PDA

View Full Version : PACIFIC FIGHTERS GOOD OR BAD IDEA?



BADGER401
03-31-2004, 06:29 PM
Although like the rest of you, IM grateful for ANY new sim or one as good to date that OLEG has prodiced and supported here with AEP..HOWEVER let me play Devils Advocate for a moment...


I still honestly believe that Oleg or his team may well be doing themselves a dis-service by again working on a new title before the Aces Expansion pack is in my opinion has truly been debugged or finished. Let me explain before everyone goes postal on me here...

I think that the development team or 3rd party programmers should be correcting bugs as well as finishing off plane sets that are "viable"... A 109Z was never used but here it is... yet there are NO cockpits in many of the wonderful twin Russian bombers that were mass produced and used in the Great Patriotic war... there are still obvious bugs in flight models of others and need of correction. I KNOW that the patch is coming out shortly and I may be sticking my neck out here before its release, but what about a cockpitted B-17 or B-25? There is enough resource material to model these as opposed to say, the Pe-8 is there not?

How about a Typhoon before the 109Z or even a Mosquito or Wellington before a J8? again just ideas.... It seems like the drive to turn out more aircraft sets without fully giving us a truly 100% solid sim to start with is in my mind a waste of personel manhours within the company is all...Dont get me wrong. I love the game, graphics, support and accessibility to Oleg, but put Pacific on the back and burn the midnight oil to finish this one off before you jump on another semi rushed and poorly tested product. It would be nice to see a poll to see what aircraft types we would like to see in the game and then build around those first....

BADGER401
03-31-2004, 06:29 PM
Although like the rest of you, IM grateful for ANY new sim or one as good to date that OLEG has prodiced and supported here with AEP..HOWEVER let me play Devils Advocate for a moment...


I still honestly believe that Oleg or his team may well be doing themselves a dis-service by again working on a new title before the Aces Expansion pack is in my opinion has truly been debugged or finished. Let me explain before everyone goes postal on me here...

I think that the development team or 3rd party programmers should be correcting bugs as well as finishing off plane sets that are "viable"... A 109Z was never used but here it is... yet there are NO cockpits in many of the wonderful twin Russian bombers that were mass produced and used in the Great Patriotic war... there are still obvious bugs in flight models of others and need of correction. I KNOW that the patch is coming out shortly and I may be sticking my neck out here before its release, but what about a cockpitted B-17 or B-25? There is enough resource material to model these as opposed to say, the Pe-8 is there not?

How about a Typhoon before the 109Z or even a Mosquito or Wellington before a J8? again just ideas.... It seems like the drive to turn out more aircraft sets without fully giving us a truly 100% solid sim to start with is in my mind a waste of personel manhours within the company is all...Dont get me wrong. I love the game, graphics, support and accessibility to Oleg, but put Pacific on the back and burn the midnight oil to finish this one off before you jump on another semi rushed and poorly tested product. It would be nice to see a poll to see what aircraft types we would like to see in the game and then build around those first....

609IAP_Recon
03-31-2004, 06:34 PM
What makes you think they aren't?

As a matter of fact, they are working on the patch for AEP, and Oleg is giving it serious attention.

Be patient!!

Secondly, these were aircraft made by third party modders. Remember that. They made those decisions.

And the Russian bomber pe is being worked on - they had 2 modders quit so I hear - so it's been delayed outside of their control!

Salute!

JG50_Recon

----
http://www.thepassionofthechrist.com

SkyChimp
03-31-2004, 07:04 PM
Hurray! A Pacific flight sim!

Regards,
SkyChimp
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/skychimp.jpg

porcupine1
03-31-2004, 07:05 PM
GOOD GOOD GOOD!!!!!!!!

ShaLung
03-31-2004, 07:26 PM
I think Pacific theater is Awesome. My favorite bird of all time is the Corsair. I'd love to see what they do with the bent wing fighter. Especially if they do the F2G-Goodyear Super Corsair !!!!!!

Oso2323
03-31-2004, 07:53 PM
I'm sort of with the original post. I can pretty much take or leave the Pacific theatre - it just doesn't interest me. I too would have preferred to see the Normandy/ETO fleshed out a bit more. Certainly I think that the British/Commonwealth forces have pretty much been ignored. The Pacific game should have a few Spit/Seafires so thats a small bonus.

horseback
03-31-2004, 08:37 PM
My own concern is whether or not it's a stand-alone. It seems unlikely in view of the presence of the A6Ms and Ki-84, along with the USAAF's primary representatives in FB, but ya never know...

