Teapot Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 Just had a fly of IL2 4.11.1 and for me (in the feeling of what I believe to be the physics fidelity) it just doesn't cut the mustard anymore :(. It can only be because I've tasted the richness that is DCS P51. "A true 'sandbox flight sim' requires hi-fidelity flyable non-combat utility/support aircraft." Wishlist Terrains - Bigger maps Wishlist Modules - A variety of utility aircraft to better reflect the support role. E.g. Flying the Hornet ... big yawn ... flying a Caribou on a beer run to Singapore? Count me in. Extracting a Recon Patrol from a hastily prepared landing strip at a random 6 figure grid reference? Now yer talking!
Ramstein Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 Just had a fly of IL2 4.11.1 and for me (in the feeling of what I believe to be the physics fidelity) it just doesn't cut the mustard anymore :(. It can only be because I've tasted the richness that is DCS P51. that's because Oleg was smoking mustard when he made western planes.. :pilotfly: ASUS Strix Z790-H, i9-13900, WartHog HOTAS and MFG Crosswind G.Skill 64 GB Ram, 2TB SSD EVGA Nvidia RTX 2080-TI (trying to hang on for a bit longer) 55" Sony OLED TV, Oculus VR
mmaruda Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 Actually, the rants from US players about the Mustang/Corsair/Hellcat/Wildcat made them change the FM so many times, that there is hardly anything of Oleg's work in it. But at least they did revise it several times and posted some historical data that they used. Too bad same cannot be said about the La-5 and La-7 which act like made by the finest engineers in top quality control factories with the use of alien technology.
mmaruda Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 You can make fun all you want, but let's honest. IL-2 cannot be compared to DCS - it's a whole new era. One must acknowledge though, that Oleg's work was a milestone in sim gaming - the amount of planes, realistic engine management, ballistics... that was something back in the day. As far as flight models go, I still think IL-2 is pretty descent. Bearing in mind how much work went into it over the years to make every whining fanboy happy with his favourite 109 or Spit and the forum battles over which FM is "porked", I think the devs made a pretty solid job. ED is in a very comfortable position with DCS. With the modern planes, fans probably would find it hard to prove something is wrong due to problems with obtaining proper documentation. And as for the Mustang, ED can always say: "Unless you happen to own a P-51 and fly it, shut up!" :D 1
joey45 Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 ED is in a very comfortable position with DCS. With the modern planes, fans probably would find it hard to prove something is wrong due to problems with obtaining proper documentation. And as for the Mustang, ED can always say: "Unless you happen to own <insert EDs next plane here> and fly it, shut up!" :D fixed it.. The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. "Me, the 13th Duke of Wybourne, here on the ED forums at 3 'o' clock in the morning, with my reputation. Are they mad.." https://ko-fi.com/joey45
Ramstein Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 (edited) .......... ED is in a very comfortable position with DCS. With the modern planes, fans probably would find it hard to prove something is wrong due to problems with obtaining proper documentation. And as for the Mustang, ED can always say: "Unless you happen to own a P-51 and fly it, shut up!" :D One of our squadmates, flew Hellcats off carriers and early jet's and worked as an engineer for Boeing.. he personally talked to Oleg, and, not just jabber, but he sent him a of of Aeronautical info on the planes he personally flew. Oleg just refused to listen... that was maybe 6 years ago,,, 7, ?? I remember all the communication back and forth... finally our squadmate just gave up,,, he did what he could in all the communication really specific highly complicated information,, He tried so damned hard to try to get the people in charge to fix blatant problems with the fm..... of the planes he actually flew, but similar planes that share the same characteristics.. all the way down to problem with stall speeds that are way wrong on some of the naval aircraft.. There are a lot of people we fly with who actually flew some of the aircraft.. I have talked to P-40 pilots personally... B-24 bomber, navigators, ... I talked a Corsair Pilot who flew Korea doing bombing runs...on Hitlers Oil fields,, and more...but they are getting pretty old now... I chatted with them for many hours..in person... (I met them and ride to the Veterans hospital with them often..) I listen to them sometime talk in groups with other pilots... i hear about things that are not done int he game, some mods they did to aircraft int he field to get better performance and stuff. of course I would not expect the