PDA

View Full Version : compared to Microsofts combat flight sims which is better



gunshots
03-10-2005, 02:37 PM

canucksledge
03-10-2005, 02:55 PM
Well, CFS2 was complete as advertised when released...if that counts anymore.

Chuck_Older
03-10-2005, 03:26 PM
This is the wrong website to ask this question

DRB_Hookech0
03-10-2005, 03:45 PM
Holy Jesus........

What is that Pvt Pile?!

A cfs3 vs il2 poll....sir....

Are Polls allowed in the Barraks Pvt Pile?

Are you allowed to troll Pvt. Pile?!


......got to find my goalie mask....here we go again!

Incomming!

Chivas
03-10-2005, 04:25 PM
Now the this board will be spammed by the 3 people who like CFS3.

Eraser_tr
03-10-2005, 04:40 PM
His poll option had cfs2 not 3 you lowlife fanboys.

There are a hell of alot more people who like cfs3 than just 3. You can all kiss my cfs3 playing *** in a few months when MAW is released and you still haven't gotten your holy patch.

BTW MS has actually been supporting us, much faster responses from them than from the 1C people too.

canucksledge
03-10-2005, 04:41 PM
Some users here are just all skin and teeth...
I don't see any vote for CFS3 there...but maybe it's me. Obviously someone who has had such limited exposure to CFS3 as to believe it takes place in THE PACIFIC has no right to an opinion. CFS2 is the one being commented on. CFS2 was great for it's day. I think we can all agree that CFS3 left a lot to be desired.

joeap
03-10-2005, 04:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Eraser_tr:
His poll option had cfs2 not 3 you lowlife fanboys.

There are a hell of alot more people who like cfs3 than just 3. You can all kiss my cfs3 playing *** in a few months when MAW is released and you still haven't gotten your holy patch.

BTW MS has actually been supporting us, much faster responses from them than from the 1C people too. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

MS support? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Well at least the 3rd party guys have been putting some hard work into fixing it.

horseback
03-10-2005, 05:34 PM
I ditched CFS2 right after I figured out how to get the original Il-2 Sturmovik to run on my old computer, over 3 years ago. Put it back on my hard drive for a revisit last year in preparation for Pacific Fighters (Note: not Pacific Torpedo Bombers). Played it twice, maybe three times.

Not even close.

cheers

horseback

reisen52
03-10-2005, 05:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by joeap:

MS support? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Well at least the 3rd party guys have been putting some hard work into fixing it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think he is talking about some MS guys supporting the 3rd party guys with tools & such.

Zeke

Eraser_tr
03-10-2005, 08:18 PM
yes, oh and they fixed its glaring bugs in a patch...just one and the game has ran perfectly for 2 years.

*****ing about cfs3 sucking is just a huge display of ignorance. And what the hell is the problem with enjoying both games anyway?

"CFS3 left a lot to be desired"
Yes, out of the box. right now, not a chance.

GT182
03-10-2005, 08:32 PM
It's a no-brainer http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif.... PF and FB/AEP beats the whole CFS series hands down. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

My CFS, CFS2 and CFS3 disks sure make great beer coasters. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

56th BMAC
03-10-2005, 09:12 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Nothing to see here... Move along.

Popey109
03-10-2005, 09:45 PM
Didn€t we just go though this BS last week?...Oh! It€s this week again. Must be trying too meet there quota http://www.cfcforums.com/showthread.php?t=5103 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Chivas
03-10-2005, 09:58 PM
"BTW MS has actually been supporting us, much faster responses from them than from the 1C people too."

LMFAO

LEXX_Luthor
03-10-2005, 10:21 PM
I have read that one of the most Popular features of CFS2 was its maps (or...its map?).

I am intereseted in hearing about CFS2 map...

Mission Editor screenshots
dimensions (miles or kilometers)
areas mapped
terrain elevation and steepness
terrain types
etc...

