PDA

View Full Version : IL2FB v. CFS3



XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 10:09 AM
Ello, all.

I own and play FB often and I do adore the realism and depth of play but I was wanting also to delve into the flight sims of western front combat as my copy of Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe no longer runs on my machine.

From those who know, does CFS3 boast the same degree of functionality/playability/detail that IL2 is so known for?

What are some pros/cons between the two?

Many thanks in advance.

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 10:09 AM
Ello, all.

I own and play FB often and I do adore the realism and depth of play but I was wanting also to delve into the flight sims of western front combat as my copy of Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe no longer runs on my machine.

From those who know, does CFS3 boast the same degree of functionality/playability/detail that IL2 is so known for?

What are some pros/cons between the two?

Many thanks in advance.

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 10:10 AM
rfc02 wrote:
- From those who know, does CFS3 boast the same
- degree of functionality/playability/detail that IL2
- is so known for?

NO! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 12:21 PM
CFS3 sucks so bad they didn't even put a room on the MSN Zone for it.

In contrast, there is already a FS2004 room on the MSN Zone with "tournament" rooms.



<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
09-20-2003, 12:35 PM
CFS3 is more like playing in a stuttering cartoon. If you get hit anywhere the damage model is simlpy no aileron control. The campaign is repetetive & uninteresting. I could go on but I think you get the idea. It is a shame but it is true.

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 12:54 PM
Go get European Air War from Microprose!

Old game, but still supported by community. I got it to run on Windows XP without problem.

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 12:56 PM
IL-2 has lasted bout 2 years on my harddrive...CFS3 didnt last 2 days. Nuff said /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
S~
47|FC

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 12:56 PM
Get Civ3 or RoN.

-------------------------------------
Sigs are over rated. Screw them. Screw them all.

RichardI
09-20-2003, 01:01 PM
rfc02:-
You'll only get a lot of nasty reactions to that question on this board, BUT, I play both games and here's the real scoop.
FB has better visuals overall. Better cockpits and external models and damage representation. Better landscape and ground objects (MUCH better). But that's it.
FB's flight models are not accurate at all IMO. Gameplay is not accurate for many reasons, the main one being the AI. It is not realistic either. And, FB has a serious sound problem. Why should I have to turn down hardware acceleration on all my games to play FB? Absurd. And the planes still all sound like Singer sewing machines. If they fix the flaws in FB, it has the potential to be the best, but it's a long way from that right now.

CFS3 has good visual modelling - not great, but very good. Using the 1% flight models gives it very accurate flight, both for players and AI. Much more realistic gameplay, IMO. The sound in CFS3 is terrific, even right out of the box. And third party sounds add even more. That's the key- third party. CFS3 is open architecture. FB can't compete with that. The entire simming community are working to bring new planes, sounds and ground objects to CFS3 every day. New weapons, new versions of planes, etc., etc. FB is static. You have to wait for Oleg to put together an add-on.
Right now, I play CFS3 a lot more than FB. If you want some real fun, expandability, and a good overall experience, get CFS3.

Rich /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


<Center>http://www.ghosts.com/images/postimages/THUNDERBOLT.jpg <Center>I've got 140 109's cornered over Berlin!

Message Edited on 09/20/0308:02AM by RichardI

Zayets
09-20-2003, 01:14 PM
IL2 can't compete with open architecture? I think you misunderstand what the scope of IL2 is. To provide the most realistic experience on WW2 air battle. And that includes everything. Sure , sound is no better than CFS3 but here everything stops. You can't say that landscape , models , DM , FM exists in CFS3 because they don't. IMHO , the only combat sim that came a bit close to IL2 was CFS2 , but only in few areas. CFS2 has better things than IL2 in mission builder and probably immersion. But all stops here for CFS2. I have all 3 games and I can tell you that:
-FM in CFS2.3 does not exist
-landscape/model are far supperior on IL2,but here CFS2 has an excuse , is too old.
-DM in IL2 was never matched , so far. There are some 3d party for cfs2 , good ones , but not at the same level as IL2 , cfs3 is worst.
-playability , if we speak about cfs2 , then yes , is a winner , but at what price?

I am only compare here Oleg with M$. EAW and BoB offer a better immersion than cfs2.cfs3 lacks that or is way inferior to IL2. I'm very sad that I can't buy a copy of Janes WW2 Fighters , I heard only good things about it.