I'll buy it regardless. Oleg's previous efforts have been too rewarding to me not to take a chance on it, and I'm dying to catch my F4F's tailhook on the Enterprise's trapwires.

cheers

horseback

"Here's your new Mustangs, boys. You can learn to fly'em on the way to the target. Cheers!" -LTCOL Don Blakeslee, 4th FG CO, February 27th, 1944

Longjocks
03-31-2004, 08:44 PM
Here's what I reckon... if Maddox screws up then that's their problem. There will always be someone to take his/their place when sales drop. It's one of the stand out-ish things about capitalism.

VIVA LA (or LE... I don't know) PF! Actually, I don't know what I meant by that.

"Thanks for the inspiration to rise above you all."

Teufel_Eldritch
03-31-2004, 08:52 PM
Good idea. More quality flight sims always are a good idea. I hope it is compatible with AEP but if it isnt then no big deal, I'll still buy it.

YANKEE ROSE
-----------
"For a world of happiness & equality is but a fantasy driven by men who envy the ruling class."

WUAF_Badsight
03-31-2004, 08:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BADGER401:

I still honestly believe that Oleg or his team may well be doing themselves a dis-service by again working on a new title before the Aces Expansion pack is in my opinion has truly been debugged or finished. Let me explain before everyone goes postal on me here...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



this isnt Maddox games

if you surfed FB world on the web enough youd see this maybe a FB sequal but from another source

I.E. this is being done by ppl other than Maddox Games

LEXX_Luthor
03-31-2004, 09:10 PM
Thread Starter:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Although like the rest of you....

How about a...Mosquito or Wellington before a J8?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>That's where I stopped reading. Is nothing like the rest of me.



__________________
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A ...in Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

tttiger
03-31-2004, 09:35 PM
Some of you guys need to learn how to read a sales pitch.

When it says "supported by" Maddox, that means it isn't made by Maddox.

It annoys me that it is deceptive and makes it appear at first glance to be coming from Maddox. But it really looks like it's just using the FB engine, probably under a license agreement.

This is a third party deal that apparently will be published by Ubi. I assume it's Luthier's.

Nothing wrong with that. Luthier does some really good work and I am ready for a PTO/CBI sim. I'm sure I'll buy it and (if it's good) I'll fly it.

But I don't think it takes any of St. Oleg's attention away from FB or BoB. That's the reason it was turned over to a third party.

Aloha,

ttt

"I want the one that kills the best with the least amount of risk to me"

-- Chuck Yeager describing "The Best Airplane."

Bearcat99
03-31-2004, 09:47 PM
I think its a great idea..... I cant wait...... I have no doubts that 1C will do the right thing by us and this third party stand alone add on will be awesome... and FBA will be better as things get worked out.

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/bookstore/tuskegeebondposter.jpg (http://tuskegeeairmen.org/airmen/who.html)[/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>vflyer@comcast.net [/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>99thPursuit Squadron IL2 Forgotten Battles (http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat)[/list]
UDQMG (http://www.uberdemon.com/index2.html) | HYPERLOBBY (http://hyperfighter.jinak.cz/) | IL2 Manager (http://www.checksix-fr.com/bibliotheque/detail_fichier.php?ID=1353) | MUDMOVERS (http://www.mudmovers.com/)

Wemic
03-31-2004, 10:12 PM
Excellent idea. I've been waiting for a good Pacific sim since the days of Microprose's Pacific Air War. Now, THAT sim sucked away many hours.

Wemic

Politicians are like diapers...they have to be changed frequently and always for the same reason.
http://home.nycap.rr.com/wemic/Wemicsig.jpg

BADGER401
03-31-2004, 10:54 PM
As I said I think its a great idea as well....Intertingly enough Ive heard cant confirm that the pacific theater is NOT MULTIPLAy can this be confirmed? Also with the zero and KI already in here why not flesh this out more then and back to my original line of thinking then. Should have Oleg sold the programming so soon then if this is the case? At any rate... Id still rather see this one finished out more. Hes sitting on the best sim here. Lets just all input to Oleg our likes or dislikes and hopefully he will pick up on a few of em...Aslo how about beta testing it out to more people as well?

altstiff
03-31-2004, 11:04 PM
Getting any flight sim from Oleg is NEVER a bad thing.

