Let's all keep designing and playing CFS2 and of course CFS1 and 3 as well. Most of all......

Cor, I forgot there was an SDK. It's just that I found it easier to learn CFS2 whereas I gave up trying to see how CFS3 works, it does seem a very wierd sim engine. Well if I can get enough CFS2 designers together we might stand a chance in competition. I know we could do some 'magnifique' things with CFS2! Well CFS2 is still alive and well and it will never run out of steam as far as I'm concerned. You could say it's almost like 'renewable energy'. When campaigns etc. of WW2 are all made and nothing hasn't been touched on their is WW1, Vietnam, Gulf war, Iraq war (well maybei if there's enough info on sorties) and then making campaigns etc. of fictional TV shows, movies etc. I don't think steam will runout for extremely long, maybe never. 8)

Nah, I think CFS2 is almost on it's last leg, Bombardier!

Sure, we can create Expansion Packs for it, but as long as it's off the shelves in shop's it'll slowly but surely continue to fade away!

Regards,
Stratobat

Quote:


I can honestly tell you your WRONG on that bit 

Quote:


Yes, one year. Pretty much expected that it takes that long given the size of the project.
I think you're wrong though as far as the longevity of CFS2 goes.
I agree with Stratobat that it's dead apart from a handfull hardcorers like you and me who still deal with it.
All we've seen over the past three years developed for it is the odd mission set or a converted FS9 plane.
AFAIK AF-Midway was the last major contribution to CFS2 and that's long time ago.

Mathias you are wrong about CFS2 as always. I do not understand why anybody would like to see any of this two great Sims die.

I"m sorry Bombadier. This is a subject that has been debated many times before.

I"m sick of it. We as a community need both this Sims. They both bring us great joy.

Lets work together and not divide this great community.

One cannot replace the other. Now if you Guys do not mind I would like to see this BS post die a quick death.

James007

another one of these CFS2 Vs. CFS3 discussions. 

Even dow guys I really hate this type of post. I have to clarify some things. CFS2 has never been stronger and better developed. Even dow there are many areas still to bee improved.

Mathias you assertion that there have been a few mission packages and f9 planes developed and converted for this program is just wrong.

There are many packages and sceneries plus planes been made to this game.

Just in the last two days Thicko uploaded a La5 and La7 that are not f9 convertions.

Akemis planes. They are not F9 convertables.

Usio is still developing Ships for this program. What about Akemis and what about Piloto Azul.

Thats another great thing about this Sim. The ability to convert planes from F9 to CFS2. Is not that a great option.

What can you tell about the Ships Collins have developed for this Sim.

What can you tell me about Stiz several Land Texures and Ocean Texture improvements as well.
The reason there are very few CFS2 available in the market now days is that it selled well at its time.

I"m sorry I forgot Jimkos Pacific Textures.

Xaviers Bases. Over 360 new bases plus 70 more that he is developing for Japan.

There many more but I do not the space to write all their names in.

You got to remember that this program is 5 years old and still going strong.

I can still see CFS3 in shelf of some PC stores. The reason for that is that it has not sell as well as its predecesors did.

Any program thats is still in store shelf after two year in the Market is simply not a great seller.

You think Hadgar and his group are a fools for developing a Korean Campaign knowing that CFS2 does not support Jets properly.

Stiz keep developing your World war one project please. This way we will have two version of World war one instead of the only one.

I know some people never developed a taste good for this program.

The reason is simple. They detest the Pacific Theater.


Now let me explain something.  World war two Simulator World is in decline. That not just CFS2 but CFS3 and EAW plus Forgotten Battle/Pacific Fighteras also.

We desperately need a new World war two Sim of high quality.

In the mean time we as a community need to stick together and develope our collective Sims to their Maximum.

I do not like to divide and to weaken our communities. The number are not important but the quality of the people involve in this habby is whats important.

Here is what another member of our community said in a prevous post on what he would like to see in a future Sim.

1.Well if we are in daydream land I would take CFS3 with a clickable TrackIR capable 3D cockpit,  CFS4's terrain & other enhancements + CFS2's fuel tank selection, carriers & world map.  

Add in EAW's 250+ plane , all in the air at the same time, formations & Woten controler along with Falcon 4's dynamic campaign engine, avionics/comms models, flight system management, mission recon, BDA, FAC & ATC.  