If you want to spend some money and you are not sure about , then download the demo of IL2 , you will see what I mean. Then rush to buy IL2:FB , is getting cheaper these days.M$ apparently did a good job with FS2004 , but as usual , they wrap a patch in a new box saying is a new game. Now we all know from where UBI stolen the idea /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Zayets out

http://www.arr.go.ro/iar81c.JPG

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 02:17 PM
avhistory 1% fms by cfs3 far better then il2fb fms

il2 fb just has the best graphics going for it


http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 02:30 PM
Wow!,

Now that's not a loaded question at all....lol

Both games have things that the other doesn't. AvHistory 1% FM ARE superior to FB's FM's, but they are both pretty good it seems to me. AvHistory is working on the DM's for CFS3. - (but wth do I know about FM's, I'm only 30 and have never even sit in one of these planes we pretend to fly)

With the AvHistory experience in CFS3, you'll have a pretty enjoyable experience if you have the rig to run it. But you have to jump through a few hoops to get all the AvHistory stuff up and running.

CFS3, by and large, looks better. Rivers in and bridges in IL2 are WAY better, but that wasn't hard considering what a sorry job M$ did on the water and the bridges in CFS3.

All in all, IL-2 is more "playable". I have both and I play IL-2 FB more.

The one glaring flaw that M$ CFS3 has is there is no Mouse head movement in the game. This is the ONE reason I no longer play CFS3. (and you can't lock opponents in the V/C)

CFS3 would have far surpassed IL-2FB if M$ would have finished the product, period. They released a product that needed about 1 more years worth of work done to it.

Regards
TinMan

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 02:37 PM
LeadSpitter_ wrote:
- avhistory 1% fms by cfs3 far better then il2fb fms
-
- il2 fb just has the best graphics going for it
-
-

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But, for the life of me, I can't understand how anyone could come to this conclusion. Once you get past the crappy DM's, the crappy cartoony cockpits, the HORRIBLE gameplay, and the nonexistent support, the best FM's available still wouldn't make this game worth my trouble. Trust me on this one, I shelled out a sh!tload of money on CFS3. Finally culminating in a Microsoft tech in CA sending the wrong windows upgrade to me, causing the need for a complete reformat of my hard drive. Just try telling either one of the two lead developers that you would like to see a patch to improve something. After they finished this project (CFS3) they were DONE! Maddox is in here at least weekly, and whether anyone wants to believe it or not, actually CARES that we enjoy what his team has created. The IL2 series is UNBEATABLE so far.

Oh, yeah. Don't judge CFS3's graphics by the screenshots, or movie trailers that they released. The actual experience can be VERY disappointing. The IL2 trailers were made in game, and the game looks exactly like what you see in the trailers.


Tsisqua

http://www.uploadit.org/files/010903-nedChristie.jpg

Tsalagi Asgaya Equa!

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 02:39 PM
rfc02, You always get one or two who completely give wrong info to a new guy asking an honest question. There`s always someone who`ll point you down the lonely allyway full of muggers to the new guy in a new town who wants to find a decent hotel. Perhaps they get a perverse pleasure out of it or just (often) use it to spread their own personal poison elsewhere...

RichardI is a classic `point you the wrong way` sort of person. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

HERE IS THE TRUTH. (short version).

I played CFS3 for 2 months. I gave it as much of a chance as possible (this was before FB had come out, but was soon to).
I tried with it for so long cos i liked the Campaign idea, even England could be invaded.

1. Just out of box, CFS3 does not register hits closer than 50m. Yes, It is true. This is why I am amazed when people say CFS3 is good. Do they not notice these errors- they sure notice the little FB ones!

2. Then AI. Very bad, people moan so much about FB, CFS AI is way worse. Enemy aircraft fight weakly, easy to kill. Friendlies do not warn you if enemy are on your six. And...
EMPTY AIRCRAFT will FIRE at you if you pass it as it goes down!!! I will repeat- EMPTY PLANE WILL STILL SHOOT AT YOU! EVEN WHEN PILOT BAILED! EVEN AFTER PATCH.

This is just one of a catalogue of errors (there`s much more, but it would take too much space, and I`ve written enough) that had me eventually running back to the original IL2.
Do NOT believe those who try to point you the WRONG way, rfc02! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

"Tis better to work towards an Impossible Good, rather than a Possible Evil."

SeaFireLIV.
(Spitfire & Escape Whiner Member).

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 02:43 PM
SeaFireLIV wrote:
- 2. Then AI. Very bad, people moan so much about FB,
- CFS AI is way worse. Enemy aircraft fight weakly,
- easy to kill. Friendlies do not warn you if enemy
- are on your six. And...
- EMPTY AIRCRAFT will FIRE at you if you pass it as it
- goes down!!! I will repeat- EMPTY PLANE WILL STILL
- SHOOT AT YOU! EVEN WHEN PILOT BAILED! EVEN AFTER
- PATCH.

