quote:

---

>Hi All,
>
>We recently released Patch 1.0.7 for Falcon 4.0: Allied Force. It will
>take MP to new heights with other improvements too. Strongly urge
>everyone to update it.
>
>_________________________________________________________
>Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
>Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

quote:

---

>On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 07:03:09 GMT, WyleCoyote@cactus.com wrote:
>On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 18:19:02 -0500, C3PO <C3PO@forums.simradar.com>
>wrote:
>
>Uh huh .... one step forward .... three steps back
>
>Hack .... break .... hack .... break ..... hack ..... break
>
>The list is long and getting longer with each patch.
>
>It would be appropriate if you give up at 1.08

quote:

---

> On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 18:19:02 -0500, C3PO <C3PO@forums.simradar.com>
> wrote:
>
> Uh huh .... one step forward .... three steps back
>
> Hack .... break .... hack .... break ..... hack ..... break
>
> The list is long and getting longer with each patch.
>
> It would be appropriate if you give up at 1.08
>
>
>
>
>

quote:

---

> Wyle - Obviously, you would be much happer, with games/sims that got NO
> support from the mfg, and NO updates and/or patches! Perhaps a console is
> more to your liking...
>
> Thanks for the info C3PO, your support of the flight sim community, is
> much
> appreciated by most!!
>
>
>
> Don Burnette
>
>
>
>
> <WyleCoyote@cactus.com> wrote in message
> news:rcos82l0f2lm1uu3a2pa04u00qatb1agrp@4ax.com...
>
>

quote:

---

> Well actually I have to say that I like reading WyleCoyote's posts - they
> keep me amused. And when you look at the patch log for the new AF v1.07
> patch it does seem to be the case that the latest patch is fixing things
> that were damaged by the last few patches. Theres nothing new there
> really.
>
> I have to say that I havent played Allied Force pretty much since I bought
> it. Its far too close to the original for me to bother getting into it
> again now. Im a bit jaded on the graphics and gameplay after all these
> years. Its a real shame Allied Force didnt provide more besides a bit of
> tinkering to the original F4. I actually stopped flying an EF2000 in
> FreeFalcon3 when Allied Force came out and I really regret it. FF3 was
> better by far IMO - I actually had a lot of fun with it - and it was free!
> And it still looks far better than AF does. Maybe I'll get back into
> Falcon via the FF route someday but Im not impressed with the AF game at
> all.
>
> The developers are standing by their product which is nice to see but for
> goodness sake lets see some imaginative additions to the game from now on
> rather than just tinkering with poxy things like radar submodes and piffle
> like that. Lets see some new flyable planes with cockpits, new graphics,
> new AI routines for the ground war, etc!
>
> Nats
>

quote:

---

>Hi All,
>
>We recently released Patch 1.0.7 for Falcon 4.0: Allied Force. It will
>take MP to new heights with other improvements too. Strongly urge
>everyone to update it.
>
>_________________________________________________________
>Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
>Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

quote:

---

>Wyle - Obviously, you would be much happer, with games/sims that got NO
>support from the mfg, and NO updates and/or patches! Perhaps a console is
>more to your liking...
>
>Thanks for the info C3PO, your support of the flight sim community, is much
>appreciated by most!!
>
>
>
>Don Burnette
>
>
>
>
><WyleCoyote@cactus.com> wrote in message
>news:rcos82l0f2lm1uu3a2pa04u00qatb1agrp@4ax.com...
>

quote:

---

>So angry
>
>_________________________________________________________
>Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
>Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

quote:

---

> On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 15:59:07 -0500, "Don Burnette"
> <burnetted@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Oh yeah support ....
>
> No ... they just need quit wasting time trying to fix the old spagetti
> and move on to a 2006 state of the art sim.
>
> But you see, the real problem is Lead Pursuit isn't a developer at
> all. They're a patcher. They don't have the horsepower to
> execute fixing key areas of F4, let alone develop, so they continue to
> fiddle.
>
> Eventually, people will wise up but for some it obviously is going to
> be later rather than sooner. I'd say based on results to date, it is
> going to be real interesting to see the result if LP is crazy enough
> to really try a new sim, aka., meaning a major rewrite of key areas.
> They don't have the resources to do anything else.
>
> I assume you are flying 1.07, I'm glad you like it .... have fun
> flying missions solo cause the AI still doesn't work.
>
> Wake up man .......
>

quote:

---

>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
> Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

quote:

---

> What's pretty gratifying is the reaction to AF form within the
> profession. Hardware companies are also extremely keen to work with us
> especially considering the multi-threaded aspect of the simulation. The
> future is good

quote:

---

> "C3PO" <C3PO@forums.simradar.com> wrote in message
> news:1150362678.19486@forums.simradar.com...
>
> I have to say from someone who used to play many simulations and really
> enjoyed Tornado, EF2000 and TAW that this kind of statement means
> absolutely nothing to me. I couldnt give a damn about respect in developer
> circles and 'multi threading' whatever that is! All I want is a great new
> refreshing simulation to play instead of all the rehashes and arcade
> games.
>
> True innovation is practically dead in the genre and I for one am really
> sad about it when I remember how excited I was playing flight simulator on
> my ZX81 all those years ago. The PC market has always had loads of flight,
> naval, tank and space sims which used to be the best game you could get
> and the pinnacle of gaming evolution. THese games got me into PC gaming.
> But these days there are no new sims worth mentioning. AF is a pretty dull
> rehash and thats pretty much all I have to say about it. X3 god dont
> mention it. Silent Hunter 3 well its not mad but its still a sequel. Are
> there any others?
>
> You lot really need to move Falcon 4 on not rest on making rehashes. I for
> one will not be buying anything that looks like Falcon 4 in the future Ive
> had enough of it to last my lifetime. We need a new sim to play.
>
> Nats
>

quote:

---

>
> I always wondered why Microsoft wouldn't try their hand at a modern combat
> flight simulation. The Flight Simulator series are very popular and always
> have done well. Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator games were very

quote:

---

> as well. Just make an F-16, F/A-18, or even an F-22 sim with dynamic
> campaign. It'd probably be a hot seller too.

quote:

---

> My $0.02
>
>

quote:

---

>But you see, the real problem is Lead Pursuit isn't a developer at
>all. They're a patcher. They don't have the horsepower to
>execute fixing key areas of F4, let alone develop, so they continue to
>fiddle.

quote:

---

>Eventually, people will wise up but for some it obviously is going to
>be later rather than sooner. I'd say based on results to date, it is
>going to be real interesting to see the result if LP is crazy enough
>to really try a new sim, aka., meaning a major rewrite of key areas.
>They don't have the resources to do anything else.

quote:

---

> On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 22:04:45 GMT, WyleCoyote@cactus.com wrote:
>
>
>
> That's twice you mention "not enough resources". How do you come to
> that conclusion (genuine question)?
>
> For me, the proof is in the pudding. Yes F4 A/F is just a patched up
> F4 - we all know that - it was never meant to be anything else -
> other than, perhaps, a method of establishing a financial base for a
> new product.
>
> If LP come up with a new sim as a result of AF sales, then I'll be
> delighted. Whether (or not) they have the necessary resources to do so
> is irrelevant. They don't *owe* us a new sim - much as we'd all like
> to see it happen.
>
> Adamski.

quote:

---

>From the very beginning, F4 was released unfinished. If you recall,

quote:

---

> "Not enough resources."
> Microprose fired the original team, because of lack of resources. The
> original team wanted so bad to finish it, that they did so, also with
> not enough resources. Wasn't until the community got ahold of it that
> it blossomed with fixes and extras. All with no "resources" except a
> desire to make it better. (Read, free.)
> But priorities got jumbled. Some wanted FM's, some wanted skins and
> objects, some wanted better avionics, etc. causing some of the
> community to splinter. And again, because of lack of resources, (read,
> money.) testing, editing, etc. could not be as thorough as it could
> have been, had there been "resources."
> Some patches, edits, fixes, broke other patches, edits, fixes.
> Politics aside as to who did what, where, when, why, LP's approach,
> IMHO, was to
> make the base as solid as they could, without splintering, so that
> everyone was on the same page. Then mod, fix, whatever, on a
> one-at-a-time basis, so if anything DID break something else, it was
> easier to find and fix the problem without having to sort thru dozens
> of community mods to figure it out.I like this approach, and think that
> in the long run, if left to their own pace, it WILL get progressively
> better.
> However, the original F4 code was/has been more problematic than ANYONE
> ever expected, and had there been resources in the very beginning when
> it was fresh, so much more would have been done and known. An example
> of this is the numerous patches that LP has already had to do.
> Just wish everyone wouldn't make it out to be a competition between FF,
> or AF, or OF,
> or BMS, or RP, or...............................................ALL
> have their good and bad points, for whatever reason. The REAL deal is
> that they are ALL Falcon4! And a complete, bells and whistles dynamic
> sim is what they ALL had in mind and were/are still trying to make. Too
> bad it's not all one team..........it's the human factor that has
> screwed the pooch for the myriad of problems that have plagued this
> sim........Just think.........if it was one team, one goal, with no
> concern of sales or recognition, the sales AND recognition would/could
> have been astronomical! %^)
> E-Man
>

quote:

---

>On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 18:19:02 -0500, C3PO <C3PO@forums.simradar.com> wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>We recently released Patch 1.0.7 for Falcon 4.0: Allied Force. It will
>take MP to new heights with other improvements too. Strongly urge
>everyone to update it.
>
>_________________________________________________________
>Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
>Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

quote:

---

>There are some people who revel in being professional whiners.
>Reasoning is not part of their gameplan because they are bitter and
>angry for whatever reason. I feel for their partner .
>
>Yes, we've certainly worked hard further improving Allied Force more
>than many other developers and sales remain strong a year after
>release. The reaction to 1.0.7 has been tremendous and we'll continue
>to support Allied Force to a certain extent during the development of
>the next product.
>
>What's pretty gratifying is the reaction to AF form within the
>profession. Hardware companies are also extremely keen to work with us
>especially considering the multi-threaded aspect of the simulation. The
>future is good
>
>_________________________________________________________
>Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
>Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

quote:

---

>On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 22:04:45 GMT, WyleCoyote@cactus.com wrote:
>
>
>
>That's twice you mention "not enough resources". How do you come to
>that conclusion (genuine question)?
>
>For me, the proof is in the pudding. Yes F4 A/F is just a patched up
>F4 - we all know that - it was never meant to be anything else -
>other than, perhaps, a method of establishing a financial base for a
>new product.
>
>If LP come up with a new sim as a result of AF sales, then I'll be
>delighted. Whether (or not) they have the necessary resources to do so
>is irrelevant. They don't *owe* us a new sim - much as we'd all like
>to see it happen.
>
>Adamski.

quote:

---

>
>Adamski wrote:
>
>"Not enough resources."
>Microprose fired the original team, because of lack of resources. The
>original team wanted so bad to finish it, that they did so, also with
>not enough resources. Wasn't until the community got ahold of it that
>it blossomed with fixes and extras. All with no "resources" except a
>desire to make it better. (Read, free.)
>But priorities got jumbled. Some wanted FM's, some wanted skins and
>objects, some wanted better avionics, etc. causing some of the
>community to splinter. And again, because of lack of resources, (read,
>money.) testing, editing, etc. could not be as thorough as it could
>have been, had there been "resources."
>Some patches, edits, fixes, broke other patches, edits, fixes.
>Politics aside as to who did what, where, when, why, LP's approach,
>IMHO, was to
>make the base as solid as they could, without splintering, so that
>everyone was on the same page. Then mod, fix, whatever, on a
>one-at-a-time basis, so if anything DID break something else, it was
>easier to find and fix the problem without having to sort thru dozens
>of community mods to figure it out.I like this approach, and think that
>in the long run, if left to their own pace, it WILL get progressively
>better.
>However, the original F4 code was/has been more problematic than ANYONE
>ever expected, and had there been resources in the very beginning when
>it was fresh, so much more would have been done and known. An example
>of this is the numerous patches that LP has already had to do.
>Just wish everyone wouldn't make it out to be a competition between FF,
>or AF, or OF,
>or BMS, or RP, or...............................................ALL
>have their good and bad points, for whatever reason. The REAL deal is
>that they are ALL Falcon4! And a complete, bells and whistles dynamic
>sim is what they ALL had in mind and were/are still trying to make. Too
>bad it's not all one team..........it's the human factor that has
>screwed the pooch for the myriad of problems that have plagued this
>sim........Just think.........if it was one team, one goal, with no
>concern of sales or recognition, the sales AND recognition would/could
>have been astronomical! %^)
>E-Man

quote:

---

>The only thing I have to say is what do people expect for the price? It
>can't be beat.
>I know nobody could be dumb enough to think they were getting an all
>new sim at that price.

quote:

---

> Oh, I know, LOMAC will be dynamic on it's NEXT release...
>

quote:

---

> "HockeyTownUSA" <cyberpilot@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Y8SdnTl4qtmmuQ_ZnZ2dnUVZ_oOdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> successful
>
> I'd love a new "F-22 sim with dynamic campaign" or maybe a new Eurofighter
> sim with a DC, but it's not going to happen in my simming lifetime so I'm
> sticking with Total Air War and EF2000. Why won't it happen?

quote:

---

>

quote:

---

> So I don't think we'll ever see a feature-packed dedicated flight sim which
> can replace the DID sims, or even the older Microprose F-117 sim. Wasn't
> there also a Joint Strike Fighter sim? You won't see that again either.

quote:

---

> On 16 Jun 2006 11:55:50 -0700, "bradclark1@msn.com"
> <bradclark1@msn.com> wrote:
>
>
> Naw ..... that's an excuse that has always been floated out there
> that's bullshit and has been contradicted by many users in pulbic
> forums when that statement has been made over the years, including me.

quote:

---

>
> What do you mean over the years? F4AF just came out!
>

quote:

---

>
> I think he's referring to it being the original F4 from Microprobe, just
> with a whole lot of bugs fixed and some new content.

quote:

---

>
> Someone wrote:
>
> Thats enough for a twenty dollar price tag and a rerelease of a sim
> that was hard to find.
> What do you expect for 20 bucks?
> It's worth that to just not having to do the dance. For me it is,
> anyway.
>

quote:

---

> I didn't take sides in the matter, just explained what he was referring to.
> I bought the game the week it was released btw.

quote:

---

> Hi All,
>
> We recently released Patch 1.0.7 for Falcon 4.0: Allied Force. It will
> take MP to new heights with other improvements too. Strongly urge
> everyone to update it.
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
> Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

quote:

---

>Hehe, well the last time there was a rant from someone about Allied
>Force we ended up selling a few extra boxes as a result of that thread.
>I might start linking more screenshots soon.
>
>_________________________________________________________
>Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
>Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

quote:

---

>There are some people who revel in being professional whiners.
>Reasoning is not part of their gameplan because they are bitter and
>angry for whatever reason. I feel for their partner .
>

quote:

---

>Yes, we've certainly worked hard

quote:

---

>than many

quote:

---

>release. The reaction to 1.0.7 has been tremendous and we'll continue
>to support Allied Force to a certain extent during the development of
>the next product.
>
>What's pretty gratifying is the reaction to AF form within the
>profession. Hardware companies are also extremely keen to work with us
>especially considering the multi-threaded aspect of the simulation. The
>future is good
>
>_________________________________________________________
>Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
>Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

quote:

---

> On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 12:08:09 -0500, C3PO <C3PO@forums.simradar.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hee hee ..... that's your story and you stick to it.
>
>

quote:

---

> Make sure you have the MPEG 2 codecs from the microsoft site on your
> system and latest video drivers -- that cured it for a few others. LGB
> stuff might be examined in the next patch.
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
> Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

quote:

---

>Let's see -- a new development house with its first release securing
>sales well into

quote:

---

>
>_________________________________________________________
>Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
>Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

quote:

---

>On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 03:55:06 -0500, C3PO <C3PO@forums.simradar.com>
>wrote:
>
>You didn't develop anything .... you just patched someone else's
>product. Fantasy world .... hee hee ... keep saying it over and over
>.... I wanna work for a real developer ....
>
>

quote:

---

>On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 18:19:02 -0500, C3PO <C3PO@forums.simradar.com>
>wrote:
>
>Did you go to PR/Publicity school to learn all that bullshit or does
>it just come naturally?
>
>In any case it's always comical to watch a bullshitter in action.
>

quote:

---

>
> _________________________________________________________
> Posted via the -Web to Usenet-

quote:

---

>
> It'll be Firefox simulator, where you simply have to think in russian, and
> watch your monitor as all targets are destroyed!! There may be a licence to
> use Clint Eastwood's likeness for the pilot!! Can't wait for this gem, does
> anyone know if it is available for preorder, or if it will be getting
> released via Steam??? LMFAO!!!

quote:

---

> I wold LOVE to see the amount of dedication in a modern day simulation
> that was put into Falcon 4, or Jane's F-15, Longbow 2, or F/A-18. Those
> games are/were great, with a great deal of resources poured into them. If
> I won the lottery tomorrow I would probably fund my own flight sim
> development project. I would probably never make back my money, but I
> would do it because I love it.

quote:

---

> I'd suggest the following:
>
> 1. Make sure ports 2934 & 2935 are forwarded on your router (if you
> have one)
>
> 2. Update to 1.0.7 (tremendous MP play)
>
> 3. Try hooking up to multivipers server. You'll need a voice ap called
> TeamSpeak for communications and you can get details here:
> http://www.multiviperforums.com/phpBB2/index.php
>
> 4. Then it's just a matter of sticking in the IP address, press
> connect, enter the password and you're there!
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
> Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!