If y'all have never seen Falcon 4 before the basic engine start trainer will give you some idea of the level of detail.  99% of the items you see in the cockit actually functions.

Falcon 4 cold engine startup proceedure. Run the utility & click on the green circles to advance.

http://www.avhistory.org/movies/rampstart.exe

In the game if you go with a ramp start it will take about 10-12 minutes.  The inertial guidance system takes about 7-8 minutes to figure out where it is on the face of the earth.  

This is a link to a navagation tutorial

http://users.skynet.be/F4Checklists/F4tacan.htm

BEAR

« Last Edit: Aug 23rd, 2005, 1:34pm by AvHistory »  Logged

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

BEAR
http://www.avhistory.org
http://www.medairwar.com  

I agree

James007

Quote:


No it was the airfile bit, ai a/c can do WW1 you just need to know the tricks 

Quote:


I proberbly will i just need to find another sim that does first 

This will bee my last post on this subject. Bombadier CFS3 is a great Sim with alot to offer but it also has a lot of short commings in my opinion.

CFS2 is also a great Sim as well but it also many short commings. Have you realize how much fun is to able to recreate missions and campaigns all over the World. Something you cannot do with any other Sim.
Do you not realize how many planes have been developed for this Sim. Over one Thousand already or perhaps more. Have you install Lowengrin Dynamic Campaign generartor. Thats great fun evendow it needs to be upgraded.

You also have most of the ships involved in the war. Do you  now you can could create your own Kamikaze missions. Something you cannot recreate in most other Sim.

Yes it is a imperfect Sim. But it also offer a lot that other Sims can not offer including CFS3.

I beleive they compliment each other. So we need both Sims to able to have a more a complete picture of  World war two air war simulation.

Do you guys realize this Sim is the only one that represent the Pacific Theaters adequately.

One thing that I do not like about CFS3 is that its campaigns are two gamey and not very historically base and they are restricted to a certain time frame of the war. You are also restricted to just one Theater. I do like the turrent view that CFS3 and other neat features it does offer. Now  you see how they both compliment each other.

CFS3 is a great Sim but it too has many short commings as well.

Looking forward to the release of MAW and Bombadier new campaigns.

LONG LIVE WORLD WAR TWO SIM WORLD.

LONG LIVE:

1CFS1
2.CFS2
3.CFS3
4.EAW
5.FORGOTTEN BATTLES/PACIFIC FIGHTERS

This is only a opinion

James007

If you take a look at the CFS3 board, next door, you'll see that a lot of people still have trouble running the darn thing. Whereas no-one has trouble running CFS2.

The other thing to note is the downloads sections here for both Sims: CFS2 is still going strong, but CFS3 just isn't getting the volume of new stuff that it should have - perhaps because it's just too complicated.
CFS3 only has one page of panels, compare that with CFS2!

Quote:


If you want to know what's going on in CFS3 you gotta check the MAW and OFF pages and the SOH and Netwings boards.
You may find out that 40-50 individuals are working on these both projects, that includes more model makers than CFS2 ever had at any one time.
Besides, Simviation is not the site to go for CFS3 stuff, better check SOH, AvHistory, Netwings and the various developers sites.
And since CFS3 does not use 2d panels you'll naturally get complete planes and no panels.
Another thing to keep in mind, when CFS2 came out the average PC was a PIII 450MHz and people had pretty much the same perf issues back then and obviously still have when it's getting hot, the many post re how to improve perf by stripping off VC's and such show that.
plus there's just a fraction of AI objects action going on in 2 as compared to 3, so it's supposed to run better, LOL.

Quote:


LOL, it's more about having fun and stretching legs

Yep, boring mess.  8)

ALL IMAGES REMOVED FOR BEING LINKED IMAGES, THIS IS NOT PERMITTED!

why are we posting CFS3 pic's in the CFS2 forum?

Yes Mathias and Bear, you guys are hard at work, but you've a lot of catching up to do, particularly as CFS3 is a lot more complicated than CFS2, so not that many people are turning stuff out fast enough.

You'll be able to crow when the 1% Lancaster comes out - I'm still waiting for that one.

