As a useful comment...what's your system?

As a non-useful comment...did you get this for Christmas or spend money on it?

Plenty of peeps here a willing to help, but you need to be a little forthcoming to get that help.

Quote:


Take heed my friend. Just answer the questions that are asked of you and I bet you get a fairly good running game. I also had the same problem and followed all the suggestions. I have already won the war as an american, now trying as a german

Why should you tune-up your car?

You do it for best performance.

CFS 3 is

[glb]VERY

[/glb] demanding.

Go without the tune-up if you want...but then you have only one person to blame for poor performance.

That person is not in Redmond, Washington.

It is not completely neccessary to tweak CFS3 all though it is a good idea. I think that alot of people who are trying to help people with problems are saying that you generaly need to find the right settings to suit you.

I think that another reason why CFS3 doesn't run completely 'out of the box' is because the fact the being a simulator and a Microsoft one at that it runs a very complex graphics engine. Which is very much the same reason that it requires more up-to-date systems to run it properly.
Biggles

Considering that the human eye can only perceive a frequency of about 45 Hz at the top end...40 FPS is not "ordinary". People have been spoiled by simplified graphics engines that will generate framerates a high as 150 FPS...but what's the point?

People have to realize that most of the tweaks required to get CFS 3 at peak performance are simply a matter of making sure that CFS and the comp are dealing with each other in a fair manner. There are literally millions of hardware/software configurations out there that have to be dealt with. The average user doesn't know enough about the box to adjust it...so the programmers make allowances and make the program do the adjusting to suit the box.

You should also remember that where most of the First-Person-Shooters only have to deal with a terrain area of a few acres, CFS (indeed all flight sims) deal with an area of up to 2500 sq MILES. Not to mention the fact that the AI has to track a bunch of objects moving in 3D space.

CFS 3 has problems...but they are remarkably slight considering the very high bar the team tried to attain. The real problem is now that they came so close...they have to fix it and actually succeed.

I like CFS3 (let me say that straight up)

However, support is a problem.

Comparing tuning your car to tuning your game is wrong. (I agree with denishc)

New cars have warranties, if you have a problem the manufacturer stands behind their product!  In fact, if I "tweaked" my car I could possibly VOID my warranty.

My car is a "performance" car, as I am not a mechanic, I would be foolish to try and tune it myself, however, if I did, I could pay a mechanic to fix up the mess I created.  I assume you would all agree that CFS3 is a "performance" game.  So far the only support that I have found so far is user groups like this one.

I read with interest that "...Plenty of people here are willing to help..."

I posted a Multiplayer Server Connection problem on this forum nearly a month ago.  41 people have read it (many times it was me), but NO ONE has ever replied.

My problem still persists.

Don't get me wrong, I am not having a go at Silverfox (or anyone else).  I have respect the fact that Silverfox has offered good advice to many people.

However, I appreciate that there are problems that are simply beyond the capacity of end users to resolve on their own.  This is especially true for game development.

Microsoft should be making their presence in the forums VERY OBVIOUS, as I have seen in forums for games from other companies, where game developers are readily identifiable, and take an active role in the Forum.  Marketing professionals will tell you that direct feedback (both good and bad) from end users is very valuable. Here the feedback is provided to Micorsoft "on a platter", and costs them NOTHING!

There should be an official (Microsoft) mechanism for escalating issues that are raised within these forums.
Currently, this is just "hit and miss" i.e. Questions in the "too hard basket" simply go unanswered.

I hope someone from Microsfot reads this and takes note. 

If you ignore the feedback from your clientele you will lose them!!!

I will continue to play the game (via "Quick Combat" mostly since I can only connect to the server once in a blue moon), but I will be thinking very carefully before purchasing another "performance" game from Microsoft.


Quote:

Anybody remember when CFS1 came out?
I had a PIII 450MHz with 64MB RAM and an 8MB ELSA graphics card without this neat features like AA, that´s what I´d call the average machine in those days
Those guys who had a Diamond or Voodoo where lucky, LOL.
CFS ran at average 5-18 fps on my machine and crashed on a regular base.
Was this a problem? Nope, I loved the game.
I´m running CFS3 on an XP1800+ 512MB DDR and Geforce 2 MX 200 (average again, hehe) at 24-36 fps, can go down to 15-18 in heavy action. not bad I think.

Quote:

I agree.

Let me clarify: I don't have anything against Microsoft, or the collection of "free" feedback from the site.  As I stated before, I like the game.

My point being that it is not apparent that Microsoft are here, looking at the feedback and providing support.

There probably is Microsoft staff checking the site, but their presence is not apparent.  This gives end users the impression that there is no "official" support structure, which in turn leads to dissatisfaction.

Perhaps if their signatures identified them as staff, then end users would see their posts and be encouraged by their presence.

How do I know whether a particular issue has been taken on board by Microsoft and is being looked into?  ???

Who do I turn to if my posted problem has no replies in another months time?

BTW When I do get a connection to the server, the game runs beautifully and I enjoy it immensely 
Which is why,  I feel very frustrated when I can't connect, which is most of the time. 

  The problem isn't that we're "game console spoiled", the problem is, that as simmers, we're willing to put up with a "here it is....you fix it" attitude from designers.   
  Now don't get me wrong, my hat's off to those of you who have fought your way through CFS3 and got it working, but the point is YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO!!!
  And yes, if I bought a McLarran I'd expect it to run properly right from the shop, just like my Ford!!

Nicely said Littig. My only complaint with CFS3 is that I don't have sufficiant RAM and Processor speed. And that can be fixed with money.

Man...I am pretty lame at the tech stuf. I got CFS3 on release and really, with just a little research found the tweaks that got it running smooth! 28-30 fps and little stutter.  That was on the GeForce2!!!

I have since purchased the GeForce4 Ti 4600 realizing that there is more the game has to offer!

Complaints about it not running out of the box I compare to this:

You go and buy a big a new Ford SUV. Get it home and find it doesn't fit in the garage like the old compact. You blame Ford Motor Company because you have to move a few boxes and tools around to get it to fit in the garage the way you like it! The garage is big enough...just needed a tweak to fit the new toy!

I've needed to tweak and patch IL2 FB as well. No one ever metions this! There are many who really love IL2 FB for the great game it is. Then there are others that just play it cause it's not by M$. For that group I feel sorry!

Just a little observation. Did anybody notice that the person that started this thread has not come back to ask for help, or to make any additonal comments?
Must have been a drive-by  complaint

Quote:


Probaly he is one of the guys of the ubi.com il2/fb forums, denischic, if you like to read bullshit and trow up put this in your browser, www.ubi.com, they are busyer in make fight in forums instead talk about the game.