CFS3 vs Il-2 FB

[Dakota93]

I was not going to comment any further past my first reply but feel it is called for. I have read alot worse than CFS3 sucks on various IL-2 forums, including posts that  ridicule freeware CFS2/3 designers.  >:( I saw a poll at another site, that had to be deleted because there wer 150 votes placed for IL-2 from just 3 IP addresses.

I respect the work Oleg and his team have done, an feel I have an idea of how much work is involved after spending a year working with a great team to assemble what is in essence a new game based on the CFS3 engine, freeware to boot.

Someone making a similar post in an IL-2 forum would be labeled ***** (figure it out)

[BEAR_-_AvHistory]

Bill Bill,

>>>Well certainly if you think FB sucks,<<<

There you go again. Y'all are really reaching with your word games & now are just making things up.

[1danny]

calliong either of these GAMES a SIM is ridiculous.
They are GAMES you PLAY them.

I have only seen one person with a Simulator that is in the process of being built.

Any one that would make fun or slam any of the modelers is nuts.
If it were not for all the 3rd party stuff I'd would have chucked cfs 3 2 years ago. In fact it was a coffee coaster untill I found simviation and S.O.H.

I tend to play cfs2for a few weeks then cfs3 then AEP
I kinda binge witv each one .even ils2 orig.
Why ain't there a il2forum here?

[Scorpiоn]

This is kind of ridiculous.  Like Woody said, nobody's opinion is going to be changed, so why in the world is everybody getting so flustered?

I, personally, like CFS3 better, although I would say it's way too arcade-ish.  I like the fact that IL-2's flight models aren't so simplified as CFS3's but you're either stalled-out-of-of-your-mind, or flying normally, there is no in between, and you're stuck with what Ubi Soft decides is best.  At any rate, Il-2's scenery is hideous, and the most of the aircraft are just different variants. (There's only a handful of distinct German aircraft) The tracers are much better than CFS3's, which is pretty dang important.

CFS3 actually runs better on my ol' 500Mhz system with full settings that Il-2 does with half settings, and the sound in Il-2 is screwier than CFS3.

Basically, out of the box, with only official updates, Il-2 is better than CFS3.  But CFS3 has potential to expand much faster than IL-2 can ever dream of.  I quite frankly don't truly like either of them all too much, because CFS3 plays like an oversimplified console game, and I have yet to find an add-on I like, and Il-2 is much too limited.  I'd go back to CFS2, but CFS3 has spoiled me with it's auto-gen scenery. I'm basically still wishing for a CFS3 engine and FS2004 realism fusion.

All that talk, and I don't think I said anything new.

[Scorpiоn]

Wait, I take that back.

Amongst the whordes of add-ons (including AvHistory's, sorry Bear) I downloaded, I kept two: the Groundcrew's Bf 110 and the Swastika pack for the default German planes.

[BEAR_-_AvHistory]

605,

>>>the Groundcrew's Bf 110<<<

What's to be sorry about, if you read the words you will see the GC Bf-110 has our models in it  ;D

Mathias & his Ground Crew have provide a large number of excellent visuals to AvHistory over the years & we have in return provided flight & damage models to them.

>>>CFS3 actually runs better on my ol' 500Mhz system with full settings that Il-2 does with half settings<<<

This I find amazing since I personally cant get full settings on any of my machines under 1.6 & even the 1.6 can get slow.

It would be of great interest to learn your game settings, cfs.cfg choices including options, Composite texture budgets.xml,  composite scenery budget.xml & screen resolution as you have somehow made a major breakthrough.

This info could be used to update the CFS3 tutorials at SOH.

In my case CFS3 from the early betas was playable at very reduced settings on both my 1000 & 950 machines but will not run at a playable level on my 450.

