I fly mainly RAF as being an x-Brit here in the States that seems the right thing to do.
Perhaps we would say 95% of my flying is for them, with the once in a very blue moon flying for the Luftwaffe.
Today was one of those blue moons..So there I am sitting on  the runway ready to take off and bomb the hell out of London. But before I go I decide to have a look around my loaded bomber..The pilot has a very big smile on his face..I wonder why I think?
So off I jolly well go, all's well as I head across the Channel..but wait..do I here "Beam Me Up Scotty" in the background...no, just my imagination.
Now i'm getting close to London..Battersea Power Staion is my selected target..Now whats this...I have been transported to the Land Of The Giants ...Dam it I was right 'StarTrek' is around here...Battersea Power Staion is HUGE, and I mean HUGE.... but wait so is everything else....Now I lived in London for many years and saw Battersea Power Station on many many occasions..I can tell you never in a million years was that, or anything else around as big as this! No wonder the Pilot had a smile on this face as just think what his 'diddle doo' must be like at that scale!!! Perhaps that's not the joystick at all that we look at !!!   Perhaps my 'sim's an old DOS version?? Does anybody remember those early days when everything was so stupid..can it be that MicroSoft in there wisdom have gone back in time?? Perhaps they used 'warp factor -5.25?'
The scaling of everything is really so way off..How can anybody think this is a good sim? For all those that are having   'kittens' and junmping to it's defence I think you should look at IL 2 or IL FB and see what it should really be like..I always thought, and this proves it, that MS had a panic when they saw that they have been knocked of there perch, and are no longer the ONLY sim around...So they bring out this 'balls-up'
Maybe we will find it in Kelloggs Corn Flakes as a free be..To charge what they did for it is too silly for words..No wonder I found it for $15 in my local store..I thought that a mistake had been made with the price, but on asking the guy behind the counter  he said 'No thats right'...I couldn't beleve my ears thinking I had got a bargin...I bet he had a good laugh at my expense...
All I can say Mr Gates and all those fine people at MS is
if you think I will buy CFS4 think again buddy...My money will be with Ubi Soft from now on.
The intrest they show in putting any problems right go far beyond the call of duty..  MS give the impression of 'more fool you' in buying it..if you think we are going to fix any problems think again..So I close with my final comment to MS....Tweak This.... 8)

Most of us here have tried IL2 in one form or another and have gone back to CFS. I've done so myself.

Also, I think you must realise that Battersea powerstation is a pretty big place. You just might not be used to looking at it from a Ju88. Could we have a screenshot to show us just how big it is?

I made a little shrine of my own that forever reminds why I like this and that.

This shrine is made up of a small table. On top of it is a chess set with the holy bible in the middle. Just behind the chess set are 3 simulator packages. CFS3, FS9, and IL-2 FB.

Why do I have CFS3 displayed on my little shrine? Because it is to remind me of the mistake I made in just recklessly buying stuff without paying attention to the warnings.

I use to like CFS3, but only for no more than half a month.

The American planes in IL-2 FB are not that accurate [I understand] because the IL-2 series was made entirely by a RUSSIAN developement team. Therefore, they have a lot of knowledge of Russian aircraft, but little knowledge of American aircraft. The great news about them is that they are quickly improving as we speak.

Some of the Russian developement members ARE graduates of an Avaition university in Moscow.

I have said this before and I will say it again: CFS3 SUCKS!!!!!!! I use to like it UNTIL I got my hands on IL-2 FB.

In CFS3, the aircraft reflections are too much. The DVC of each aircraft doesn't seem to satisfy me enough. The bridges are too easy to destroy [just a few shots from a very weak machine gun]. The AI enemy ground units seem to ride through the bridges, even if the bridges are completely destroyed. I don't feel any sense of purpose in the dynamic campagne. The clouds stink. Most of the time, it's too easy to complete a mission [mission complete after sinking just 1 ship out of a fleet of 9 ships]. The AI is dumb and they take too long to attack. The dynamic campagn skips too many days after every mission, therfore leaving me no time to prevent or stop a German Offensive. The Allied side loses to quickly, thus making a very quick war that ended too soon. And most often, the warp takes to VERY HIGH altitude when the target enemy aircraft are at a VERY LOW altitude.

