Search the archive:
YaBB - Yet another Bulletin Board
 
   
 
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 ... 19
Send Topic Print
cfs3 or PF (Read 26873 times)
Reply #195 - Mar 3rd, 2005 at 12:26am

AvHistory   Offline
Colonel
Kinder & Gentler
NC, USA

Gender: male
Posts: 577
*****
 
Quote:
i would agree that if from a far off distance u can see a glimmer of light off the bare metal from the angle of the sun it would add something to a flight sim but as far as i know cfs3 does not do this, nor does il2 feel free to correct me on that issue if need be.


BlakJakofSpades,

>>>you are a (semi ) reasonable guy<<<

I would really hate for that to get around as it will ruin my image at the Zoo & SimHq's PF section. Shocked

http://www.avhistory.org/movies/p51ref2.avi
new movie

I could not zoom out any further on a plane I was flying but I was able to make the plane "disappear" when I went nose or tail to the sun against the clouds. It flashed pretty good as the larger surfaces were presented to the sun.

This will happen as far away as you can see the plane as the reflective skin is an actual separate part of the plane not just a part of the base skin paint.

Mathias is the visual guru & can explain how it works much better then I can, but it does work.

As for your liking one game more then another I have no problem with that at all.  As I said before Falcon 4/SP4 is my favorite flight sim & believe all old Fords should have Chevy power. Wink

Y'all can't take these debate too seriously or personally because; what will it all mean 5 years or even 5 days from now.

BEAR
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #196 - Mar 3rd, 2005 at 12:36am

AvHistory   Offline
Colonel
Kinder & Gentler
NC, USA

Gender: male
Posts: 577
*****
 
Bearcat99,

I meant to ask, did you have a different screen name @ the old Netwings?

BEAR


 
IP Logged
 
Reply #197 - Mar 3rd, 2005 at 12:49am

BlakJakofSpades   Offline
Lieutenant Colonel

Posts: 6
*****
 
impressive... Smiley
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #198 - Mar 3rd, 2005 at 3:27am

Oleg_Maddox   Offline
Lieutenant Colonel
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 8
*****
 
Quote:
So we both agree with my original post that the items I listed will not be in PF, except for a IJN torpedo bomber some time in the future & the Betty that was originally advertised as part of the game.



Yes, because Grumman's name was used in the promotion & advertising of PF without their specific permission & without paying their license fee. Grumman's successor company was unhappy with this and went after you, UBI or both over the trademark infringement.



To get to the readme you need to open the box...if you open the box you can't return the product.  If the Betty was in the buying decision & not there you are just out of luck, till if & when, one shows up possibly 6 months or so later.

Additionally, its still being advertised as being in the game even though its not.  Maybe a small note about its future release on the web site might be the right thing to do.

The IL2/PF read me & license agreement is a lawyer - legalize thing that puts the buyer at a disadvantage just like Grumman's license fee y'all are complaining about put you at a disadvantage,  is it not?

If the lawyer thing is good for IL2/PF why is it not also good for Grumman?


Me red faced, Nah.  I will be happy to see the Betty even if it is very late.

BTW are you using those excellent Italian planes as the non-advertised Pacific Fighters add-ons?



I said exactly the same thing, MS never modeled them, so I am not sure what your point is.


As far as I know we all have IL2 including PF,  thanks for your very kind offer.  Maybe you will send us BOB when the time is right. I feel confident that we can give it a fair appraisal. We can be reached through

http://www.avhistory.org


I was part of the debate which took place on the CFS3 board at SimHq just like we are doing here.  It was a long one specifically comparing the items I listed above.  Oleg jumped in for a few posts very late in the game, just like here, then left even after RC-79 one of our team in the debate offered to continue in Russian to help with a better understanding of the issues.

You may remember from the thread that RC-79 retired from USAF F-4 Phantom II's, did contract work with NASA & holds a number of advanced aeronautical engineering degrees. IIRC he also knew a number of people at the Russian academy's that you also knew.