mods to get into the game,, I am just saying These guys were there, and still have great memory... but when the actual pilot tries to directly communicate real experience data and gets nowhere... not much else can be done... any pilots who actually fly these planes now do not do combat at all, as they are too valuable to push to the limit and dangerous.. so you still can get dent fm/dm from anyone who flies any that still remain.... at least ballpark... but some are not even in the ballpark... Of course I will sound mean if I don't credit where credit is due, and yes Oleg did get a combat flight sim to market that is one of the most successful ever.. but it still naws on people,, what might have been... :doh: Edited May 13, 2012 by Ramstein ASUS Strix Z790-H, i9-13900, WartHog HOTAS and MFG Crosswind G.Skill 64 GB Ram, 2TB SSD EVGA Nvidia RTX 2080-TI (trying to hang on for a bit longer) 55" Sony OLED TV, Oculus VR
TAGERT Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 There is a reason test engineers instrument planes.. Because pilots, even trained test pilots, 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
leafer Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 I don't think a stall speed applies to that logic there. ED have been taking my money since 1995. :P
Ramstein Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 I don't think a stall speed applies to that logic there. just saying the oleg would not even listen to the real pilot over one example stall speed information was refusued on several aircraft the pilot used to fly.. out of many conversations,, so why didn't it apply? ASUS Strix Z790-H, i9-13900, WartHog HOTAS and MFG Crosswind G.Skill 64 GB Ram, 2TB SSD EVGA Nvidia RTX 2080-TI (trying to hang on for a bit longer) 55" Sony OLED TV, Oculus VR
mmaruda Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 One must understand how IL-2 works. This is not a "how it feels" game. More of a "numbers say this" game. The original IL-2 (first release not FB) was quite well made, everything seemed to work according to what you might have expected and a 190 would pretty much always own those damned Lavochkins. Stuff got messed up with Forgotten Battles and Pacific Fighters (the latter one being not actually Oleg's projects, but Luthier's - the guy responsible for CloD). Now the main problem is, that the initial game took only some basic numbers (weight, wingspan, engine power, etc) and calculated the FM somehow - I'm not really sure about how it was, just repeating what some people refered to as common knowledge. After jets and more complicated planes got in the game, each FM was specific for the aircraft. Initially some planes would defy the laws of physics (190, full rudder, yanking stick back did not result in a flip). Anyway, most of the stuff got fixed by now, but people are still complaining. I think it's the game engine's limitations that come into play (drag is a bit of an abstract concept in IL-2, prop pitch also is not exactly what it is, only the recent patch did proper stuff to overheating). I could go on and on, played this for years, mostly offline, but I am more or less familiar with the FM battles on forums. I think with such an amount of planes and people ranting, it's now impossible to make the FMs how they should be. Last changes to the 190 made it a no drag plane and it turns out, the drag for the FWs is mostly from the prop. The Corsair also got slowed down to match what the charts said and all was fine till people discover it was too slow to take off at times. Anyway, there is a ton of stuff that can be said, but the reason Oleg did not listen is probably because many people contacted him saying they are pilots and this and that is wrong and it wasn't possible to make everyone happy. Now Team Daidalos do the patches and it's a great job they are doing (like the AI, finally!), they seem to listen, though I wouldn't expect IL-2 will ever feel a bit like the real thing. One thing has to be said - it was the first WWII sim, that actually showed how hard and complicated flying the planes of that time was, not to mention fighting. Suddenly, it wasn't about making Ace, it was about getting back home in one piece. The game is old and dated now, but still fun to play and easy to get into (the easiest, "serious" sim I'd say). It's simply one of the best sims ever made and will always be. Just one more thing on the FMs, the whole wrong feel, wrong performance thing in game is very subjective as well as it is subjective in real life. You'll find a dozen WWII survivors who will say that P-40, P-51, P-whatever was the best plane because they found it a good machine to fly by their subjective standards. But it also may be so, that 100 guys laying dead in the dirt would curse the plane because it got them killed. Same goes for every other side of the conflict, Russians praise their Lavochkins (somehow the did not mind 20 levers to operate the engine and a +50C temp in the cockpit) and as I'm Polish, I should feel obligated to say: take a hike, the best planes of WWII were the P11c and the Los bomber. :) Once you look past your expectations on a given plane, and start to play the game and try to fly well with what you have, it's tons of fun. Cheers all! 2