And the list goes on.

I do agree that CFS2 is better than CFS3. But I still have my doubts about any CFS series made by M$.

I use to play Ghost Recon, Splinter Cell, Rayman, and the 1st IL-2 sim. All made by UBI. And they are great.

I am so sure of my faith in God, I don't have to prove anyone else wrong in order to know I am right.

People that are unsure of their faith, are always offended by someone that believes different and insist on arguing. Are they so unsure of their believe they must convince you that yours is wrong for them to be right?

Point is, I have not gone over to IL-2 forums and made  the better points of CFS3 the reason why IL-2 is inferior. I feel we should do or not do the one we enjoy.
Why?
I am not a troll.
Wulfmann

Quote:


I need my Coat........ 

PS: If it wasn't for those people I mentioned, I wouldn't have to go over here and start blurting things out.

I will forever regret saying this, but my conscience told me to.

I'm sorry I over reacted about CFS3 and FS9 and so on and so forth. Woodlouse, you are right about me. I promise you I won't make a bad complaint about these sims ever again.

Ok, there, I said it. Ya happy now?

Ya guys better not go braggin about this all over the forums. If I find out, I'll kick your behinds.

PS: I found those same couple of guys [the ones i previously mentioned] a playing IL-2 online a few hours ago. They say they hate IL-2 but I caught them playing it. ???

Anyways, I taught them a lesson by vulching them [if you know what i mean] while they were still sitting on their airbase.

Trolling. Now that is the first term I have ever seen in these forums in ages. And it took this long for even one person to mention it.

Would you rather see me make ONE LOOOOOONG post that takes up space? or bits and pieces?

EDIT: This is the first time I ever trolled.

I agree the CFS3 scenery looks stupid!!!!
I haven´t seen houses (taling about the autogen)
like this anywhere in the world they are way too
small and from the distance the towns and cities look more like a soldiers cemetary to me.
I have both CFS3 & IL-2FB an I like both of
them although I do prefer IL-2 !
I actually consider CFS3 a game and
Forgotten Battles a simulation , and haven´t
flown a real warbird myself I can only say that
IL-2 gives me a more `flying feeling´ than
CFS.

Thanks guys!  This thread has been pure entertainment LOL!

Will

Yes please, and a large coke as well.

Will

Kahatu, i'm glad you've seen the light. Anyone who goes to IL2 forums to brag about CFS3 should be shot. I am quite sure that no one from these forums would stoop so low as to do that sort of thing. Everyone is entitiled to their opinions, however, sometimes you need to know when and when not to express it. People should be allowed to make they're own decisions on what simulators they play and what they think about them. They do not need people to make them for them.

Well, a lot of people sign up, post one or two posts on a problem they have and then they leave. We are the ones who could not escape.

Yours is an admission by omission of the fact you claimed "real" pilots said the FM in IL-2 was more to real than CFS3 so that made it a stalemate. WRONG! I called you out to make the most important point with regards to your calling CFS3 a game and IL-2 a sim. Wrong! IL-2 is what you say, I do agree. It runs better, requires little frustration, it is much easier to do and is by far the better game. But, when we say simulator, we are refering to something that simulates and the flight models (actually the MS ones suck big time) by Aviation History and others using those tools, are the closest to actually flying these planes as real planes as have yet been done. That was my point which you tried to slip past and on to trashing CFS3. You got caught on the fight models and I an just making a big deal out of it so there is no question. CFS3 with 1% aircraft are the closest thing to flying a real WWII fighter. Period. After that, you are mostly right with regards IL-2 FB being a much better done package than the rushed to stores with more wrong than any sim in historyMS cranky needed the whole world to save CFS3. You have a right to your opinion and the right to state the obvious but, saying  IL-2 has better FMs ruins any chance of any argument being credible with anyone that has some knowledge on the subject.
Wulfmann

I believe that the Flight Unlimited series had very realistic flight dynamics. Especially Flight Unlimited III. They actually simulated the airflow over the wings and control surfaces to make them fly as realistically as possible.