BTW Dmitry Moskalenko who did some of our 1% Russian planes is now working at Eagle on LOMAC, maybe you will run across him some day.

As always its a pleasure to have you here chatting about flight sims with a simple hobbyist like myself.

BEAR


I will repeat you the last time: Never tell people that you don't know in both of the following cases:

When you know nothing and tell all the things like your fantasy

When you know something partially but invert it, which which finally get absolutely reversed result. 

And the answers to you others already show everything that I told you myself. Isn't it enough for you?

Buy.




 
IP Logged
 
Reply #199 - Mar 3rd, 2005 at 9:06am

AvHistory   Offline
Colonel
Kinder & Gentler
NC, USA

Gender: male
Posts: 577
*****
 
Quote:
When you know nothing and tell all the things like your fantasy

When you know something partially but invert it, which which finally get absolutely reversed result.  


I guess this means I will not be getting my advance copy of BOB.  I am simply devastated.....devastated, interesting word - sounds a lot like Devastator which I will not be getting either. Sad

Fantasy is also an interesting word. 

Royal Navy capital ships moored in battleship row Pearl Harbor at 7:50 am Sunday morning 7 December 1941 is fantasy.  Its actually worthy of Harry Turtledove.

Its also fantasy to think you can historically re-create the major Pacific battles in the carrier wars & island hopping campaigns without the 20 or so major items, like carriers, that I listed along with additional/larger maps.

So far the only thing you have told me different then what I originally posted is that we will really, really, really be getting, sometime in the future, the Betty that we really, really, really thought was in the box because your advertising did & still does say its in the box.  Oh yes...and a IJN torpedo bomber to be named later.

When questioned about the Betty you elected to hide behind some UBI lawyers weasel words about whatever we say on the box or in our adverting does not have to be fact because the only thing that is real is the license agreement.

You also felt you did not really have to answer any questions at all about anything at all because as you said, "Do you have the right to ask me this when I do a lot of add-ons free for all?"  I believe if you come into a fourm to talk about and make claims about a specific game I have a perfect right to ask you anything I want about it.  You on the other hand have a perfect right not to reply, but have no right to try to control what is asked.

Seems like you are trying to play Oleg the altruistic victim to avoid talking about what will & what will not be added to PF before its finally closed out.  If y'all don't know at this time or don't want to talk about it just say so.

Newsflash....Y'all have used the promise of future free add-ons to promote your products since before the original IL2 was even released.  When you do this the "future free add-ons" become an inducement to buy & your delivering on your commitment is not altruism, its to be expected.  They have been pre-paid for by the people who factored them into the decision when buying the game.

BTW I wonder if all these fine new items promised can be added to Il2/FB/ACE or if the guys have to pony up & buy Pacific Fighters before they can get them, another inducement to buy?

Bye y'all...come see us again soon.......hear!

I expect the Zoo & SimHq PF will be in an uproar over this one Smiley

BEAR





I
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #200 - Mar 3rd, 2005 at 9:19am

james007   Offline
Colonel
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 1514
*****
 
Oleg nice for to drop in here. Your input is well appreciated. I"am one of your consumers for years. I have all your produts since you started the IL2 series. IL-2 to the Pacific Fighter. I also have most of the addon as well. I want to thank you for bringing us the Eastern Front to World two combat Simulator.

With out your input we would not have had the priviledge of being able to fly in the Eastern Front as no one else has been able reproduce it as well as you have. I always been a big fan of Word war two Aviation.

I was aware of many of the planes that parcipated in the Eastern Front before you build this Simulator.
Now I have been able to fly them as well. Other People that where not aware of what the Eastern Front meant to the History of World war two have learn about it thruogh your Simulator.

In other words you and all the other Developers are responsible to do this work with devotion if you care about what our privious Generations and what they had to go through to preserve our freedom that we cherrish today.

You World war two Aviation developers are not just developing games for our enjoyment but it can also bee use for our collective memories of that great war on our younger generations mind.