My full settings machine is an AMD 2.4:  

System - Home Made
AMD XP2400
Memory 1 GB PC2100
FX-5600/128MB
SBlive 5.1
XP-Pro
DX-9.0b Final

Game Settings
1280X1024X32
Overall slider @ 5
Aircraft slider @ 5
Terrain slider @ 5
Scenery slider @ 5
Effects slider @ 5
Clouds slider @ 1
Shadows Button ON
Reflections Button ON
T&SL Button ON

BEAR - AvHistory

[Scorpiоn]

Oh, don't get me wrong Bear, AvHistory's flight models are very convincing, but it's usually the visual models that don't meet up.  Just yesterday I downloaded the F4U-4 and was quite convinced of the flight dynamics.  What I didn't like was the external textures, they had a sort of pixelation to them.  The VC could use some touching up, since looking around will put your head half outside the glass.  Even though they're not needed, the wings don't fold and the tailhook doesn't work.  Various little annoyances like this, I could solve, but I'd need the source files to do so.  And since it seems everyone's satisfied but me, why bother anyone about it? ::)

My performance is a tricky issue, because many games will consider my CPU so outdated it will deactivate features.  Take Command and Conquer Generals: Zero Hour for instance.  I had to force the game through .ini's to display the "shell map".  Similarly, CFS3 does not allow me to really use the CFS3 configuration utility.  Technically it does, but all it lets me do is modify the 1-5 detail slider that you can do from the UI screen in CFS3.  No anti-aliasing options or anything like that.  I run 1600x1200 at 32 colors or whatever, since 800x600 @ 16 offers no difference.  I usually run detail settings at 5,3,4,2,1 or 5,4,3,2,1 with all the bottom three options checked.

Dell Inspirion T500 XPS - Upgraded

Microsoft Windows XP Home
Motherboard: Dunno.
CPU: Intel Pentium III 500Mhz
Video: PNY NVidia GeForce4 Ti4200 64MB
RAM: 512MB
Sound: Voyetra TurtleBeach or something like that
DX9.0A

Usually around 8.5-10.2 FPS, but for some reason around bomber formations or airfields FPS drops to around 4. :P To me, 10 is good, and 15 is plenty, but I only get 15 by looking at the sky. ::)

I'm often amazed by my little computer that could, and am usually afraid to do anything to upset the balance it has, so I don't tinker too much with it except start up options.  Using MSConfig from Start>Run, I try to turn off all those annoying programs that start themselves, but XP doesn't seem to agree with that the way 98 did.

Sorry if 10 FPS dissapoints you. Two things I don't need too much of to enjoy a sim is FPS and poly counts.

[BEAR_-_AvHistory]

605,

No problem with the visual as beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

[farmerdave]

Bear, where did you get the Enterprise from?

[randombeaner]

Bear, where did you get the Enterprise from?

you can get the enterprise and other AC carriers from
http://www.isoliti4gatti.com/index.htm

[BEAR_-_AvHistory]

Corrado La Posta who works with us on our 1% Italian aircraft has the following CFS3 carriers on his site.

USA - Lexington, Saratoga, Yorktown, Enterprise, Hornet

IJA - Akagi, Kaga, Soryu, Hiryu

Add in some AvHistory 1% planes & it looks like the Coral Sea & Midway

[Woodlouse2002]

Also it would be interesting to hear if anyone else is getting the game to be actually playable on machines of less then 750mhz & what their settings are.

By playable I mean run the campaigns without display or flight model problems or play online without hardware issues.

BEAR - AvHistory

I run CFS3 on a 700mhz Duron.
Overall slider @ 3
Aircraft slider @ 5
Terrain slider @ 3
Scenery slider @ 3
Effects slider @ 4
Clouds slider @ 1

I get playable framerates most of the time. The exception being when the sky's get crowded. No display or flight model problems that I know of. The only times I get problems is when I start to run out of RAM. Then the terrain textures start doing funny things.

[cssc]

well i have both il2 and cfs3. i find il2 the best because it works with no stuttering on my computer. i have tried for a week to get cfs3 to run smoothly but i can't so now i jsut play il2.

[Iroquois]

I've been getting used to Il-2 and it's not so bad. No as bad as Lock On. I've got both CFS3 and Il-2 to run smoothly now. BTW, Il-2 fans, theres a 2.04 patch out not that fixes some minor issues and adds a few things to the game.
http://www.il2sturmovik.com/#news0

[alreadydead]

I watched the exact same thing happen to the computer. I was chasing a target plane, it hadn't taken any damage. I was about 900 feet behind him. We entered a cloud, and as we exited the cloud he blew to pieces. Nothing else happened. No lightning. It's a bug in the software. It's somewhat rare. There are strange physics in the clouds. Try flying through one during a stall. I found myself being flipped like a hamburger once. I think planes blow up instantly in clouds because of this. The cloud induces strange physics, the plane exceeds some limiting parameter, and the program kills the plane without warning because it has no other option.