See you in the fence....

Asus P4B 533 Intel 2.4GHZ
1 GIG Ram
GeForce FX 5700 256MB (56.64)
SB Audigy
MSFF2 & X45 throttle

RicknZ
03-31-2004, 11:23 PM
Great idea.
Bad implementation.

Why the *** cant i, having owned a AEP p38/109Z etc fly them vs the new planes?

Self imposed limitations.

I challenge anybody to mention just one benefit to us consumers having these two games seperate.

*silence*

UCLANUPE
03-31-2004, 11:34 PM
Rick check the other thread you will be pleased http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

03-31-2004, 11:46 PM
It wont matter weather the Pacific fighters is a stand alone Sim or compatible with FB.

If its compatible with FB well and Good.
If it is not it wont matter it would sell well in its own right.

There is a reason why all new releases from Ic or associates hit the shelves in the USA first, in case you have not already guessed.

It wont matter, this new Sim hits the USA public right between the eyes because it is set in the Pacific.
Success in the market place is already guarenteed!


S!

RedDeth
04-01-2004, 12:04 AM
if you dont like it dont buy it.

its all done with oleg involved guys. over 100 new buildings and 40 new planes 16 new maps and you think oleg isnt involved all the way?

btw it has carriers and whole new fleets of ships to be bombed and torpedoed. and landings on the carriers...and takeoffs.

and flyable american and japanese bombers.

anyone that doesnt like that should be permanently banned from ubi forums for stupidity.

www.fighterjocks.net (http://www.fighterjocks.net) home of 12 time Champions AFJ http://www.alloutwar.com/IL2FS/round9.cfm http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_120_1065509034.jpg

XyZspineZyX
04-01-2004, 12:11 AM
It's a good idea, PROVIDED...

they do a better job of flight modeling overall.

The Zero modeling flat out *sucks*. I dunno about the "wonder Ki-84", as it's an ueberplane, and always seems optimistically modelled whereever one goes.

If they can't get a plane like the Zero right, it doesn't say much for their ability to get the others right. Actually, that extends into the existing East Front and European planes as well. New holes appear in the modelling daily.

Pacific Fighters will probably be a lot of fun, but as a sim, it'll be just like FB and IL-2.... a good looking MESS of a sim.

04-01-2004, 12:16 AM
Dont worry Red Death there are plenty of people out here like me that wont hesitate to lay their cash down for Pacific fighters.

I had fun over Europe in EAW, jumped on the IL-2 Bandwagon to try out the Russian front, flew the Ring out of it.
Aces expansion is a good Add on, but it has me back in Europe.(doh!)

The Pacific with out the cheat modders of CFS 2 was always going to get my dollars, the fact that 1C is involved just made it a certainty, and I have no doubts there are many more like me.
Il-2/FB compatible or not too!

S!

Longjocks
04-01-2004, 12:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RicknZ:
Why the *** cant i, having owned a AEP p38/109Z etc fly them vs the new planes?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Pretending for a moment it hasn't been stated that they will be cross-compatable, my answer would have been, "Because there's no such game in which you can. Stiff s**t!" Then I'd be a complete tit and say something about your spelling.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Self imposed limitations.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>In which the developers choose for themselves. It's then their problem, not ours.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I challenge anybody to mention just one benefit to us consumers having these two games seperate.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I'll take you up on that. You see, I might feel like playing FB/AEP, so I load it up and play. But then I might want a Pacific oriented game, so I'd load up PF. It's a no-brainer really.

Forgive me while I make a quick exit before I lose any more brain cells...

"Thanks for the inspiration to rise above you all."

GR142-Pipper
04-01-2004, 01:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BADGER401:
...snip....