Thanks~

ruf9ii
03-10-2005, 10:45 PM
ok, i have a (sorta) unbiased view on CFS and Il2.
years and years ago i used to rock around in MS fighter ace. that game was tops (this is how i remember it anyways). i stopeped playing sims for a while after that then CFS3 come out and i saw screenshots and was like 'WOW', this looks great. bought it first time it come out, and hell was i disapointed. my MSFFB2 stick didnt even work with it properly. the ground looked like a texture from wolfenstein 3D (in 320x280!) and to top it off it run at about 10 FBS. my machine isnt top notch but should be more than capable of running this (athlon 2600 and 4200ti GPU). uninstalled, took game back for refund.
one thing i did like though was the aircraft choice and the fact that ground targets had icons! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif i dunno why, but i just do...

unfortunately i was hooked back on sims so i headed after a different game. having tried il2 demo (and being moderately pleased) i went and got FB. staight out of box it run like a dream. and it looked good too!

i think the moral is, first impressions last, and CFS3 made one hell of a bad impression. same as LOMAC...

lets all hope BOB doesnt go down the same path ....

TAGERT.
03-10-2005, 11:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gunshots:
i personaly believe that Pacific Fighters is far superior to microsofts simulators
they are more realistic have more missions and aircraft and the enemy is smarter

plz post answers

gunshot <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Oh majic 8 ball.. Is gunshot just a troll?

http://www.umich.edu/~info/8ball/11.gif

Are you sure? Could he just be clueless?

http://www.umich.edu/~info/8ball/14.gif

Ok.. good enough for me than

LEXX_Luthor
03-10-2005, 11:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
http://www.simviation.com/pageimages/CFS2map.jpg

Map for Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator 2--WWII Pacific Theatre Contains all stock CFS2 airfield locations. by Mike Wagner. 25K

~ http://www.simviation.com/cfs2misc1.htm
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Is it one big map, or a number of small maps?

Skycat_2
03-11-2005, 12:36 AM
The poll question is CFS-2 (the Pacific one) vs. Pacific Fighters. Please leave your CFS-3 bashing at the door ... no matter how tempted you may feel to express an opinion. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Lexx, CFS-2 gives you a MAP. One big continuous map. CFS-1 and CFS-2 worked the same way as the MS Flight Simulator releases of their time, except with a much smaller coverage of the world (FS releases give you nearly the entire globe). In addition, one could easily add more terrain meshes to each of the first two versions of the CFS series ... IIRC, you could even port locations from versions of FS.

Feathered_IV
03-11-2005, 12:44 AM
Gunshots, is this really how you choose to spend your very first post on this forum?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1241.gif

Sheesh.....But ugh, welcome aboard anyhow.

LEXX_Luthor
03-11-2005, 12:55 AM
Thanks Skycat, that's what I thought I heard....I have never messed with any MS game, but I would like to see this map though. So, you could fly partially across the huge map if you had enough range and fuel? Thanks.

Skycat:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>CFS-2 gives you a MAP. One big continuous map. CFS-1 and CFS-2 worked the same way as the MS Flight Simulator releases of their time, except with a much smaller coverage of the world (FS releases give you nearly the entire globe). In addition, one could easily add more terrain meshes to each of the first two versions of the CFS series ... IIRC, you could even port locations from versions of FS. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Skycat_2
03-11-2005, 01:17 AM
Lexx,

You could fly until your eyes dried up into little raisins in their sockets, and you were absolutley comatose with boredom. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

What did those maps look like? Well, mostly they were water. The islands were vividly colored and had decent topography -- I recently fired the game up and flew down through a deep river valley. 3D ground objects like buildings and trees only appeared on the beaches though.


Take a look at Microsoft's official screenshots page (http://www.microsoft.com/games/combatfs2/visuals.asp) if you're interested.

LEXX_Luthor
03-11-2005, 02:03 AM
Thanks. I never thought of looking at MS website. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Tully__
03-11-2005, 03:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I have read that one of the most Popular features of CFS2 was its maps (or...its map?).

I am intereseted in hearing about CFS2 map...

Mission Editor screenshots
dimensions (miles or kilometers)
areas mapped
terrain elevation and steepness
terrain types
etc...