Regarding performance issues - you are right: when CFS2 came out a lot of people didn't have powerful computers, but they could still run the game.
With CFS3, a lot of people just seem to have trouble getting it to work.

Quote:


I think you will find we released more CFS3 planes (105) then we did CFS2 planes (100) and in half the elapsed time.

Interesting how this boring subject has more posts & views per day then the next 70 or so posts in the forum, don't you think?

James, y'all should really lighten up a bit & try pontificating a little less. These are just computer games of passing interest nothing more, nothing less & definitely not real life items that should be cherished and adored. They are just not all that important in the real world scheme of things

Anyone who lives & dies over any one of these computer games is seriously lacking a real life.  This for me is a fourth or fifth level hobby.  Most of my higher level hobbies involve face to face, in one case foot to face, contact with other people.

Nudging each other about a flight sim of choice is no different then ford vs. chevy, yankees vs. bosox or giants vs. cowboys debates that take place anytime a bunch of guys get together for a few beers.

So, if you don't want to play just stay out of the way or at least realize that your "plea" is just a request based on your own personal opinion.

Additionally, I would question your right to unilaterally set yourself up as the official hall monitor of all things flight sim. I have not seen much contribution from you other then directives & pleas telling us how we all should act, how we should think & what we should post to these forums. Exactly who are you to take this position on yourself?

IMHO people like Mathias & me have more then paid our dues to freely express our opinions on these forms both from the point of working with the developers as the games were created & providing a significant amount of freeware after the products were released.  It really pisses me off to read your constant holier then thou lectures about what we post.

We enjoyed Bombardier101's challenge & had some fun going back & forth with him. Some people liked the thread & others did not, such is life.  

The nice thing about a forum is y'all don't have to read the threads you don't like, maybe you should take that approach and get off the soapbox.

BTW before anyone asks the other hobbies that take presidence over this one are.

martial arts
(Tae Kwon Do & Hap Ki Do)



engine building



car building



speedboat restoration

To clarify: the Lanc remark means:

Sure all those pictures of various aircraft look okay, but they don't spin my engine. If you'd put up a picture of the finished Lanc that has been promised for so long, then I'd have something else to do other than trawling these boards. 

Regarding you guys having built more for CFS3 than CFS2 - well that just applies to you. My belief is that there is more out there for CFS2, because CFS3 stuff seems slow in coming. And that may be because it's more difficult to do. I'm not going to try it, because I'm confortable with making stuff for CFS2 and enjoy flying it more than CFS3. I just use CFS3 to fly heavy bombers, because CFS3 is set up for that slightly better. IMHO.

My Martial Art is AI-DO: the drawing of the sword, the striking of your enemies, the removal of the blood from the blade, and the re-sheathing of the sword in one swift movement. But you probably guessed that.  8)

Quote:




Bottom line is we develop what pleases & interests us since we are the ones who will be living with a project for a period of time.  Its just a hobby not a job & we fully intend to enjoy what we are doing.

Quote:


There has never been a promised date on Lancaster, when it gets done it will be done just like the B-24 or any other plane.  Just to restate, its a hobby not a business & we feel no obligation to build this or that plane on such & such a time frame.

Quote:


Yes it applies to us but I believe we were the most prolific single producer of CFS2 aircraft during the time the game was in regular production. Therefore its quite easy for us to assess the level of effort required to move a plane out the door in CFS2 vs. CFS3

I would expect more CFS2 items to be available as its been out for a few more years then CFS3 & the CFS1 stuff was a direct import giving CFS2 a five or six year head start on available product.  Again, I do not believe that its any more difficult to do.

Quote:


My Korean sword style is called Haidong Gumdo.  I only hold a color belt in it but contact with the wooden practice swords (like those in "The Last Samurai") can be memorable.

Generally we stress Numchuck training during 1st Dahn, the Staff during 2nd & the Sword during 3rd.

Personally my favorite weapon is the staff or M-14.  

......
.....

Quote:


You mean the same thread where Oleg ran off because he could not answer the hard questions about his flight models?

The exact same questions he now seems to be trying to answer with BOB's all new flight models?

Interesting how the PF guys followed Oleg's lead & all bailed out really quick when the hard questions got asked about the games content and ability to re-enact WWII in the Pacific.

As for the aircraft visuals beauty is in the eye of the beholder. My pictures are direct screen captures & its funny how my copy of PF does not look as good on my screen as many of the posted PF pictures. PF does have nice water for a flight sim....

Quote:


This isn't about you so your personal excitement level is really of no importance except to yourself in this debate & is not valid as a proof of your point.

Based on requests to build & existing download patterns these planes are of great interest to many others & the fact that we like them moves them to the top of the production list.

The point you continue to miss, whether you like it or not, its our choice what to develop.  As you have said you are not happy with what we produce you can still go some where else, using the Lanc as an example,  like FP's CFS3 Lancaster or our CFS2 Lancaster which is now about 4 years old.

Hey imagine that, a Lanc is available in CFS3, thing is you had to pay for it, which may be the heart of your problem with CFS3.  The freeware guys should get off their collective butts & release these planes right now so we can get our new plane fix for free.

You ignore the fact that we have duplicated in CFS3 just about every plane we did for CFS2 and did it in less then a year. Had we stretched out production to the same rate we did in CFS2 I expect you would be a happy as pig in slop as you would be getting a new plane every now & then for the next year or so.

Problem is at the end of that extra year it would still be the same 105/100 CFS3/CFS2 split its been for the past year. Sorry we got them out so quickly.  

Picking a plane we have not chosen to release in itself is no proof of your contention, because as you stated a Lance is available in CFS3 even though y'all can't get it on the cheap.  

You don't really want the Lanc because you already have one. You really don't want any of the other planes we showed in the thread because they might already be available in some other sim.  Since you also said the Lanc that you don't really want would excite you,  one might wonder what y'all really do want?  

A freeware B-24 is under construction & like the Lanc it will be done when its done.




Those who worry that CFS3 freware development is dead or need a B-24 right now can pay FP for a copy.

I find it interesting you choose to stress the Lanc & ignore the other major RAF bombers that are now flying like Halifax, Manchester, Whitley, Blenheim, Battle & Wellington.  Then maybe these planes might be available in some other sim so, as you said,  you are not interested in them.

When its all said & done nothing you have stated demonstrates that the current state of CFS2 development is greater then CFS3 or that it has more varied aircraft available to it only that its been around longer.  

To suggest that a CFS3 is not still viable is to overlook the fact that our CFS3 B-17 has had 26,000 downloads in two years while our CFS2 version has only had 12,000 in 4 years.

BTW our CFS2 Lanc had about 9,000 downloads in 4 years so between it & the CFS2 B-17 they just about equal the CFS3 B-17's 2 year total dowloads.

Quote:


When you can demonstrate the active existence in CFS2 of two projects on the scale of CFS3's MAW & OFF, right down to the cows in the fields, you may have a point to debate. Until then all you have is an opinion, which you are entitled to, but so far there is not much hard data behind it.



Don't step on any Meadow Muffins, y'hear  

Quote:


Not to worry, this thread is just a light duty time killer. 

Quote:


If a hobby does not amuse & entertain you there is no point in doing it in the first place

People who go through life worrying about what others think of them never seem to manage to do much of anything since whatever they do will surely offend somebody.

As to the specifics of this thread I don't believe I was rude to anyone, did not call anyone a vulgar name, did not challenge their parentage, did not challenge their intelligence & I am still looking for the insults you said I have allegedly heaped on my 12 year old opponents.

BTW I  don't think the total traffic on the Simviation CFS2/3 forums is enough to give a visitor much of an impression one way or another.  That being said this thread is generating some well above average traffic like all X vs. X threads do & if the guys who run the site have a problem with me they can always tell me to take a hike.


Quote:


I really do hate it when someone tries to manage my free time & the planes will get done when they are done.  Actually,  I am not sure it really matters to you when we get done as IIRC you do not have CFS3.

Where's the yawn smiley?

Quote:


Most of the guys in the thread except for Mathias are in the UK or US & since I have lived in both places I will respectly disagree that I offened anyone who was not specifically looking to be offended.  

Quote:


Did not, did not & I am gonna tell you Mommy on you,  so there!!!  

Quote:


There are about 66 developers listed on the CFS3 MAW & OFF staff pages along with a number of others who need to be added so figure about 75 guys.

If you take a look at the names then run through the CFS2 planes etc listed for download here at Simviation & other CFS2 sites you will see that a large portion of them have been created by these guys.