...Dont get me wrong. I love the game, graphics, support and accessibility to Oleg, but put Pacific on the back and burn the midnight oil to finish this one off before you jump on another semi rushed and poorly tested product. It would be nice to see a poll to see what aircraft types we would like to see in the game and then build around those first....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Agreed. I too really enjoy IL-2/IL-2FB but the software really seems to have a chronically weak beta program and the fixes seem to take longer that one would expect. Your point of additional aircraft introduction before these fixes are provided is well taken. I'd rather have fewer aircraft choices but a more finished product than additional aircraft choices in which it's clear some are just not ready for commercial release. This is yet another instance where sometimes less is more.

GR142-Pipper

Mitlov47
04-01-2004, 01:25 AM
First off, it makes no sense to make this an add on for IL-2: Forgotten Battles. There were no IL-2s in the Pacific Theater, and the Pacific Theater is not a "Forgotten Battle" like the Winter War was.

Secondly, the game engine is going to need a LOT of re-work. FB works great with tanks, but the whole system for ships doesn't work so great. The snow effect is awesome (including turbulence), but the look of the "Pacific" map is 100% wrong. And I don't think the current engine could support take-offs and landings from carriers. Most Russian front fighting is at low altitude (where FB does well); a lot of Pacific fighting was at very high altitude (where FB sucks). Basically, FB is a European Eastern Front sim; this will be a Pacific sim. There's very little overlap--not just in terms of planes, but in terms of combat style.

Finally, The benefit TO US will be minimal for having these games separate. However, the benefit to the greater gaming community will be huge. Think of all those people who don't own FB, but will see a Pacific sim and will want to buy it. If it were an expansion pack, they'd have to drop $100 to buy FB, AEP, *and* Pacific Fighters. Now they can just buy Pacific Fighters. We won't have to pay more, and they'll have to pay much less. That will mean many more people will end up playing Pacific Fighters.

---------------------------

(aka Mitlov on HyperLobby and Ubi)

VVS LA-5FN -- "Yes Anastasia"
FAF BF-109G-6 -- "Ever Dream"
USAAF P-47D-27 -- "The Happy Phantom"

Mitlov47
04-01-2004, 01:28 AM
By the way...

Does anyone else see the irony in Maddox proudly proclaiming that "Pacific FIGHTERS" will focus more on bombers than "IL-2 Sturmovik"? So much for truth in advertising, on both counts http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

---------------------------

(aka Mitlov on HyperLobby and Ubi)

VVS LA-5FN -- "Yes Anastasia"
FAF BF-109G-6 -- "Ever Dream"
USAAF P-47D-27 -- "The Happy Phantom"

LEXX_Luthor
04-01-2004, 01:48 AM
um, anything would focus more on bombers than the FB--well in the past anyway.

Anyway the Pacific bombers most popular are single engine carrier bombers so they are more easily made Flyable then the bigger bombers. Expect to see a big bucket of small carrier bombers.

Not Whining, anything Flyable is Good. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif


__________________
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A ...in Aces Expansion Pack

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif Me~163 Takeoff Bug will be Patched "soon"....use airstart for now.


"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Slush69
04-01-2004, 01:52 AM
How can anyone think Pacific Fighers is a bad idea? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif

It's a great idea. Simple as that. Just as BoB is a great idea, a Med Sim is a great idea etc. etc.

New products, and more money, fuels new life and players into the flight sim community, leading to even more development. That's great!

cheers/slush

http://www.wilcks.dk/crap/Eurotrolls.gif

Xnomad
04-01-2004, 04:58 AM
Well I'm a bit worried as I think that the HL servers for FB AEP will be a little emptier when this comes out. God they are empty enough as it is eg. there is only one AEP "close to FR" server with good connection speeds up at the moment in Europe and it's "VirtualPilots_1" thankfully it's proving to be quite popular in the evenings right now but I can't see the Finns going over to the Pacific.

The other server is F-16 but they have been down since AEP came out and when they are up no one joins them as they aren't hosting with AEP (I suppose as the dedicated server isn't out yet) However, before AEP I often found that these two servers were only near full during a small time of the day and near empty the rest of the time. So Pacific Fighters will probably kill it some more. Nevertheles I'm looking forward to it although there won't be a 109, it looks like it'll be Spits and P-38's for me then.

http://www.xnomad.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/sig.jpg

jtasker
04-01-2004, 05:04 AM
If the CV's can be controlled or at least courses plotted for them to follow, and the plane set is well done (F4F, SBD, TBD vs the Aero, Val, Kate) and the later stuff (F6F, F4U, Jill etc. there will be some amazing action. If DF and or Coop can utilize the CV's in some constructive manner it would be a blast.. Add in the existing P40, P38, etc. and you've got a hell of a plane set..

