them more realistic, and you can get the software to do that.

But to compare it to Il-2/FB, or any other COMBAT flight sim, is ridiculous; it's not even apples and oranges, it's apples and truck tires. They aren't comparable because they don't do the same things.

If you built a combat flight simulator to the same degree of visual detail as FS2K2, it would be unplayable in anything but a super-expensive custom-made computer which only a very few people could afford. Because a combat FS has to do so much more.

Think about it. A flight simulator like FS2K2 just has to keep track of one plane and what it's doing. Oh, there are some simple-minded AIs around the airports to provide traffic, but all they do is taxi around and take off and land - they don't have to perform complex maneuvers and respond to constantly-changing input like the AIs in a combat sim. And they're not in big numbers. There's nothing on the order of a twenty-bomber formation with a dozen fighters escorting and a dozen more attacking, as you'd commonly have in FB.

And it doesn't have to keep track of things like damage and weapons effect, and all in all it's just got so much less to do that it's got lots of memory to spare for things like forests with highly detailed trees, or aircraft interiors that you can get up out of your seat and walk around in.

Even then it pushes the framerates pretty hard. If you turn the settings up high - comparable to Excellent or Perfect in FB - your basic frame rate will probably run around 25 fps. That is perfectly good for a non-combat flight simulator, because it will stay there pretty steadily unless you give it a real hit by doing something extreme, like flying over London at rooftop level with high-density scenery. (Hey, if you've never flown a Cessna Bobcat under the Tower Bridge, don't knock it.)

But a basic frame rate of 25 would be pretty poor - most would say unacceptable - for FB or CFS-2 or 3, because in a combat sim you've got all these sudden things happening to impact the FR. Flak, bomb explosions, gunfire, other planes showing up...you start out with 25 just tooling along minding your own business, and when it hits the fan it's liable to be slideshow time.

So it's not a criticism of FB to say that FS2K2 is a better pure flight sim. FB was never intended to be a pure flight sim; it's a combat flight sim, and that's something entirely different.

It's like comparing a fighter and a bomber and saying the bomber must be better because it's got more engines or the fighter must be better because it's faster.

Personally I advise anyone who can afford it and has the time to get both. They're not in competition, or shouldn't be. And you do learn things. My landing technique in FB improved a hell of a lot after having to muscle a 747 down a few times.

All this assumes you're talking about FS2002 or FS2004. If you mean CFS-2 or CFS-3, that's a whole different subject.

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 02:07 AM
Very well said.

But can you imagine prop-combat over some of those FS2002 sceneries? Good God what a feast that would be!



Message Edited on 07/27/0301:08AM by Beirut

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 03:08 AM
Blind_Joe_Death wrote:
- If you built a combat flight simulator to the same
- degree of visual detail as FS2K2, it would be
- unplayable in anything but a super-expensive
- custom-made computer which only a very few people
- could afford.

So true, and so simple.. ie the more time and money you devote to developing the country side, the less time and money you have to do other things. Same holds true for the CPU, the more CPU cycles you devote to displaying the country side, the less CPU cycles you have for AI, AC Graphics, Damage Models, etc.

Yet, you would not belive how many people cant grasp that simple concept. I think the belive the detailed country side is just a check box someone forgot to set in the pull down menu of the IL2 SDK, that would make IL2's country side on parr with the likes of FS2K2. No extra time or money needed to do it, because it is just a simple little check box in the SDK that someone must have forgot to check! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 03:12 AM
U get to kill daisies

-------
I'm just saying...


<Center><img src=http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0QwC4BKYUc8NdMGbLmK6nXDVLh2PHDHXJaQ1bq!8G7LP4M88wB FsyxFjf4d*z6zBGsbDWqHu7YGhkgzyCM27ZtHoOdC*BEG5*v4s Dst1JT1g/sig.jpg> </Center>



Message Edited on 07/27/0309:00PM by Tully__

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 03:38 AM
tagert wrote:
--
- -

I won a double dog dare.

Everone knows that is worth anything.

-------
I'm just saying...


<Center><img src=http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0QwC4BKYUc8NdMGbLmK6nXDVLh2PHDHXJaQ1bq!8G7LP4M88wB FsyxFjf4d*z6zBGsbDWqHu7YGhkgzyCM27ZtHoOdC*BEG5*v4s Dst1JT1g/sig.jpg> </Center>



Message Edited on 07/27/0308:49PM by Tully__

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 03:43 AM
tagert wrote:
-
- Man get a life! Let me see if I got this correctly,
- you came to the forum, and responded to all the fist
- page threads with some out of context ref to
- lesbians? What in gods earth does that do for you?
-


Leave my b!tch alone. It you don't I may cry.



<center>http://www.btinternet.com/~lenazavaroni/images/tva_01a.jpg

<font size="+4">What a fox!</font></center>

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 03:44 AM
HeavyDelta wrote:
- I won a double dog dare.
-
- Everone knows that is worth anything.
-
--------
- I'm just saying...

Hmmmmm.. Hey if that is what it takes to float your boat, more power to you! YOU GO GIRL!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 03:47 AM
georgeo76 wrote:
- I've been seeing commercials for MS flight simulator
- and I'm curious. What's the difference between the
- simulator and the combat simulator? I always just
- assumed they had superior weather and physics in
- lieu of DM and bullet physics. But really, what's
- the difference?


Noone shoots at you in MS flight sim /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif