|
Home > Archive > Flight simulator > April 2005 > IL2-FB with PF add-on: Best, most complete WW2 sim ever!
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
IL2-FB with PF add-on: Best, most complete WW2 sim ever!
|
|
| James Calivar 2005-04-07, 7:01 pm |
| I don't think it's any exaggeration to say that IL2-FB with the PF add on is
the best-looking, best performing and most complete WW2 sim ever released.
I've been playing this game for a year now and have had a hard time finding
even one thing to complain about. What is you opinion?! :-) This sim has
it all, bombers, fighters, even some weird Polack planes that make for real
historical accuracy! I love IL2 and would definitely buy it again.
James
| |
| James Calivar 2005-04-07, 7:02 pm |
| "Don Burnette" <d.burnette@clothes.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Wb6dnWby3Nke3NTfRVn-gw@giganews.com...
quote:
> James Calivar wrote:
>
>
> I would agree with that totally.
> Incredible sim.
> Has more depth than any I have seen to day ( ok, still planning on
> installing Falcon4 soon), and the support from the developer is
> incredible...
>
Would you please install F4 already?!?!?! I need a n00B to shoot down.
| |
| scharmers@hotmail.com 2005-04-07, 7:02 pm |
|
James Calivar wrote:
quote:
> I don't think it's any exaggeration to say that IL2-FB with the PF
add on is
quote:
> the best-looking, best performing and most complete WW2 sim ever
released.
quote:
> I've been playing this game for a year now and have had a hard time
finding
quote:
> even one thing to complain about. What is you opinion?! :-) This
sim has
quote:
> it all, bombers, fighters, even some weird Polack planes that make
for real
quote:
> historical accuracy! I love IL2 and would definitely buy it again.
>
> James
Ah...yes, the wonders of Pacific Fighters. To be able to swoop down in
your Kate against the hapless Arizona at Pearl Harbor. To experience
the sheer terror of flying a Vindicator against the Akagi. Or, to even
parallel George Bush Sr.'s flight in his Avenger at the Marianas Turket
shoot........
......OR NOT.
Go back to SimHQ, fanboi. They miss you.
--scharmers
| |
| alq119_4spam@yahoo.com 2005-04-07, 7:02 pm |
| scharmers@hotmail.com wrote:
quote:
> Ah...yes, the wonders of Pacific Fighters. To be able to swoop down
in
quote:
> your Kate against the hapless Arizona at Pearl Harbor. To experience
> the sheer terror of flying a Vindicator against the Akagi. Or, to
even
quote:
> parallel George Bush Sr.'s flight in his Avenger at the Marianas
Turket
quote:
> shoot........
>
>
> .....OR NOT.
>
> Go back to SimHQ, fanboi. They miss you.
>
> --scharmers
Come now, scharmers. That's a little harsh. I'm detecting an
undercurrent in your post. Something about... torpedo bombers? Can't
quite make it out....
Regardless, it seems "fanboi" is becoming as prolific in the flight-sim
community as YUO=FAG on XXXXedcompany.com.
| |
| alq119_4spam@yahoo.com 2005-04-07, 7:02 pm |
| Angof wrote:
quote:
> WWII Online...by a country mile.
Ah yes. But is WW2OL a sim? I haven't played it myself, so I don't know
whether I'd class it as a sim or not. But I'll acknowledge it's often
hard to delineate between a game and a sim.
quote:
> I know iL2 is a great game.
And don't forget it either!!!
quote:
> Eh? Just pointing out an inaccuracy. At the moment there even the
most
quote:
> complete WWII sim and has nothing like 'it all'.
Talking about WW2 online again? Well - I can't say whether I'd class it
as a sim or not. Haven't tried it at all. A sim is in the Eye of the
Beholder and all that.
| |
| alq119_4spam@yahoo.com 2005-04-07, 7:02 pm |
| scharmers@hotmail.com wrote:
quote:
> ...Something about a near total lack of the actual ships involved in
> the Pacific Theatre (i.e. HOLY CATS WHY AM I SINKING A BRITISH
> BATTLESHIP IN PEARL HARBOR, HOLY CATS WHAT KIND OF CARRIER AM I
SINKING
quote:
> AT MIDWAY)
>
> ...Something about a dearth of Pacific Theatre maps that matter (of
> course, this is a limitation of the PF engine, which sucks in
expansive
quote:
> maps and high altitudes....)
>
> you know, stuff like that, and, oh yeah, torpedo bombers.
I feel your pain. CFS2 was great in that you could fly over HUGE areas.
Take off from Port Moresby, bomb Cape Gloucester & that channel there,
off Lae, and then make it back over the mountains to land. With
reasonably complex engine management & graphics that are still quite
nice today. Fair enough. BUT - you were doing it with brain-dead AI,
and FOUR wingman commands. Yikes! And there were no torpedo bombers & a
small ship list in the default release also. Pacific fighters does
everything that CFS2 did, only better. Except for the map sizes. And
ability to mod it.
I'm relating the two, because CFS2 is the only other Pacific related
sim in recent history. PF does a lot of things right. Honestly, the
reason I'm not too cut up about the lack of torpedo bombers is that I
always dug the land-based side of thing more. New Guinea, specifically.
Which is why the biggest gripe I have with PF is the small map size.
Besides, I saw a screenshot of a Japanese torpedo plane in one of the
Dev updates. A B6N. It'll be coming with the next patch. In "2 weeks".
| |
| G. Patricks 2005-04-07, 7:02 pm |
| Aces High has nice torpedo bombers...... 8-)
Icer
quote:
>On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:01:04 -0500, "James Calivar" <amheiserbush@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>I don't think it's any exaggeration to say that IL2-FB with the PF add on is
>the best-looking, best performing and most complete WW2 sim ever released.
>I've been playing this game for a year now and have had a hard time finding
>even one thing to complain about. What is you opinion?! :-) This sim has
>it all, bombers, fighters, even some weird Polack planes that make for real
>historical accuracy! I love IL2 and would definitely buy it again.
>
>James
>
| |
|
| James Calivar wrote:
quote:
> I don't think it's any exaggeration to say that IL2-FB with the PF
> add on is the best-looking, best performing and most complete WW2 sim
> ever released.
Not only is it an exaggeration the 'most complete' bit is untrue.
quote:
> I've been playing this game for a year now and have
> had a hard time finding even one thing to complain about. What is
> you opinion?! :-)
It's a great game...never played a sim or any other game that I couldn't
find anything to complain about though.
quote:
> This sim has it all, bombers, fighters, even some
> weird Polack planes that make for real historical accuracy! I love
> IL2 and would definitely buy it again.
No the sim does not have it all and is a WWII flight sim, not a WWII sim.
| |
| alq119_4spam@yahoo.com 2005-04-09, 6:32 pm |
| scharmers@hotmail.com wrote:
quote:
> ...Something about a near total lack of the actual ships involved in
> the Pacific Theatre (i.e. HOLY CATS WHY AM I SINKING A BRITISH
> BATTLESHIP IN PEARL HARBOR, HOLY CATS WHAT KIND OF CARRIER AM I
SINKING
quote:
> AT MIDWAY)
>
> ...Something about a dearth of Pacific Theatre maps that matter (of
> course, this is a limitation of the PF engine, which sucks in
expansive
quote:
> maps and high altitudes....)
>
> you know, stuff like that, and, oh yeah, torpedo bombers.
I feel your pain. CFS2 was great in that you could fly over HUGE areas.
Take off from Port Moresby, bomb Cape Gloucester & that channel there,
off Lae, and then make it back over the mountains to land. With
reasonably complex engine management & graphics that are still quite
nice today. Fair enough. BUT - you were doing it with brain-dead AI,
and FOUR wingman commands. Yikes! And there were no torpedo bombers & a
small ship list in the default release also. Pacific fighters does
everything that CFS2 did, only better. Except for the map sizes. And
ability to mod it.
I'm relating the two, because CFS2 is the only other Pacific related
sim in recent history. PF does a lot of things right. Honestly, the
reason I'm not too cut up about the lack of torpedo bombers is that I
always dug the land-based side of thing more. New Guinea, specifically.
Which is why the biggest gripe I have with PF is the small map size.
Besides, I saw a screenshot of a Japanese torpedo plane in one of the
Dev updates. A B6N. It'll be coming with the next patch. In "2 weeks".
| |
| alq119_4spam@yahoo.com 2005-04-11, 6:46 pm |
| scharmers@hotmail.com wrote:
quote:
> ...Something about a near total lack of the actual ships involved in
> the Pacific Theatre (i.e. HOLY CATS WHY AM I SINKING A BRITISH
> BATTLESHIP IN PEARL HARBOR, HOLY CATS WHAT KIND OF CARRIER AM I
SINKING
quote:
> AT MIDWAY)
>
> ...Something about a dearth of Pacific Theatre maps that matter (of
> course, this is a limitation of the PF engine, which sucks in
expansive
quote:
> maps and high altitudes....)
>
> you know, stuff like that, and, oh yeah, torpedo bombers.
I feel your pain. CFS2 was great in that you could fly over HUGE areas.
Take off from Port Moresby, bomb Cape Gloucester & that channel there,
off Lae, and then make it back over the mountains to land. With
reasonably complex engine management & graphics that are still quite
nice today. Fair enough. BUT - you were doing it with brain-dead AI,
and FOUR wingman commands. Yikes! And there were no torpedo bombers & a
small ship list in the default release also. Pacific fighters does
everything that CFS2 did, only better. Except for the map sizes. And
ability to mod it.
I'm relating the two, because CFS2 is the only other Pacific related
sim in recent history. PF does a lot of things right. Honestly, the
reason I'm not too cut up about the lack of torpedo bombers is that I
always dug the land-based side of thing more. New Guinea, specifically.
Which is why the biggest gripe I have with PF is the small map size.
Besides, I saw a screenshot of a Japanese torpedo plane in one of the
Dev updates. A B6N. It'll be coming with the next patch. In "2 weeks".
| |
| G. Patricks 2005-04-11, 6:46 pm |
| Aces High has nice torpedo bombers...... 8-)
Icer
quote:
>On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:01:04 -0500, "James Calivar" <amheiserbush@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>I don't think it's any exaggeration to say that IL2-FB with the PF add on is
>the best-looking, best performing and most complete WW2 sim ever released.
>I've been playing this game for a year now and have had a hard time finding
>even one thing to complain about. What is you opinion?! :-) This sim has
>it all, bombers, fighters, even some weird Polack planes that make for real
>historical accuracy! I love IL2 and would definitely buy it again.
>
>James
>
|
| |
|
|