OMG! I had the CFS3 box in my hand when I noticed IL-2 was at a reduced price. Thank god I swapped and bougght IL-2 instead.

S! Simon.
<center>

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Download the USAAF campaign folder here (http://www.downloadcounter.com/cgi-bin/download.pl?username=James_Jones&account=705).

http://extremeone.4t.com/images/USsig.jpg
<font color="#000000">It's my attitude not my aptitude that determines my altitude.</font></center>

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 02:44 PM
-avhistory 1% fms by cfs3 far better then il2fb fms-
better THAN Il-2:FB
not then, THAN.
Please Leadspitter, after 2 years you gotta learn this.
/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
Hawk4


I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids. J. Ripper

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 02:46 PM
Realistic or not,as long it´s fun I would play but,I have a P4 2.26,768rambus and a GF4 4600Ti,quite decent,and can´t play it stutter free even at low details.Thats what bugger me of the most.




Message Edited on 09/20/0301:48PM by Superluminal

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 03:02 PM
LeadSpitter aims post RBJ.

Don't take his arguments seriously. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



=======================================
Athlon XP 3200+, FIC AU13 MOBO, DDR 1024M, GeForce4ti4200,
MCP-T SoundStorm, Seagate Barracuda IV 7200rpm 60G HDD,
Yes,I got TrackIR/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif , Two M$ SW Pr2(weird but good HOTAS.Bill,let sticks be made!)

=815=Squadron in South Korea
http://cafe.daum.net/il2sturmovik

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 03:03 PM
CFS3 tracers look like ping-pong balls. I couldn't
help but giggle every time I fired my guns. The water
looks like a childs drawing hanging on your refrigerator.
These among other things...see for yourself.

CFS3 has been permanently uninstalled from my PC.

http://home.si.rr.com/skywolf/moonlight2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 03:28 PM
I upgraded my old config for CFS3. I was in a CFS squad ands we were all waiting with baited breath for the release of CFS3. While I waited I got IL2 on the recommendation of a gentlemen I met in Best Buy. I havent looked back. When I got CFS3 even with my new rig which was put together just for it (Athalon XP1600,768MSDRAM,900Pro128video,SBPCI512 video.... ) it would not run it. Period. I couldnt even get my MS joystick to work right...... I found the graphics to be sub par...especially when compared to IL2. I found the FMs & DMs to be laughable and the AI.....well like someone said...what AI. The scenery was in that blurry CFS mosaic style that is still in FS2004 though from what I have seen FS2004 is much better than CFS3. I actually thought the scenery in CFS1 was better than CFS3. I could never get CFS3 to run out of the box right. Even after I upgraded further to a 9500Pro128, 1 GDDR, SB Audigy card..it STILL ran like crap. FB ran great right out of the box. There are problems with FB but none that make it comparable and certainly none that put it on the same level as CFS3. The fact that CFS3 has more limited views and no track record and no panning feature alone kicks FB way up there IMO. I know there are some who cant get FB to run right out of the box but they are in the minority and usually it can be traced to siome kind of config issue. CFS3 is just buggy as h*ll. To each his own.... I may put it back on my HD just for s#its & giggles, to see what the state of the art in arcade flight simulation looks like but as far as actually running it on a regular basis....I dont think so. It cant hold it's own against FB or IL2 for that matter. I read on the Sim Outhouse forums last week where there are no more patches coming out. So much for support. One patch that does very little and thats it. We can complain about Oleg & 1C if we want to but hey.......we know we are going to get some problems addressed. Everyone will never be satisfied..ther will always be someone who feels cheated &/or left out...but I think the level of overall satisfaction is higher with FB than CFS3 unless the person is a gammer and/or has never tried IL2 or FB anmd has nothing to compare CFS3 to. There is some good third party work going on but you know with the third party stuff....how do you know if the plane you are flying against is not some souped up bird flown by a computer savy simmer with time on his hands and no compunctions against tweaking out an advantage to feed his fragile ego....you dont... At least in FB you know we are on a level playing field...whether you agree with the FMs or not. Visually, and functionally FB is a smorgasboard...... CFS3 is a buffet. That of course is just my opinion........ It's funny though how al those guysa who keep pumping up CFS3 are still here flying FB regularly...... where as to me FB is so good that I dont want to even bother with CFS3... of course to each his own....but if it was that good I wouldnt bother with an inferior product.....then again I have very little free time on my hands......, so each moment of flying is precious to me.