Thanks~ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

CFS2 is based on FS98 IIRC and has the entire Pacific (world if you like) in one map, but the terrain is REALLY ugly below about 5000'. If you select unlimited fuel, you can take off from Hawaii and land at Port Moresby. That, the ability to set triggers in the CFS2 mission builder and the open architecture (allowing user add-on aircraft) are it's primary advantages. Another lesser advantage is the full engine management available in CFS2, but it's user optional, not set by the host.

The user add-on aircraft is also a major disadvantage as it allows all sorts of true UFO like performance. Added to that, the flight model engine is directly derived from the MS civil aviation sims and is not suited to combat manouvers. To top it off, hit detection and collision detection uses the "hit bubble" model which means if you fly withing a wingspan of another aircraft, you collide and blow up, and you're bullets only have to get vaguely in the vicinity of your target to score hits.

Had EAW covered the Pacific Theatre, I don't think CFS2 would have even been near my PC after the year 2000, as EAW was a much better sim for combat IMO.

I find the IL2 series is a far better sim for combat than CFS2 (and by all accounts I've read, better than CFS3 as well). It's major downfalls are the lack of triggers in FMB and the limited map size. While engine management is in some ways more simplified than in CFS2, it's the same for all players. Whatever level the host sets applies to all.

LEXX_Luthor
03-11-2005, 03:19 AM
Thanks for the post Tully.

The main thing I was interested in finding out was the map sizes; of great interest to me as offline player. Just wondering what was possible in a flight sim today.

MEGILE
03-11-2005, 03:28 AM
CFS2 was the flight sim of yesterday, BOB is the flight sim of tommorow.
What remains to be seen is the map size we are going to get in BoB.
Britain + northern France, Belgium and Holland would rule.. but I won't get my hopes up http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Feathered_IV
03-11-2005, 03:40 AM
One wonders why the CFS2 default late model A6M skins are so superior to ours though http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif.

Bearcat99
03-11-2005, 07:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tully__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I have read that one of the most Popular features of CFS2 was its maps (or...its map?).

I am intereseted in hearing about CFS2 map...

Mission Editor screenshots
dimensions (miles or kilometers)
areas mapped
terrain elevation and steepness
terrain types
etc...

Thanks~ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

CFS2 is based on FS98 IIRC and has the entire Pacific (world if you like) in one map, but the terrain is REALLY ugly below about 5000'. If you select unlimited fuel, you can take off from Hawaii and land at Port Moresby. That, the ability to set triggers in the CFS2 mission builder and the open architecture (allowing user add-on aircraft) are it's primary advantages. Another lesser advantage is the full engine management available in CFS2, but it's user optional, not set by the host.

The user add-on aircraft is also a major disadvantage as it allows all sorts of true UFO like performance. Added to that, the flight model engine is directly derived from the MS civil aviation sims and is not suited to combat manouvers. To top it off, hit detection and collision detection uses the "hit bubble" model which means if you fly withing a wingspan of another aircraft, you collide and blow up, and you're bullets only have to get vaguely in the vicinity of your target to score hits.

Had EAW covered the Pacific Theatre, I don't think CFS2 would have even been near my PC after the year 2000, as EAW was a much better sim for combat IMO.

I find the IL2 series is a far better sim for combat than CFS2 (and by all accounts I've read, better than CFS3 as well). It's major downfalls are the lack of triggers in FMB and the limited map size. While engine management is in some ways more simplified than in CFS2, it's the same for all players. Whatever level the host sets applies to all. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That about sums it up for me too... CFS2 was great in it's day... but IMO once IL2 came out it's death was imminent. The only thing that kept CFS 1,2 & 3 even in the place they held was the theaters (A lot of people either didnt know about or didnt care about the eastern Front) and all three are a tinkerer's dream..... if thats your cup of tea. If you are into flight sims and simulated WW2 aerial combat.... this series is the smoking ticket. It has far and away more of what I want in a flght sim than anything else out.

BTW Tully wasnt there a PAW? I seem to remember seeing that.

Bearcat99
03-11-2005, 07:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tully__:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I have read that one of the most Popular features of CFS2 was its maps (or...its map?).

I am intereseted in hearing about CFS2 map...