A lot will depend on how well they are able to model the CV ops and the ships DM's in general..

AWL_Spinner
04-01-2004, 05:12 AM
Doesn't interest me personally and I can't see myself buying it, it's still a great idea though.

Really good to see this product diversifying and attracting new audiences the way it is.

Phooey to all those who want it to remain a little closed clique, nice one everyone else.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Cheers, Spinner

http://www.alliedwingedlegion.com/members/signatures/spinner_sig.jpg

buz13
04-01-2004, 05:23 AM
The idea is great. Now we need to see if the execution is great. If it has as comprehensive a list of aircraft as FB did when it came out it should be great...but if we pay the same price for a sim with 8-10 flyable aircraft then that would not be good.
Remember it's called Pacific Fighters so I don't expect much in the way of bombers which will limit the sim considerablely. I would hope that little effort will go into making many mods of each type and rather making more types of aircraft. Also if this is a stand alone and we need to fly endless miles over open ocean without a wing leveler autopilot it will be a great disappointment. I'm still looking for an answer as to why it was removed from FB. Why remove a feature and then refuse to give an explanation? I know I will purchase Pacific Fighters.....and expect to be pleased because of who is producing it...but I'm also a little worried that we will be paying the same as we did for FB and not getting as complete a product.

Longjocks
04-01-2004, 05:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by EMitton:
By the way...

Does anyone else see the irony in Maddox proudly proclaiming that "Pacific FIGHTERS" will focus more on bombers than "IL-2 Sturmovik"? So much for truth in advertising, on both counts http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Aaaaaaaahhhhhhh.... I get it! I get it! My mum always said I was clever.

Buuuut, I could play the technicality game. Humour me for a moment while I start babbling crap...

warrior
noun [C]
a soldier, usually one who has both experience and skill in fighting, especially in the past:
a Samurai warrior
a warrior king/nation

A war is to warrior as a fight is to fighter. They can each mean the same thing respectively. Said fighter fights in said war in the Pacific. Thusly, 'Pacific Fighters' could relate to all the warriors. You can even extend this to their machines. ie. bombers took part in fighting and thus can be called fighters. This definition works best when you use it to collectively refer to soldiers, fighters and bombers in that theatre.

'Pacific Fighters' is perfectly apt.

Plus, despite the added dedication to bomber craft, what's the bet that fighter types outweigh the bomber types? Then the name is apt on simple terms of the greater half of a ratio. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

"Thanks for the inspiration to rise above you all."

Huxley_S
04-01-2004, 05:44 AM
I would buy this new game but I hope that unlike IL2/FB/AEP/BoE it at least acknowledges that there were some British and Commonwealth forces involved in World War II.

So far we've been completely ignored, with voices, skins, regiments, pilots, markings, missions and campaigns conspicuously absent from the official games and expansions, and rectified only by enthusiasts from the IL2 community.

I'm half expecting that when BoB comes out it'll be all USAAF vs Luftwaffe campaigns and maybe one token RAF recon mission or something...

FB Music and Campaigns @
http://www.onemorewild.org/huxley

Afreaka
04-01-2004, 06:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BADGER401:
Although like the rest of you, IM grateful for ANY new sim or one as good to date that OLEG has prodiced and supported here with AEP..HOWEVER let me play Devils Advocate for a moment...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Its a crummy idea. CFS(The pacific theater) was great when it came out and still is. CFS(European Theater) was/is a gummybear arcade. The Maddox team seem to be taking the same path counter clockwise. Just as Fiat makes Ferrari, they also makes Fiat Panda. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif
www.newcars.nl/fotos/fiat/panda.jpg

Rex Kramer(Airplane, 1980): Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.

Afreaka
04-01-2004, 06:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BADGER401:
Although like the rest of you, IM grateful for ANY new sim or one as good to date that OLEG has prodiced and supported here with AEP..HOWEVER let me play Devils Advocate for a moment...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Its a crummy idea. CFS(The pacific theater) was great when it came out and still is. CFS(European Theater) was/is a gummybear arcade. The Maddox team seem to be taking the same path counter clockwise. Just as Fiat makes Ferrari, they also makes Fiat Panda. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif
www.newcars.nl/fotos/ fiat/panda.jpg

Rex Kramer(Airplane, 1980): Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.

