Great news for the hardcore sim market...

[Force_Feedback]

I think it was in the "Pretty big news for the future" thread. Which sounds like the ultimate in flight sim when they finish it.

 

Nice words, they outline exactly what their "problems" are. :|

[Groove]

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/new-for-you/top-sellers/-/videogames/468642/ref=pd_ts_tb_h/102-5445525-0473719

[SUBS17]

Nice words, they outline exactly what their "problems" are. :|

 

Well from what I see the problem is wanting information thats not available e.g the Hornet Tac manual. But my understanding is that if you have the startup and shut down procedures then you're pretty much got enough data to model an aircraft of F4s level. As for the weapons part you can apply what you know and take a guess for the rest. Later on if more information were to be made available then you could just patch it.

[VMFA-Blaze]

Yes this all sounds really super and I truley love Lock on but there really are some problems here regarding the Engine.......

 

When I'm flying say Pacific Fighters for example there really seems to be other things going on, and I mean I feel like I'm not the only one there.....

 

Now with Lock on theres a lot less happening, the flight models are superb as well as the graphics but there really seems to be something missing ........

 

When Lockon was first released I was creating a campaign that was based on one of USAFHTL old Flanker 2.5 campaigns that was called "The Peninsula Is Not Enough" .....

 

Some of you might remember that one, it has a lot of things going on in it, theres action happening on several fronts and utilizes allmost every type of aircraft, ship and helicopter available.....

 

Well needless to say after the action began to heat up my system completley froze and I had to reboot......

 

Now that was with an older system then I have now but I'm quite sure that results even today would be about the same.......

 

So I really think that the present engine has some problems, and the code needs to reworked somewhat ......

 

I haven't done any real programming in quite some time but personally feel that this is needed and I really would like to hear about some work being done in this respect...

 

The addons are awsome and I guess that ED is aware of Lock on's short comeings and hopefully are resolving some of these issues.......

 

Does anyone else concur with this.......

 

~S~

 

 

Blaze

[SUBS17]

I don't know, with FCs latest patches lockon can handle alot more objects than before. On todays current high end pcs it should not be a problem. There again your reference to Pacific Fighters is spot on. The new engine should be able to handle 100 players or more plus surface objects. For me the big difference between Lockon and any other sim is the level of detail in multiplayer. The thing you mentioned about something being missing is essentially other players. If you're talking ai then they aren't there because no body put them there. Perhaps a feature such as civ objects in the settings were added which featured extra air traffic. Such a feature would involve inbound and outbound aircraft, vehicles on the ramp(forklifts/tankers/tractors/security patrols). Couple this with multi-voice radio traffic and you have the begining of full immersion. If such a feature were on a carrier then it would have ground crew as well as continuous flight rotation of a buisy carrier. The pilot has to wait his turn before taking off. Already FC features much improved ATC ai, the other day I was ordered to hold while an incoming human player was on finals. Now if only they added broadcast reception so that I can hear my human wingmans response and reply when he made the decision to land(like Pacific Fighters) then everything goes up that little bit more.(the only reason I was told to hold is because I asked permission to takeoff)

[Dark_Sceptre]

If you lot & Eagle wanted an immersive environment, you'd be flying in one today. What you have now is what you asked for - a visually stunning flight simulator.

 

The fact that so few of you are capable of looking beyond the immediate visuals (which btw are far from bad in F4:AF), really says it all. I could tell you that once you take off in a fully simulated war, you don't have the TIME nor the inclination to pay any attention to the visuals, because you are too busy sorting out radar returns and trying to make your assigned target on time and in one piece. But clearly that holds absolutely no value here - cause you simply aren't interested in that type of simulator.

[GGTharos]

If you lot & Eagle wanted an immersive environment, you'd be flying in one today. What you have now is what you asked for - a visually stunning flight simulator.

 

The fact that so few of you are capable of looking beyond the immediate visuals (which btw are far from bad in F4:AF), really says it all. I could tell you that once you take off in a fully simulated war, you don't have the TIME nor the inclination to pay any attention to the visuals, because you are too busy sorting out radar returns and trying to make your assigned target on time and in one piece. But clearly that holds absolutely no value here - cause you simply aren't interested in that type of simulator.