Mission Editor screenshots
dimensions (miles or kilometers)
areas mapped
terrain elevation and steepness
terrain types
etc...

Thanks~ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

CFS2 is based on FS98 IIRC and has the entire Pacific (world if

TAGERT.
03-11-2005, 08:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
BTW Tully wasnt there a PAW? I seem to remember seeing that. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>1942 Pacific Air War by Micropose.

http://www.ibiblio.org/GameBytes/issue20/greviews/paw1.gif
http://www.ibiblio.org/GameBytes/issue20/greviews/paw1.html

Much of the EAW was based on PAW.. Even though there was a few years inbtween the two.. EAW got delayed and nearly cancled so many times. PAW was a great flight sim, one of the first to impliment the "total force equation" FM over the typical table based sims of it's time.

Stanger_361st
03-11-2005, 08:40 AM
As much as you want to bash MSCFS2, Pacific Fighters is way imcomplete. How long has it been since pacific Fighter came out and look what we got. We got more work and addons coming to the eastern front then we do to the Pacific front. Some how I feel cheated in this so called Pacific Fighters.

TAGERT.
03-11-2005, 08:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stanger_361st:
As much as you want to bash MSCFS2, Pacific Fighters is way imcomplete. How long has it been since pacific Fighter came out and look what we got. We got more work and addons coming to the eastern front then we do to the Pacific front. Some how I feel cheated in this so called Pacific Fighters. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Other than the Betty you have everything the box promised you.. And you will get that and MORE! As for more ETO planes.. How must your mind work to precive that as a negative thing? What must have happened to you in your life to take something positive and twist it into a negative is beyond me!

Stanger_361st
03-11-2005, 09:12 AM
It is a negative thing when you expand to a front and treat it like it is a after thought.

TAGERT.
03-11-2005, 09:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stanger_361st:
It is a negative thing when you expand to a front and treat it like it is a after thought. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Thank you for the insight to how your brain works.. Im glad mine does not work that way.

Chuck_Older
03-11-2005, 10:23 AM
I have always thought this curious and I just figured out why

Everyone assumes whatever they envision PF as being is the way it should be. If it isn't the way that they imagined, they get mad

The sim is "Pacific Fighters", and what did you get? You got Pacific Fighters.

Folks assume that all sorts of things should be covered...where was it said that PF would add the entire PTO onto FB? Or that PF standalone would cover the entire PTO in minute detail?

We have what the sim is about...the Betty is missing though. I guess I'm a satisfied customer because I didn't assume what the content of PF would be, I researched a bit and then decided to buy


All of the "We don't have X Y and Z places in PF" folks, could you answer me a question?

Where's the Attu and Kiska maps?

Skycat_2
03-11-2005, 10:54 AM
Random thoughts:

* CFS-2 was based on FS2000, which itself was an overhaul of FS98. CFS-1 was the one based on FS98. The addons between the two FS versions usually weren't compatible without some work, IIRC, and that affected compatibility of the two CFS versions.

* I have a copy of Microprose's 1942 Pacific Air War, but can't load it because the sim is based on DOS 5.0. The game comes on six diskettes. Like EAW, PAW has two manual books: Player's Game Guide is 94 pages and Pilot's Handbook is 84 pages. (The second book is a good historical read).

* Regarding the name "Pacific Fighters": If you consider how the sim Jane's WWII Fighters presented combat (a limited number of flyable planes on a single, limited coverage map) then Pacific Fighters and WWII Fighters are cut from the same cloth.

* OT: I reloaded EAW the other night, and my opinion is that CFS-3 should have been based on the EAW code instead. The two games are very similar in theme, map coverage and ground objects; in my opinion CFS-3 is more like EAW than it is like CFS-1. Playing EAW, I could only wish that the graphics could be updated to the clarity and quality of CFS-3. So, I guess if you missed EAW and a sim's visuals are highly important to you, CFS-3 could be seen as the successor to EAW.

Stanger_361st
03-11-2005, 11:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TAGERT.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stanger_361st:
It is a negative thing when you expand to a front and treat it like it is a after thought. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Thank you for the insight to how your brain works.. Im glad mine does not work that way. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I see that you can only repond in a negative personal attacks.