Rajvosa
04-01-2004, 06:48 AM
If it is going to be a part of Il-2 FB, an update like AEP is, I'll definitely buy it. If it is a stand alone product with non-compatible aircraft, i.e. I won't be able to fight Yaks in a Corsair, I will probab√¬∂y treat it like CFS3 - stay away from it.

Regards,

Jasko

http://2ridetheworld.com/sponsor%20images/BMW%20Roundel%2018082002.jpg

"I've already got a female to worry about. Her name is the Enterprise." - James T. Kirk

StudUK
04-01-2004, 09:10 AM
I personally been waiting for something like this since Microprose Pacific Air War!!

Very excited about the news!!!!

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steve.riche/Album/Misc/sig.jpg
----------------
WinXP Pro (SP1)
pentium4 3.06ghz
512megs (2x 256 OCZ PC2700)
Aopen AX4R Plus MB
Radeon 9800 Pro (Cat 4.3)
SB Audigy2

dahdah
04-01-2004, 10:15 AM
Well there is a forom now.

http://www.pacific-fighters.com/teaser/

ENTER

PACIFIC FIGHTERS SPECIFIC FORUMand discuss this new Maddox game with other combat flight simulation fans.
Backed by the Oleg Maddox development team, Pacific Fighters allows you to participate
in the most compelling air-war experience ever created!
Fly missions for the Allied forces or become an ace pilot for the deadly
Japanese empire Ė which will you choose?

Select from a large variety of flyable aircraft such as the lethal Japanese Zero,
U.S. made F6F Hellcat and a variety of British fighter planes.
Target enemy ships, vehicles and aircraft on one of the 16 maps featuring
famous historic locations. New to the series will be the emphasis on flyable bombers and
aircraft-carrier action.

posted by Dude163 on the SimHQ FB forum

Pacific Fighters, Ubisoft‚'s new flight combat title, will launch this fall!

Backed by the Oleg Maddox team, Pacific Fighters allows players to participate in the most compelling Pacific air war experience ever created. Fly planes on either side of the conflict, including U.S., Japan, Great Britain, or Australia. There are more than 40 flyable aircraft, including the F6F Hellcat, the deadly Japanese Zero, and the UK‚'s Supermarine Seafire. In addition, for the first time in the 1C: Maddox game series, players will have the option to take-off and land on aircraft carriers during combat.

‚"We‚'re extremely proud and excited to bring Pacific Fighters to the combat flight sim audience because we know they‚'re going to be very pleased with improvements to the award-winning IL-2 game engine and enjoy the new Pacific war setting,‚"Ě said producer Ilya Shevchenko. ‚"Players will appreciate the variety of famous fighters, however, in this title more than any previous Maddox sim, we‚'re emphasizing flyable bombers such as the SBD Dauntless, Aichi Val, Mitsubishi G4M Betty, and at least four versions of the North American B-25 Mitchell.‚"Ě

Players will be able to target enemy ships, vehicles, airfields and aircraft on one of the 16 new maps, including Guadalcanal, Pearl Harbor and Singapore. The online multiplayer options allow players to engage in live battles ranging in style from free-for-all dogfights to cooperative campaigns.

not sure where he got this from though.

JG52_wunsch
04-01-2004, 12:22 PM
the med makes more sense.pac isn t my cup of tea.but then again i don t have to buy it,cheers.

After it was refeuled i climbed in.With many manipulations the mechcanics started the turbines.I followed their actions with the greatest of interest.The first one started quite easily.the second caught fire.In no time the whole engine was on fire.Luckily as a fighter pilot i was used to getting quickly out of the cockpit.The fire was quickly put out.The second plane caused no trouble - Adolf Galland (first time in a ME262)

BuzzU
04-01-2004, 04:01 PM
This is one way to get rid of the Luftwhiners. Good deal!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buzz
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto/anderson9.jpg

RedDeth
04-01-2004, 04:58 PM
oh my god the amount of whining on this thread makes me physically ill.

this game will be fantastic.