<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

Message Edited on 09/20/0310:35AM by Bearcat99

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 03:30 PM
I have always enjoyed cfs3 as well as IL-2FB..I have never had a problem with stuttering graphics-since patchs for cfs3 have been out runs even smother, also mudmover has some installs to fix aerion issue...graphics IMO are awesome along with explosions and damage and smoke/fire effects....You will always be attacked for liking CFS3 at this forum-thats life lots of hardcore IL2FB's-----anyway I got factory sealed CFS3 for $17.99 at amazon.com from a lady who sells pc games to help kids with cancer-for 18 bucks to me it was welll worth it and helping children with cancer being a cancer survivor myself was a extra treat..

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 03:55 PM
CFS3 is so bad..I DOWNLOADED IT..and didn't even bother keeping it. -_-
Il-2:FB on the other hand...I shelled out 80 bucks for(Canadian of course)...and it hasn't left my HD since.
And i'm what you would call a 'casual gamer'...I don't have a lot of time to play...sims aren't something I enjoyed...until I picked up Il2...it changed my whole perspective on flight sims in general.

Message Edited on 09/20/0302:56PM by Blade_X_

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 04:02 PM
I have not made the effort to sort out CFS3, so I probably shouldn't chime it. I like the theater and the immersion concept, but the actual flying, at least in SP, disappointed me--too many holdovers going all the way back to CFS (which was a hit of a game I admit). The ground is still the "blurry patchwork" someone else mentioned; the engines sound suspiciously like CFS; and the gun sounds are exactly like the George in CFS2. I'll admit that I'm an eye candy guy. I din't feel I was taken seriously when I shelled out the $60(?). IL2FB is not always to my taste visually, as much is pale green or, at least for German cockpits, fake-looking grey. But it's all tied together into a believable, balanced world. CFS3 seems a hodge-podge of disimilar pieces. Nice planes (not quite as nice as CFS2), but poor landscape, and limited sound depth. Though I believe MS programmers are talented, the marketers seems never to venture out of their own world, and they'll claim "firsts" in things that others have been doing for a while (e.g., 3D cockpits). Various projects don't seem to share knowledge either. FS2004, at least to me, is gorgeous compared to CFS3. There's no excuse for that. And, some cokpits are realy nice, while others seem half finished (both in CFS3 AND FS2004. You'd think with only a handful of planes boxed in FS2004, that would finally have been sorted). I really believe Maddox cares more and has better "feelers" in place for the community. But they seem to miss the mark a bit for immersion and the "Western" perspective. Some simmers are scared to death that the "West" will take over their beloved game. But, let's be fair: it's nice to hear your own language and relive your own legends, and I think a few more maps, planes, and sound files added to the existing game would provide the flexibility. I have a feeling immersion depends largely on motion capture and scripted sequences, which I don't get the impression Maddox wants to get into. If they ever get into FPSs, they will probably gather more fine people and have a base to share with other sims. I'd like to see that.

Back to the topic. I won't can CFS3, but I will probably only sample it every so often, giving the community time to enliven the game. I will probably always feel a lack of immersion in IL2FB, but another part of me will stay loyal because I think Oleg and his employees love what they do.

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 05:02 PM
I have been around with flight sims since back when FS2 was on a 1.44 floppy, remember them:-) and thought I was in heaven with what was offered.Have had most WWII sims since then...the good and the ugly..
At 74 I never had the opportunity to fly any of the planes offered in any of the sims, except the Tiger Moth which I took my training in in late '45.So I really can't offer any true life FM considerations like I see put forth in this and other forums.
I can say that what I've seen is that MS has continually brought out sims that seem to be enlarged patches of the previous ones and offer very little support for their product.They seem to depend on the 3rd party stuff to MAKE their sims and have since day one..IMO.
Further to that, I was lucky enuff to beta IL2 (original) (FS9 also, BTW) and bought it as soon as it hit the shelf! The support here , as mentioned, is continuous and seems sincere. With the production of FB I have IMO reached a level of 'involvment' not seen in any other sim, so far..There have been a few other sims Ive enjoyed as much but because of their age and antiquity arent up to these standards....so be it!
I would really enjoy being able to compare apples with apples, but as both these sims take part in a different part of the war this is not possible, so I try to enjoy both. I get more 'involved with FB and get to fly a different type of a/c than normal so have a good time. It is MY personal favourite, but I do fly CFS3 every so often and get enjoyment there too.
As far as the 3rd party stuff, Maddox keeps control of his sim so that everyone is as equal as their planes can make them in the online wars, whereas MS opens it up to any cheats that want a 'super'plane can have this..Take your choice...not all was equal back then either, remember.. Well Ive held the soapbox long enuff and it is just MY opinion...FWIW..LOL

Burt


Burt

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 05:18 PM
i believe Seafire just summed up this little deboggle.

agreed sir...../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_01.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 07:30 PM
Lead - its more than just graphics.

