RedTiger

I'm glad to see the community helping out on this one. To be honest, I didn't see this as much of an improvement over the original one (and I sheepishly admit, I don't even know a thing about photoshop, let alone 3D modeling!), but it looks like its on the right track to be something great! :)

I can remember reading an interview with Pete Bonanni where he recalled his thoughts the first time he saw the F-16A. He thought "Wow, they finally got the right number of engines for a Fighter!". :D

He was referring to a much more recent version with an updated flight model displayed in one of those videos, not the original 1998 Falcon 4.0.

Wip out those shears and...de-bollocks away?! :crazy:

Hence why I asked why it was released to the public! ;) Its a tiny bit disingenuous to say that you have an awesome F-16 model that the pros said was spot-on but it just so happens it can't be experienced by the general public. Another thing I thought of...have those F-16 pilots experienced lots of sims? Hypothetical situation; If I'm a fighter pilot, and the only sims I've experienced were the professional-grade ones I train on and lets say, Falcon 3.0, my base of comparison for other commercial sims is going to be pretty weak. I might try Falcon4.0 and think "wow, this is pretty close" since I've never tried anything else. Thank you for explaining it better than I could. ;)

For the end user, I can think of a few Advantages: 1. Convenience and CP that is less Draconian and easy to live with. CP is built-in with Steam. To play a game downloaded through Steam, you HAVE to Launch it from the Steam client. The game is heavily integrated into Steam with no way for a lay person to easily access it in a form that works without Steam. 2. The games you own are tied to your account, not your computer. This helps with CP but also means you can download and access the game from anywhere. 3. Built-in multiplayer support. Disadvantages: 1. Same as an advantage; games you own are tied to your account. You will always need an internet connection to play them and to reinstall them. 2. Good luck with modding or using that 3rd-party development stuff. I don't even know how that would work. This would be easily to figure out though. Ask someone who plays IL2: 1946 through Steam if they can run any mods on their program. Also...surprise, surprise; Steam games can be cracked, or so I've heard. CP software reminds me of a dead bolt on an apartment door. Yeah it keeps the run of the mill burglars and crazy people out of your home. But if Johnny the axe murder REALLY wants to get in, he'll find a way.

No, every so often, like he said 1 or 2 weeks, a pop-up window will come up when you run the Steam client. Among other things, it advertises new games. You have to hit the little "next" button to view everything. Just having the BS under the simulation category is good advertising in of itself: http://store.steampowered.com/genre/Simulation/

You're forgetting the fact that thousands of people visit Steam's website on a daily basis. Finding this sim while browsing Steam could be the first time they've ever heard of it. It could make people aware of it that potentially would have never heard of it otherwise. Also, I read that pop-up! :) There have been some games that I never knew existed that I learned about from that pop-up! :)

Probably, just wanted to let him know in case he intended this to work with all missiles.

This sky mod: http://www.lockonfiles.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownloaddetails&cid=123&lid=831&ttitle=SkyColorMod_v.1.0#dldetails Attempts to change some of the colors to more muted ones. I think you can choose like a grayish one that will look more realistic when you have snow or rain on days without an overcast.

This mod is great, but from what I can see it only works on the Aim-120. I tried it with the Aim-9, R-73, and R-27 and it still looked like the old 2D one. Just thought I should let you know in case this was not intentional.

Why wasn't it availble to the public?

While that is certainly a vast improvement, it still just has this...sterile look to it. I've never even flown a plane before, let alone and F-16, but it still just looks like I'm on the world's smoothest riding steel rollercoaster. Other times, the way it looks is something that I could only describe as "floaty". Maybe thats the way it really is? I'm not saying anything from LOMAC's SFM planes is any better since they are lacking in other areas. The closest we can come to comparison would be a clean Su-25 with a light fuel load. The stalls and low speed handling in the first video are a lot better though, for sure. This youtube video has the HUD footage that I always like to keep in mind: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BVHxfk2uOI&feature=related MiG-29 guns kills at less than 200 knots? Oh my! ;) In one of those clips they even get down below 120 knots. I have yet to see any Falcon video show off the ability to still be able to dogfight at such a slow speed with an adversary that is supposed to reign supreme in that regard. Also take note that in few cases is the F-16 anywhere near its cornering speed, although you could argue that they've just cashed all their smash in to get that guns kills. Also note the altitude they're getting these kills at. Trying this in F4AF is like watching a 500 pound man trying to run the 100 meter dash.

Not to mention built-in advertising.

I didn't mean to give the impression that it did. This is like the third time something like this has happened. Maybe I need to elaborate more! :huh: Should read as: I was meaning to contrast what is good about it vs. what could be improved. :) EDIT: again, this is from flying F4AF and a bit of Red Viper. Don't know nothin about OF or Free Falcon X.0 or whatever number they're up to.