 

 

Right. Tell ya what: The graphics in F4 stink. Big time. Far from bad? They stink so much it's not even funny.

And you know, they're all part of the immersion - how can you actually say that any part of a simulator is not important? When I want to drop some GBU's, I play F4AF.

When I want to do CAS or have a great dogfight, I play LOMAC BECAUSE IT LOOKS MUCH LESS LIKE A SILLY LITTLE GAME. Get the difference yet?

 

Anyway, if you're so busy getting to your target on time and in one piece, what're you doing here? -.-

[leafer]

Cuz before they can get busy, they have to turn the pc on, defrag a million times then reboot then defrag then load all the different versions and etc. In the mean time, they log on and the first place they go to is here and pray to god that ED hadn't done anything that would threaten their beloved game. Then they wait for the blue van.

[Dark_Sceptre]

Yes do ignore everything I said and keep ranting. It seems to be what you're proficient at. I think I'll go away now and leave you sad lot to plot how best to take over the world. Most of the people who had some perspective and the ability to think in a rational fashion seem to have gone on to greener pastures already.

 

Hmm. Is that a grassy meadow I see? Yep. Maybe I should just .. yes.. I think I will head over there instead. Byeee...

[GGTharos]

Yes do ignore everything I said and keep ranting. It seems to be what you're proficient at. I think I'll go away now and leave you sad lot to plot how best to take over the world. Most of the people who had some perspective and the ability to think in a rational fashion seem to have gone on to greener pastures already.

 

Hmm. Is that a grassy meadow I see? Yep. Maybe I should just .. yes.. I think I will head over there instead. Byeee...

 

 

... Are you still here? :icon_roll

[tflash]

If you lot & Eagle wanted an immersive environment, you'd be flying in one today. What you have now is what you asked for - a visually stunning flight simulator.

 

The fact that so few of you are capable of looking beyond the immediate visuals (which btw are far from bad in F4:AF), really says it all. I could tell you that once you take off in a fully simulated war, you don't have the TIME nor the inclination to pay any attention to the visuals, because you are too busy sorting out radar returns and trying to make your assigned target on time and in one piece. But clearly that holds absolutely no value here - cause you simply aren't interested in that type of simulator.

 

Well, euh ... I don't agree. This brings us back to the original post. I must confess I bought BattleField 2 instead of F4:AF because I already own FC 1.1 :=)

 

BTW, I'm having incredible fun in the quite immersive Battlefield 2 which combines STUNNING graphics with fast-paced action. Yeah, I do like a sim like that ;-) Reminds me so much of Flaming Cliffs!

[SUBS17]

The good thing about AFs release is that it'll help make the flight sim community bigger. New pilots are bound to get lockon FC as well as AF as both are really great flight sims. Like I said in my previous post immersion can be greatly increased by increasing the traffic on the airfields for a start and broadening the communication.

[SUBS17]

Cuz before they can get busy, they have to turn the pc on, defrag a million times then reboot then defrag then load all the different versions and etc. In the mean time, they log on and the first place they go to is here and pray to god that ED hadn't done anything that would threaten their beloved game. Then they wait for the blue van.

 

Theres only 1 version now Falcon Allied Forces, no need for any complicated installations. And I'll have both AF and FC on my hard drive because I aren't biased and can appreciate the work that has been put into these flight sims.

[leafer]

nah, i'm just messing with one of the haters and he's probably lurking around, still. I don't hate any flight sim but I can't afford to support them all so I stick with ED.

 

cheers

 

edit:

 

Darkspot,

 

wake me up when they included AFM and some actual radar modeling under all the button clicking fest in Falcon. heh

[enigma6584]

Yes do ignore everything I said and keep ranting. It seems to be what you're proficient at. I think I'll go away now and leave you sad lot to plot how best to take over the world. Most of the people who had some perspective and the ability to think in a rational fashion seem to have gone on to greener pastures already.

 

Hmm. Is that a grassy meadow I see? Yep. Maybe I should just .. yes.. I think I will head over there instead. Byeee...