The view system in CFS3 is horrid. The online play is not very good either. The padlock system is silly, requires no work by the pilot at all.

Lastly, the open architecture makes for a nightmare since everyone has different setups - the 1% has good models, but the setup of all those AC is a major pain (ie. copy this file here, this file there, etc... it's a mess).

Lastly - why in the heck they don't have trackir support is beyond me, considering the MS flight sims have had Trackir support for awhile now.

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 07:43 PM
How about a FB versus FS2004 thread? Oh no, this board couldn't handle it because there's SOOOOO many ways where FS2004 puts FB to shame.

CFS3 has its merits, I know them well. The 1% team's mods are awesome, and flying a 1% spitfire in CFS3 (OR FS2004) is WAY more complicated than flying anything in FB.

Either way, you rarely get many intelligent responses in threads about CFS3 or other MS products in this area.

Sort of like asking if Ghost Recon is any good in an OFP forum...



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

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 09:57 PM
Just don't look at the ground - MS products have the worse ground that I've ever seen.

I call it the 'oil spill' look.

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 09:59 PM
I can't speak for the 1% planes in CFS3, but the ones in CFS2 really did not impress me at all, particularly when compared to the planes in il2/il2 FB. The 3d cockpits were horrendous, and although the flight performances for each aircraft were accurate (roll-rates, climb performance, turn performance, etc...) the planes as simulated just didn't have the character/feel of flight that is so well done in il2 and il2fb. They're certainly not more difficult to fly than in il2; the model feels canned, as if your on rails.



I have not bought CFS3 yet, but may do so if the mods continue to improve the sim. My understanding is that the 1% team is now working on "post departure flight modeling" or making spin and stall behavior more accurate within the confines of MS's architecture. So it sounds to me like things will improve, and in defense of CFS3 you can at least fly the Bf110, spitfire and P51 now.

_____________________________________
Proud flyer of IL2 Forgotten Battles: The home of the first, and only fully Kevlar covered airplanes...the Lagg 3 and I16 Rata.

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 10:33 PM
I know I am going to sound like a broken record but I too have long ago un-installed cfs3 after a few months tryout.

Loved the thought of flying a B25 (anything with 12 forward firing .50 cal's has got to get the blood going) or the Ju 88, tempest, etc.

But the AI are brutally dumb, the cockpits are a step back from cfs2 and the campaigns boring repetition.

Only thing really going for it besides the above mentioned planes is the ability to warp to the next stage of the mission (sorry, but flying 20 minutes in FB just to get to the mission point is a bit much...maybe if you'd get bounced occassionally enroute...?)

Considering what a resource hog cfs3 is, there should be better graphics and everything else.

The fact that 300 some odd people are on HL each night and nothing on ms zone for cfs3 speaks loudest.

http://images.ucomics.com/images/doonesbury/strip/thecast/duke2.jpg


"Death before Unconsciousness" - Uncle Duke

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 10:43 PM
Dex, I don't think none of them(FS2004 & FB) should feel the shame, both are great product in their region.

As I play both sim, I hope Bill hire Oleg with tremendous money and support. (thou the opposite would be better. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif )

=======================================
Athlon XP 3200+, FIC AU13 MOBO, DDR 1024M, GeForce4ti4200,
MCP-T SoundStorm, Seagate Barracuda IV 7200rpm 60G HDD,
Yes,I got TrackIR/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif , Two M$ SW Pr2(weird but good HOTAS.Bill,let sticks be made!)

=815=Squadron in South Korea
http://cafe.daum.net/il2sturmovik

XyZspineZyX
09-20-2003, 11:27 PM
Dexmeister, I`m a massive Spit fan, but even that in CFS3 could not keep me on, though I tried for over 2 months. I flew the Spit almost all the time, but also the Typhoon and tempest. As for FMs the only difference I noticed between FB and CFS3 was that the Spit landed more realistically, you really had to prepare to land before going in. Apart from that aircraft were as easy, maybe easier to fly than FB. Also I took off all that radar crap and messages that CFS3 floods you in to have more realism.

It`s still crap! (technical term!)I`d rather fly a bf109 E in FB than the Spit in CFS3! Sad, but true. And I know what i`m talking about. I spent a hell of a long time on it! Patch included.





"Tis better to work towards an Impossible Good, rather than a Possible Evil."

SeaFireLIV.
(Spitfire & Escape Whiner Member).