Its generally felt that we have paid our dues, done all we wanted to do with CFS2 & it was time to move on to a bigger more effective sandbox CFS3.

This is not all bad for CFS2 as it left a lot of room for new guys like some of y'all to come into the hobby & make your mark.

At some point both these games will be history just like many before them & you will also move on.

Only one flight sim has stood the test of time, since Amiga'89 for me, & that is Falcon.  Like Dracula it has risen yet again as Falcon 4:Allied Forces.  The reason, I believe, is because its a true simulator & not just an air combat game.  FS has also had a good run IMHO because it stresses its simulator side over its game side.

BTW in re-reading this before I posted it the 75 developers number popped up. I will bet we have more developers working on MAW/OFF then this CFS2 board has active members.  

Quote:




Well I exaggerated just a little....truth is the cows don't do Meadow Muffins    That being said if we packaged them as aircraft & set up a loadout for them..."Muffins Away" at the push of a button.



Then we would be forced to do multi national loadouts because I don't think these things do Meadow Muffins. ???

Thing is that kind of project can get out of hand quickly.  If we Muffined the cows what kind of load factor would be required by the new CFS3 Infantry when they are caught in an open field by fighters planes?  

Quote:


Point taken.....GregP (SARGE - AvHistory) & I have been doing sim modification for about 17 years & some of other guys like Matthias (Ground Crew) pretty much as long.

Many of us including the three above have been testers & advisors to the developers of a number of the sims y'all have played.

We all know each other as well as you can after years over the net & many of us have met in person.

I really enjoy a spirited debate as by nature I am a competitive person, but I hope I do not step over the line & deliberately hurt someone's feelings.

GZR_Groundhog just released the new MAW terrain to us for testing this morning.  Some samples

Quote:


No problem, your thread gave as a chance to talk about what we are doing with CFS3. 

Hey guys,

Changed the title to something much more suitable.

Quote:


I used to have something about that, CFS2 worked fine.

Quote:

Lol!

Soon I will have to show development pics just like Bear, won't I?

Happy flying,



Bombardier

Quote:


I still have mine.  Was a Celeron 200 that was over-clocked to 450 running twin Voodoo's in SLI mode so I could play E/A's F-15E game which was bleeding edge at the time.

Now my granddaughter plays Cinderella & Barbie on it.  

Quote:

No but you can be if you wish. Start in a small way by doing things for yourself. Who knows where you will be several months from now? It's much easier now than when I started as all the tutes & utilities are available to help you.

The earlier sims like CFS1 or CFS2 can give you a good start. I progressed from CFS1 to CFS2 & from what Bear is saying many of the CFS3 guys did the same. I was never interested in CFS3 as it won't run at all well on my system. That's the only real reason so I can't comment on what it's like. There's still a place in this hobby for everyone if only they would stop fighting over which is the best.

Quote:


Nope, I'm not joking!

All the Developer's you mentioned above have been Developing for years, save for you and Corsair Freak

Regards,
Stratobat

Quote:


100% agreed. I just started by making silly little fictional missions that didn't work properly, but I slowly started learning. And also I had an 'exploration expedition' of the CFS2 main folder. And gradualy I started learning what everything does. And now look at me! I know what most things do and about the only thing I can't make is a visual model of an aircraft. That's how far anyone can go with a bit of brains, imaginitivity, motivation and time. Even people as young as 10 can do something like it. But Hagar we are not fighting over which is best anymore, although in a poll in the CFS3 forum more people liked CFS2. I'm not being pompous or anything, there was a poll that had those results. I voted CFS2

Stratobat, sorry I didn't make my point properly. I was to say that we had a good handful of 'old hands' at CFS2 dev and I guess Brandon and I are the "young 'uns" eh?

It would be nice to show MS that us CFS2 designers are absolutely capable of making a CFS4 out of CFS2. Then we could say "That's how much potential this has!".

That MAW Aircraft list is really... ermm what's the word -long.  Almost as long as the list of developed aircraft for STRIKE FIGHTERS, and almost as long as the list of aircraft that ship with the IL2/PACIFIC FIGHTERS Sim.
But it ain't nowhere near as long as the list of aircraft, panels, gauges, missions, campaigns, terrains, and tools that people have developed for CFS2.