So, I want to thank you and your staff for your contribution to the improvement of quality in our World war two Sim World.

As for Pacific Fighter I"am sorry Oleg but you gave us the impression that you and your team where going to do the complete Pacific war through with this new installment to IL-2 series.

I feel a bit desappointed that you are leaving as with half developed Simulator.

Maybe you did not promise this, but I know you did gave us that impression.

I was hoping to have two great Simulator for the Pacific war instead I have been left with only one.

If you notice there is only one Simulator dedicated to the Pacific air war and I believe thats a shame.

The Pacific Fighter has many good features that I like but its still not a complete Simulators representing the Pacific war like with help of a very dedicate team of developors CFS2 has become.

Now I"am force to wait three or four years for the next Simulator dedicated for the Pacific war.

I hope you can do better the next time.

I"am sorry but I will tell you like I see it. Its better to bee honest and upfront than to be told how great one is and not bee able to correct ones mistakes because of it.

I do like your products other wise I would not have bought them all, or bee writting this post if I did not care about our genre.

On weather Pacific Fighter is better than CFS3. I believe Pacific is the better Simulator over all if merge with FB is concern. CFS3 is getting better every day and a dandy of a Simulator of its own but not as good as the FB merge with PF is.

Lets wait for MAW and see what it offer us Simmers.

Its good to debate and dicuss issues. It can only improve the hooby we all Love.

Please do not treat this as Antagonist post. We all have one thing in common. We all love World war two combat Simulations.

Oleg you have raise the Bar on the quality of this hobby and I thank you for it.

Good luck on your new series.

James007
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #201 - Mar 3rd, 2005 at 9:57am

Bearcat99   Offline
Colonel
IMMERSION BABY!!!
Northern Virginia

Posts: 10
*****
 
I really couldnt see much in that video.. but I think I understand what you were tring to show and yes depending on the angle refection is modelled in FB3.0. I personally prefer to look at the sim as one huge 5 CD sim instead of PF as a stand alone.... while the option to use it as a stand alone exists.... I think a person would get more flavor from the whole package. I think my whole CFS3 experience would have been different if someone had been able to tell me how to get my MSFFB2 stick to wrk properly. If there were no IL2series I would most likely be in CFS. I just prefer where I am at. I think it is a better product for what I want out of a flight sim.

You would be welomed at the UBI forums... by some.. and ragged by others..... keep in mind that @ssholes are everywhere... here.. there.... everywhere.. but there are also some who would welcome a decent converstaion on the virtues of the two sims rather than a debate on the individual merits of each. Obviously both camps are extremely passionate and loyal to thier chosen product... as it should be. You know....... virtual fighter jocks have the same swagger and egos that the real ones did..... actually it is more intense because it isnt real and its really all about bragging rights rather than life or death.... the life or death issue fosters more modesty... but this is all puff on all our parts... and it's cool. I just want to be able to boot up the nextgen sim an about 15 years GOD willing and go..."Wow.... I remember back in the day.. we had those great 2D sims....." Hopefully Id still run into some of the same simmers I know now....

BTW... I cant remember what my handle was on the old Netwings... it was some variation of Bearcat99 though... that is the only name I have ever used... except for the first day on the Zone... I was Redatil51... then I changed it to what it is now later that same day. I may have had a squad affiliation in there... again some variation of 99 or RT or TRT.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #202 - Mar 3rd, 2005 at 12:03pm

IndioBlack   Offline
Colonel
Fox-Four

Posts: 266
*****
 
Okay so Oleg's been here again and ignored the question on multi-throttle support in Pacific Fighters.
He used to ignore it on the IL2/Forgotten Battles/Pacific Fighters Boards too.
Come on Oleg, I'd just like to know: can't do it, won't do it - which is it?
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #203 - Mar 3rd, 2005 at 12:14pm

Beery1   Offline
Major
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 4
*****
 
Quote:
Okay so Oleg's been here again and ignored the question on multi-throttle support in Pacific Fighters.
He used to ignore it on the IL2/Forgotten Battles/Pacific Fighters Boards too.
Come on Oleg, I'd just like to know: can't do it, won't do it - which is it?


