cfs3 or PF

[AvHistory]

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.

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.

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

[AvHistory]

Bearcat99,

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

BEAR

[BlakJakofSpades]

impressive...

[Oleg_Maddox]

[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.

[AvHistory]

[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.

[pete]

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

[Bearcat99]

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.

[IndioBlack]

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?

[Beery1]

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.

[james007]

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

[kool352]

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.

[BlakJakofSpades]

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.

[IndioBlack]

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.

[BlakJakofSpades]

"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?

[Beery1]

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.