 

LOL. Poor baby. Just can't stand that thought of someone not thinking you as smart as you think yourself to be. Good grief and bon voyage prick.

[Russianfish]

I think ED Could take a page from Falcons book, I mean here we are 7 years later and its still going! And its mainly due to the dynamic campaign. Lomac is a great looking sim but its missing personality. As said before adding civilian traffic and/or busy airfields would bring a little more to the table. I would never want a carbon copy but I would like to see some gameplay improvments before more aircraft are added, IMHO of course.

 

BTW: does anyone remember how perfect F4 ran after its intial release :eek: it took how many years to get it stable...lol

[Kevlon]

i agree with many of you that it dosent realy mather abouth the gfx, as long as the game play is good. I'm a noob to Falcon 4, i just got the game. And i think it looks okai. I mean, the planes are pretty highres , and when flying up high its not that bad. The one thing that made me buy the game was its gameplay, just look at the adwanced cockpit, you can click everything.. :D

For me Falcon 4 is a game with awsome gameplay and OK gfx

LOMAC is a game with great gfx AND gameplay

[ranger1]

F4AF GRAPHICS

 

The F4AF graphics were a huge disappointment for me! LOMAC's graphics are far, far superior. Too bad we can't have F4AF with LOMAC's graphics + the F16. Wouldn't that be heaven? I'd shell out many greenbacks for that sim.

[Pilotasso]

I think graphics is a poor way of judging a SIM. See if it delivers in the simulation itself, that what matters. Graphics IMHO is responsible for todays lack of gameplay optimization IMHO.

[GGTharos]

Graphics are a PART of the sim.

 

You can't do G-loadings and nausea in most cases, but you sure can do graphics.

 

This whole 'eye candy' BS that's going around is silly. Graphics are PART OF THE SIMULATION!

 

SIMULATION! Get it? To simulate the environment?

 

Is it more or less important than the avionics? It depends on who you ask; I consider graphics pretty important - in fact I have problems with F4AF's graphics ... it turns me off so bad, when its such a good game :P

[leafer]

Graphics are a PART of the sim.

 

You can't do G-loadings and nausea in most cases, but you sure can do graphics.

 

This whole 'eye candy' BS that's going around is silly. Graphics are PART OF THE SIMULATION!

 

SIMULATION! Get it? To simulate the environment?

 

Is it more or less important than the avionics? It depends on who you ask; I consider graphics pretty important - in fact I have problems with F4AF's graphics ... it turns me off so bad, when its such a good game :P

 

Exactly.

 

For me, it's as important as flight models and avionics. I know all of you that says graphics won't make or break a sim, would touch this with a ten foot pole?

 

 

NO! :D

[Russianfish]

Exactly.

 

For me, it's as important as flight models and avionics. I know all of you that says graphics won't make or break a sim, would touch this with a ten foot pole?

 

 

NO! :D

 

If it was a SIM about flak guns and it had a gizillion buttons to press, then yeah I would play it :wink:

 

The graphics in F4 are serviceable to me. My gripe would be that they do not look as good as what is already out there for the Falcon engine. Looking at projects such as the Angolian theater with close to photo real terrain, or Free Falcon which has some pretty decent effects, its abit of a let down. I hope LP is going to improve this area next, but If not I'm sure someone will :cool:

[SimFreak]

I’d rather have less graphics and more simulation. That’s why I enjoyed my time with LOMAC but it’s time to move up to next level, and that level is F4AF.

[SimFan]

Both.

 

Bought F4:AF a few days ago (and love it).

Also I would appreciate F4 AF DC & pits + LO GFX and AFM.

But with both sims we already do have THE best of modern flight sims out there.

[44th Eagle]

I guess I will chim in on this to.....LOMAC is a great example of what a flight sim graphics can look like. While on the other hand F4 is a great example of DC and avionics.

 

Each of them have there down falls but both of them combined would rock! I enjoy them both. Each of them have set the bar for the future. Now lets wait and see if Fighter Ops, Lockon 2, etc gives us what we want.