Good luck on getting a response.  Like I said before, if Oleg doesn't want to see problems, they simply don't exist.  Try talking to him about flak super-accuracy or airframe vibration vastly improving gunfire accuracy.  Try talking to him about the fact that the AI escape routines are fatally flawed and simply don't work as they should.  Those issues don't exist, so the wildly inaccurate and unrealistic results they generate are really the fault of reality, which doesn't meet up with Oleg's standards of realism.

Oleg says that he won't adjust factors unless he has real world data proving his sim is wrong.  I've sent such data, yet nothing has been done.  Oleg Maddox has a beautiful arcade game masquerading as a simulation, and he is not interested in realism unless it's desired by the arcade fans who play his 'simulations'.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #204 - Mar 3rd, 2005 at 1:35pm

james007   Offline
Colonel
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 1514
*****
 
This will my last post on this subject since most of you are way to passionate and not very objective for my taste. I fly this Simulators for experience and feeling each give me. I always wanted a Simulator that Simulated the whole war.

The one that comes closes because it has a World map and a fantastic open format is CFS2. That beaing said it also has many short commings. The lack of quality control make some plane by the community a bit less than realistic. The cockpits are not as detail as in other Sims. The Ai while not as bad as some people think it is, it still very repetative  in its behavior as a opponent. Re guardless of the plane it always does the same manoeuvre every time. It has a limit comunication capabilities. The only thing that saves it and make it a great Simulator it its dedicated community that have evolve it to a great extend.

CFS3 has that third demention look to that is very appealing to me.  Pretty good looking exterior look to its models, and feel to it that adictive to it.

It also has poor cockpits and only one Theater to work with, The same limited communication capabilities that CFS2 has. Ai that is just more difficult to shoot down than it was in CFS2 but not that much better. It has many more other things that keep it from the been best in the market.

IL-2 series has the Beautiful sceneries and planes . Near perfect cockpits for the technology of today. A tremendous coloful look to it. A bit better Comunication capabilities than the CFS series has. Yet there is something missing to it. There is that immersion or lack of  it that almost ruins it. The missions are bit to long at times and  there no mechanism to reach your objective without having to fly the whole mission. The sounds are poor compare to the CFS series. and while Patches have improve the Sim tremendously they have not correct this aspect of it very much. The graphics are not as good as your first imppresions leads you to believe. CFS3 are better with the exception of look of the water, and with the upgrades to the sceneries in CFS2 its better now as well. The Ai are good but bit unrealistic at times. The missions especialy the ones for the Pacific Fighter are not as realastic or Immersing as could have been. With the addition of third parties DGgen it has been some what improved. It still needs more campaings for both sides to make it a more complete Simulator. I hope he corrects this problem with Patch 3.05.

CFS1 is a old Sim with many short comming but a heck of a lot fun. A pioneer of a Sim. I still enjoy flying in it.

Janes World war two Fighters was a great Sim for its time but too limited in scope.

EAW is the most immersing of all of them evedow its a seven year old Sim. Just look at their forums and you will see how popular this Sim is still is. Thats increadible achievement. Its only real appeal its immersing factor that has not been over come all this years. Amazing if you ask me.

Even with its dedicated community it still a improved old game. It cannot copare with the newer ones in sceneries, Planes models or cockpits and many other feature that our newer Sim display. Even with all its shortcomming its still a lot fun to play with it. It still has the easiest format and some feature that todays Sims do not have. Like for example it has best communacation capabilities of any Sim in the Market. It has a good intro to get you in the mood. It also has a World war two documentary for a historical refreshment, and if you press F12 you can become a spectator to the whole action like if you where waching a World war two movie. It also allows you to fly in other planes in your squadron if you are shoot down during a mission.
Thats does not mean its my favorite Sim. No by no means.

I do fly through it once in while but its not my favorite.