I cannot speak for anything other than F4AF and Red Viper here, but neither have realistic flight models. They differ in unrealisms. Falcon's is based on the F-16s doghouse chart, but it doesn't handle the extremes of the flight regimen very well. LOMAC's SFM planes (Fulcrum, Flankers, Eagle, Hog) "feel" better to some, but they have their own problems. They also don't handle the extremes very well. Falcon has particular problems once you get below 300 knots, in that the plane becomes a crippled whale and is unrealistically unresponsive to control inputs. Get down below 200 knots and compare what you experience to the HUD footage from the real thing. Both have scripted stalls and both sims do not do fighter jet justice in terms of thrust to weight ratios. Now, on the good side, Falcon does an excellent job of showing you the roll authority the F-16 gives you vs. the Russian fighters. There's a noticible ramp-up and ramp-down in the Flanker and Fulcrum with a tendency to have to correct unless you are very practiced in flying them.

Looking forward to it!!!

It made sense to me. Ideally you want the guy in a glass bubble with almost 3D visibility, unlimited by cockpit frame and such. Not sure about bathing suit...but I can see why you'd rather the pilot not have to where such things as a G suit and helmet. Might make it easier and more comfortable to move around to look around. The "wish you were dead" missiles are self-explanatory. :P I'd explain it as you wanting to have Superman flying around with BVR heat vision and a cool-looking outfit instead of those tights. :lol:

Far Cry 2's SecurROM was made public a couple weeks before it was released. Also, it very clearly stated as such on the back of the box that it requires an online activation. It doesn't say "you have x amount of them and you can revoke one by uninstalling, yada yada yada", but they did warn you about activations. Enough that it would have been enough for you to not purchase it and do some research. Things like this may not be possible to describe from the outset because the developer may not know from the outset! Just a few weeks ago I can remember Wags or EvilBivol saying that ED was in contact with Steam, presumably to discuss making BS available there. So, you could conclude that ED wasn't sure about its CP for the Western version until very recently. What you COULD be sure about is that it would have one. That was very clear from the beginning. I have yet to see a CP system that at least someone doesn't complain about. So I kinda saw this coming, no matter the CP used.

You don't have to have the CD in the drive continually. Ever play FC? If its anything like that (and I will assume it is this, being called a "weekly disk check" and all), it will simply say that the protection has expired and ask you to put the disk in. You put it in, it does its thing, and BAM, you're good for another week. I cannot see where anyone would rather have arbitrary activations over this unless even very brief contact, like less than it took you to install the program to begin with, between the CD/DVD and drive are not acceptable.

Strange that you would have a choice between this and a set number of activations. Who the hell would choose a set number of activations over a weekly disk check?? I appreciate this information. I hope this is the way it works in the Western version. :)

Niether do I. It was pretty much: *Glance at manual* "The stick is the wrong shape. It should be flat on the left side". *Close PDF file*. ;) I'd recognize that stick anywhere. I have a CH Fighterstick and its a very simplistic shame, thats probably why. :) I wouldn't be able to pick out the differences in say, an F-15 stick. When someone comments on the inaccuracy of a player made model on these boards, I usually don't see it until I look really closely. Look at the pickle button and TMS. They should be directly in line with each other. The pickle button shouldn't be to the side. Its because the side is round. It should be flat. Its a pet peeve of mine. You go to all that work but you can't get something like joystick 100% accurate. Not a deal breaker, just a little half-assed is all. :)

I don't think so. The moment I saw the picture in the manual, it didn't look right. Compare: vs. http://www.williamson-labs.com/images/f16-stick-157.jpg http://www.jetfighters.dk/back/simpic2.jpg or even a Cougar: http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41T23WD31ZL._SL500_AA280_.jpg The shape is wrong. Its too round on the left side. Now I ask you; why the hell would you go to all that trouble to make that realistic F-16 module for FSX and of all things f*ck up on the stick and not bother to get that right? :doh: I'd still buy it if I had FSX though. :D

I think you misunderstand. What I meant was "Lets not discuss this like its a fact if we do not know for certain that it is".

Thanks for that honest update. This is similar to some other CP methods. My copy of Far Cry 2 works in a similar way. In my honest opinion, I don't really like this and I'm worried about these things becoming more strict. I wonder at what point it will be when we no longer really own software, at least not in the way we used to, and it becomes more like "leasing" it. Sadly, I can only see piracy become MORE common if the trend continues, just out of either resentment or not wanting the hassle of this. OTOH, I did buy Far Cry 2 knowing full well that that I was limited in activations. This didn't bother me because I don't think I'll be playing it for years to come. Flight sims are a different matter. I'll see how this works out, I still intend to buy BS.