However,  I think your stuff from MAW looks really good, and for those who are interested in this area of the War, unlike me, it should be a real blast.

Quote:


Just don't get shucked in awe IB.
Beside that the aircraft list is not complete (missing on the list are Walrus, Do24, couple of subversion of Fw190, Bf109 and Bf110 and some easter eggs not even mentioned anywhere, not to talk about the long list of vehicles, buildings, infrastructure, the new flight modelling etc etc pp) is MAW the largest third party addon that has ever been under developement for any flightsim.
CFS2 may have more planes by now, developed over the past six years, a few of them actually made by me,
some of  which are badly outdated by today's standard, others that can competite quite well.
Whatever, there is no fully out-developed theathre available for CFS2 outside the original core theathre,
yet you have to browse the wwww up and down for the addons.
There is for instance no European Theathre of operations available that would really satisfy.
I know what I'm talking about, been working on CFS2 ETO for about three years myself, yet we havn't been able to really make it shine.
There are some developements under construction, I know I know, but these are being developed for years now without a lot of progress.
I'm afraid the few that are left for CFS2 are not enough to handle that.
The nice thing about the MAW project is that for the first time the M$CFS developer community teamed up for a mutual efford as opposed to the small-small developement that we where used to in the old days.
That's a direct developement based on experience we made in the old days (that is when CFS2 was the current Sim)
All those many planes that you quote to have in CFS2 that CFS3 has not are actually made for the most part by exactly the same guys that develope MAW today, so you are praising those guy's past work and bash the very same guy's current work.
IMO you have nothing to contribute to the discussion because you obviously don't know what you're talking about.

Quote:

I agree, but it soon will surpass CFS2 unless more developers help out...

Quote:

This is getting ridiculous Bomber. You can't stop progress & right now CFS3 apparently has more potential. Some developers like Bear & Mathias feel they did as much as they could with CFS2 & rather than pack it in went on to the challenge of CFS3.

Meanwhile, people like me & IndioBlack (who knows far more than he is prepared to admit) plus plenty of others are still plodding on producing addons for CFS2. Creating anything worthwhile obviously takes time but we're still working in the background. Taking advantage of the work done by previous developers since CFS1 makes it much easier & I'm grateful to every single one of them. Newcomers like you prove that the demand is still there & you're helping by creating your own stuff. This is how it always was & we can't change that or influence a huge professional corporation like Microsoft in any way.

This thread is rapidly turning into what I feared.

In my opinion, flight sim's in general have lost the luster and market share they once held 5 years ago.  Don't agree?  Go to your local computer store and browse the controller shelves.  Five years ago, you saw a plethora of flight yokes and joysticks.  Now, all you see are game controllers and just a few joysticks.  I think FPS's are the dominant genre right now.

here we go... 

Quote:

I really don't get your point Bomber old chap. The unusual thing about CFS is that all three versions are different. They remain popular for much longer than the equivalent versions of FS as these are basically updates of the same sim. You won't find many people creating stuff for FS2002 now.

It's not likely that 50 experienced developers are going to suddenly spring up from nowhere but some of the old stagers are still around. There's also the newcomers like you which can only be good for the hobby. If downloads from the Fox Four site are anything to go by CFS2 still has a large following. Come to that, people are still downloading the missions we created for CFS1 back in the year dot.

That OFF stuff looks cool. Sort of like Wires Wings and Canvas for CFS3.

Bear, how did anyone make those CFS3 camels? They look cool!   8)

Getting 50 people to agree on anything sounds quite a task in itself.

Quote:


Yes I agree with you 100%.  Sadly so do the major publishers as they have pretty much bailed out of flight sims over the past 5 years leaving only UBI/SOFT releasing Combat Flight Sims.  They will not have a new offering till late '06 or early '07 provided they don't also pull the plug.

Quote:


Beware! I'm not from Saxony, and before you ask not from Bavaria either.



Quote:


Well, the sad thruth is like dcunning sais, there is no "succesfull" combat flight sim these days.
Someone remember the old original CombatFS site (not the sequel that's running under the same name today) and cfs2online, today Netwings?

You shut down your browser at midnight and return at 7:00am and you see six full pages of new posts.
That where the days!

Quote:

When your site gets working I'm finding out where

Quote:


He's right too