I do not  just fly in one Simulator . None will ever have all I ever want in a Sim. So for me I like them all. I think they all are good Sims and I fly in all of them to get my World war two flying desire out of my system.

Yes, I think we need to get involve as a community and try to improve this genre as much as possible for the benefit of all. But to me you should buy them all and enjoy them all. They are not political parties or different Idiologies that one should not change. I think everyone should appreciate what has been done so far. Be objective and not offended when one of us says something that we do not like obout our favorite Sim.
They all got good things and short commings.

Lets hope Microsoft joins us one day in the name of competition and in the process improving the quality of this genre.

Happy shooting and do come back home safely.

James007



.

« Last Edit: Mar 3rd, 2005 at 2:39pm by james007 »  
IP Logged
 
Reply #205 - Mar 3rd, 2005 at 8:10pm

kool352   Offline
2nd Lieutenant

Gender: male
Posts: 1
**
 
Hello all i am new to this forum and would like to just put in my two cents. After buying and playing both games i have come to the conclusion that IL2 PF is a much better game all around i do agree that cfs3 has its good points but PF is an all around better game. In reply to the person who wrote that the stall rate is incredible i would have to say that you are either ham fisting it or just trying to over fly the plane.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #206 - Mar 4th, 2005 at 2:32am

BlakJakofSpades   Offline
Lieutenant Colonel

Posts: 6
*****
 
i guess u guys missed the part where you can in fact control multiple engines with a throttle quadrant in il-2, and while it's not pretty or clean its still functional, and no i dont mean physically selecting which engine you want, find something else to nitpick please.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #207 - Mar 4th, 2005 at 12:41pm

IndioBlack   Offline
Colonel
Fox-Four

Posts: 266
*****
 
Quote:
i guess u guys missed the part where you can in fact control multiple engines with a throttle quadrant in il-2, and while it's not pretty or clean its still functional, and no i dont mean physically selecting which engine you want, find something else to nitpick please.


It's not nitpicking to point out that you can control individual throttles with dedicated axes in CFS2 and CFS3, but you cannot in IL2/FORGOTTEN BATTLES/PACIFIC FIGHTERS.
At what point would the control system be poor enough for you to decide not to fly that Sim? Would you fly if there was no axis for throttles? What about no axis for Rudders? How about no axes at all, just keyboard control? That's how we started years ago, and over the years in search of realism, the dedicated Flight Sim Producers pushed the envelope and gave us control axes for Stick, Throttle, Rudders, Toe brakes, Multiple Throttles and so on.
I don't fly PACIFIC BATTLES because it does not support the Quad Throttle directly, whereas CFS3 does.
Yes there are workarounds, which I mentioned above, and which I described as clumsy; the same workarounds that you describe as not pretty and not clean. Sure they are functional, so is a mouse taped to a pencil to emulate a stick, but it's nowhere near as functional as Direct axis control.
If that's how Oleg likes to fudge the aircraft controls, you got to wonder what else he is fudging.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #208 - Mar 4th, 2005 at 1:53pm

BlakJakofSpades   Offline
Lieutenant Colonel

Posts: 6
*****
 
"because it does not support the Quad Throttle directly"

so you admit it does? how much you wanna bet multiple engine control will be implimented natively in BOB, true that's not what we're flying right now but oleg doesn't have time to fix everything you want fixed in this soon to be obselete game, especially since it works, why would he waste his time?
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #209 - Mar 4th, 2005 at 2:09pm

Beery1   Offline
Major
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 4
*****
 
Quote:
author=BlakJakofSpades ...oleg doesn't have time to fix everything you want fixed in this soon to be obselete game, especially since it works, why would he waste his time?


Yeah, apparently there are a whole lot of things that Oleg doesn't have time to fix.  He has plenty of time to waste building more and more new (and ever more uncommon) planes though, doesn't he.  Why fix the game when you can waste time and resources messing about with your 3D modelling tool?
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 ... 19
Send Topic Print