TAGERT.
03-11-2005, 11:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stanger_361st:
I see that you can only repond in a negative personal attacks. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I see that you are confused.

Stanger_361st
03-11-2005, 11:43 AM
I have a great respect for Oleg and his team. I think over all Oleg has done a great thing for the expantion of the flight sim community. He is setting a standard in the sim market. I still think Oleg does quality work dispite the bickering that goes on about flight models and damage models.
The Pacific front is my favorite front. I just expressed my feeling that I fell that it is incomplete. Will I still fly it yes. Because it is my favorite theater.

Respectfully,
Stanger

reisen52
03-11-2005, 12:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
The sim is "Pacific Fighters", and what did you get? You got Pacific Fighters.

Folks assume that all sorts of things should be covered...where was it said that PF would add the entire PTO onto FB? Or that PF standalone would cover the entire PTO in minute detail?
I researched a bit and then decided to buy? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

UBI/Maddox advertising said:

The award-winning flight combat from Oleg Maddox€s IL-2 series moves the setting from the Eastern front to the fierce combat of the Pacific theater.

Allied fighters and bombers square off against the notorious air power of the Japanese empire. For the first time, a large variety of British aircraft will be included along with the U.S. and Australian planes.

Target enemy ships, vehicles, airfields, and a host of AI-controlled aircraft. Re-enact some of the most famous air battles of WWII in places like Pearl Harbor, Guadalcanal, and Iwo Jima.

Maps of the most famous battles of the Pacific: 16 new maps are included with famous historical locations such as Midway, Okinawa, Pearl Harbor, and Singapore.

Attack a vast array of targets ranging from railroads to battleships: Ground objects such as trains, trucks, and tanks can all be pounded from the air.

Torpedo historically accurate ships, drop parafrags on enemy airfields, and encounter over 100 other targets on the ground and at sea.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:Where's the Attu and Kiska maps? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Missing along with the US battleships, Yorktown class carriers & torpedo bombers etc. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Zeke

TAGERT.
03-11-2005, 12:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stanger_361st:
I have a great respect for Oleg and his team. I think over all Oleg has done a great thing for the expantion of the flight sim community. He is setting a standard in the sim market. I still think Oleg does quality work dispite the bickering that goes on about flight models and damage models.
The Pacific front is my favorite front. I just expressed my feeling that I fell that it is incomplete. Will I still fly it yes. Because it is my favorite theater.

Respectfully,
Stanger <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Your welcome, Glad I could help.

Aaron_GT
03-12-2005, 02:53 AM
"Torpedo historically accurate ships,"

We have torpedos on the A20 and Beaufighter at least.

Aaron_GT
03-12-2005, 02:55 AM
" Playing EAW, I could only wish that the graphics could be updated to the clarity and quality of CFS-3"

There are all sorts of updates available. My problem with EAW is that it seems to want to make my rudder pedals into the default stick, not my actual joystick, no matter what I do in Windows or EAW config screens.

Iggy-Snaps
03-12-2005, 03:50 PM
S! WTF? I've gotten my moneys worth in entertainment in every flight sim I have bought. I and most of the people I've talked to have had the most fun overall on the original CFS Zone. There were squads like the Fighting 335th, Knights of the ****ed, 51st Flying tigers, RAF, heck even the IJN. We had the PTO even carriers, back then all add on scenery made by squad members. Yeah the graphics sucked by todays standards but I think you can thank MS for the intrest in Flight Sims today and the excellent sims that are available, PF is the best combat sim today. This old Pirate loves the PTO.

Http://geocities.com/335th/pirate2.gif

TUOR451
03-12-2005, 04:10 PM
LEXX_Luthor -I was interrested also in flying long distances in CFS2.I loaded up a P38 with drop tanks and with time compression and a direction finder addon (ADF) flew to almost all the airstrips some legs being almost too far.I flew high and lowered mixture (Lindburg style).We also used to do hops between islands on multiplayer.I enjoyed this as I am bad at combat.lol