Quote:


Keep in mind we dont all beleive this

Quote:


hehe  thats the on thing we can be sure of.  LMAO

I'm all ready...but a little worried on the airflow over my left ball-bag..seems to have a little bit of drag stopping full movemeant...
I think it may be that 1% putt-putt i'm flying..Thank the lord i don't fly that in Iraq....or anywhere come to that..
I don't know where your pilot friends are from, are you sure they are not enemy agents?....

Olag has given money to get real pilots to improve his sim and they have. It is the game engine that needs changing and might very well be what his next one will have.
I have seen posted many real pilots, not enemy agents, say from the former Soviet military, but those that fly current WWII aircraft claim the CFS3 1% A/C are the closest flight models.
You showed Olag got some to work for him. I do notice no endorsement as to the final results by any of those listed.
Interesting!
Wulfmann

In the IL-2 community, there is a forum section that is called "Oleg Maddox Ready Room" and Oleg usually reads the posts in order to read the opinions of consumers. Therefore, that part of the forums was my first place to go to.

Besides, I wanted to hear consumer opinions as well.

It seems that a lot of people over at the IL-2 community are more willing to put up with a closed-source simulator in order to avoid the infamous CHEATERS and Hackers.

Besically, they seem to want fair play instead of a different game engine. Besides, I seem to agree with them.

If a lot of people used addons while playing online, there would be serious lag or serious UNREALISM. For example:

When I play online in FS, I see a 747 doing loops and barrel rolls even though that player says he is flying an F-18.

If this happened in IL-2, then imagine this: An Me-262 flying like a Me-162, or a P-51 Mustang flying like a P-80.

And remember, there are so many addons that it's impossible to download them all. Therefore, you will always see some aircraft doing some unusual things.

Quote:

I hope you realise that if someone is flying a plane that you don't have in multiplayer in FS then you will see a stock aircraft. In CFS2 you see the Zero. So therefore, in FS you see a 747. Whether they be flying an F18 or a Stringbag.

I do not do multi-play but, I do see your point with IL-2. IL-2 is a great game and I enjoyed many aspects of it. If it were a choice between out of the box, I would be doing IL-2 without any doubt.
Based on others, not my, opinions, I would likely go with IL-2 for multi-play if I were starting from scratch and that was my leanings.
I wouldn't blame Olag for not changing engines but he is smart enough to know when he is going to fall behind. CFS3 problems are all noted all to well. But, the engine is the best and we, the community and not MS, have made great strides to making this an excellent game on its own right.
However, one must be a dedicated, willing to learn, with long suffering to jump through all the hoops to get to the point of a high level CFS.
Most, and I can not blame them one bit, won't do it.
If I had waited one month and heard the truth about CFS3 before I bought it, I would be doing IL-2 FB now.
In fact, I had given up on CFS3 and had gone back to Il-2 until I found the 1% planes and the various web sites with their support and common interest. I gave it a shot and it quickly surpassed IL-2, IMO.
It is the fun of repairing this and updating and being a part of a shared work that is so much cooler than just playing a game, even if it is more trouble. It has the potential and is already much better than IL-2. But, if you are not heavily into modifying, downloading, tweaking etc, you would not know that.
I truly believe that if Olag played the last BoB installment of mine the British fighter sets, he would take a serious look at upgrading his engine because he would realize that CFS4 will jump past him and without a new engine he will not keep up. That is just my opinion and mine alone.
Wulfmann