all the complaints need to be put in perspective. oleg has created a game ten times better than any that came before it. to say this and that arent modelled correct is bull. they are constantly patching modifying and keeping this game fresh for all and its just a game....so if you dont like it dont come to these forums and dont buy the game.

dont tell us you wont buy the game for 2 reasons. 1 we dont care. and 2 your lying through your teeth when you say you wont buy it.

hit the road whiners.

www.fighterjocks.net (http://www.fighterjocks.net) home of 12 time Champions AFJ http://www.alloutwar.com/IL2FS/round9.cfm http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_120_1065509034.jpg

ucanfly
04-01-2004, 05:04 PM
I am very much looking forward to this sim. Carriers! Carriers! Carriers! Wooopeeeee!

I almost bought CFS2. Whew!

Lav69
04-01-2004, 05:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SkyChimp:
Hurray! A Pacific flight sim! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed!!

Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe, bios 1008
Nvidia nForce 2, Ultra 400 chipset
Antec 430w PS
Athlon XP 3200 (400fsb)
ATI Radeon 9700pro
1024mb Corsair XMS, twin x, pc3200, dual channel
120gb Maxtor, sata 150 - 120gb WD 7200rpm
SB Audigy
Windows XP, home
Saitek X45

Lav69
04-01-2004, 05:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RedDeth:
oh my god the amount of whining on this thread makes me physically ill.

this game will be fantastic.

all the complaints need to be put in perspective. oleg has created a game ten times better than any that came before it. to say this and that arent modelled correct is bull. they are constantly patching modifying and keeping this game fresh for all and its just a game....so if you dont like it dont come to these forums and dont buy the game.

dont tell us you wont buy the game for 2 reasons. 1 we dont care. and 2 your lying through your teeth when you say you wont buy it.

hit the road whiners.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I concur!!

Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe, bios 1008
Nvidia nForce 2, Ultra 400 chipset
Antec 430w PS
Athlon XP 3200 (400fsb)
ATI Radeon 9700pro
1024mb Corsair XMS, twin x, pc3200, dual channel
120gb Maxtor, sata 150 - 120gb WD 7200rpm
SB Audigy
Windows XP, home
Saitek X45

Oso2323
04-01-2004, 06:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lav69:
I concur!!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I respectfully disagree.

NegativeGee
04-01-2004, 06:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oso2323:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lav69:
I concur!!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I respectfully disagree.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I respectfully disagree and concur http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif

"As weaponry, both were good, but in far different ways from each other. In a nutshell, I describe it this way: if the FW 190 was a sabre, the 109 was a florett, or foil, like that used in the precision art of fencing." - Gunther Rall

http://www.invoman.com/images/tali_with_hands.jpg

Look Noobie, we already told you, we don't have the Patch!

Oso2323
04-01-2004, 08:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RedDeth:
oh my god the amount of whining on this thread makes me physically ill.

dont tell us you wont buy the game for 2 reasons. 1 we dont care. and 2 your lying through your teeth when you say you wont buy it.

hit the road whiners.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You do realize that Ubisoft's team reads this forum for *marketing* purposes, don't you? So all the complaining, etc. serves a purpose.

And some of us really might not buy the Pacific game. At this point it's going to depend on the price and what a/c are modelled.

tagTaken2
04-01-2004, 09:43 PM
Brilliant idea. I'll buy it regardless, of whether addon or standalone...

Looking forward to a kamikaze campaign... load mission...fly... create new pilot... load mission... fly, etc.

New poll thought: angriest people on forum? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Oso2323
04-01-2004, 10:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tagTaken2:
Looking forward to a kamikaze campaign... load mission...fly... create new pilot... load mission... fly, etc.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Some of us call that: "playing FB." :-)

RedDeth
04-01-2004, 11:16 PM
"You do realize that Ubisoft's team reads this forum for *marketing* purposes, don't you? So all the complaining, etc. serves a purpose.

And some of us really might not buy the Pacific game. At this point it's going to depend on the price and what a/c are modelled."

OSO your conspiracy theory that they read this so we must complain to get a better product is totally insane. you need meds....this isnt a movie

www.fighterjocks.net (http://www.fighterjocks.net) home of 12 time Champions AFJ http://www.alloutwar.com/IL2FS/round9.cfm http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_120_1065509034.jpg