JIMJAM Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 (edited) My first sim was Microprose F-19 running on a $3000 "in todays money what, $6000" at a unheard of 20 mhz. The runways were lines, mountains were triangles and I was drop jawed and glued to the screen overwhelmed by the realism of it all. Now my 8 yr old Nephew sits in my flight chair compete with subwoofers,complete HOTAS,37 inch LCD screen flying FSX loading with about a grand of payware addons. He looks over at me and says, "Why cant I blow things up?" Gotta remember to him these ARE the days of lines as runways and triangles for mountains to him. The evolution continues.......... Simming has been a expensive and frustrating hobby but I hope I live to see the day where you have to wear a blood pressure monitor to cut the sim off if its gets to high. The opening screen warns they are not responsible for heart attacks and the sim comes with barf bags. Edited May 13, 2012 by JIMJAM
leafer Posted May 14, 2012 Posted May 14, 2012 just saying the oleg would not even listen to the real pilot over one example stall speed information was refusued on several aircraft the pilot used to fly.. out of many conversations,, so why didn't it apply? It was a reply to TAGERT's. He said a pilot's perception doesn't mean it's reality. ED have been taking my money since 1995. :P
leafer Posted May 14, 2012 Posted May 14, 2012 One must understand how IL-2 works. This is not a "how it feels" game. More of a "numbers say this" game. The original IL-2 (first release not FB) was quite well made, everything seemed to work according to what you might have expected and a 190 would pretty much always own those damned Lavochkins. The original IL2 fm isn't that great either. For example, taking off in IL2 whether light or armed to the teeth, flap or no flap, takes the same amount of seconds and lifting off at the exact same spot on the runway every time. Something's wrong there. ED have been taking my money since 1995. :P
BTTW-DratsaB Posted May 14, 2012 Posted May 14, 2012 IL2 is a pretty old game, Isn't our advanced flight model today better because we have more processing power? Specs: GA-Z87X-UD3H, i7-4770k, 16GB, RTX2060, SB AE-5, 750watt Corsair PSU, X52, Track IR4, Win10x64. Sim Settings: Textures: ? | Scenes: ? |Water: ? | Visibility Range: ? | Heat Blur: ? | Shadows: ? | Res: 1680x1050 | Aspect: 16:10 | Monitors: 1 Screen | MSAA: ? | Tree Visibility: ? | Vsync: On | Mirrors: ? | Civ Traffic: High | Res Of Cockpit Disp: 512 | Clutter: ? | Fullscreen: On
leafer Posted May 14, 2012 Posted May 14, 2012 (edited) IL2 is a pretty old game, Isn't our advanced flight model today better because we have more processing power? AFM for Su25T since Lock On: Flaming Cliffs. I'm not comparing the two. I used to play the original IL2, read a lot of the thread and yeah, Oleg is pretty stubborn. That's what I'm saying. Edited May 14, 2012 by leafer ED have been taking my money since 1995. :P
ARM505 Posted May 14, 2012 Posted May 14, 2012 Wow. IL2, the single greatest WW2 air combat series in the history of simming, is remembered like this? Come on guys, it deserves better. Of course it had tons of quirks, and of course it's now showing it's age - but good luck to anybody getting even vaguely close to that number of simulated, playable aircraft in the air, and good luck keeping everybody happy (here's a clue - you won't) and good luck making something that lives as long as it has. Frankly, it's still perfectly playable, and that says a lot. I sincerely wish that the DCS series lives as long. I expect it will, albeit with far fewer platforms, which is fine too. Nonetheless, I think IL2 deserves a lot of credit. I still remember epic battles/moments on dedicated servers with a bunch of friends, something the DCS series has yet to give me personally, despite it's technical excellence. IMHO.
Teapot Posted May 14, 2012 Author Posted May 14, 2012 Wow. IL2, the single greatest WW2 air combat series in the history of simming, is remembered like this? Come on guys, it deserves better. Of course it had tons of quirks, and of course it's now showing it's age - but good luck to anybody getting even vaguely close to that number of simulated, playable aircraft in the air, and good luck keeping everybody happy (here's a clue - you won't) and good luck making something that lives as long as it has. Frankly, it's still perfectly playable, and that says a lot. I sincerely wish that the DCS series lives as long. I expect it will, albeit with far fewer platforms, which is fine too. Nonetheless, I think IL2 deserves a lot of credit. I still remember epic battles/moments on dedicated servers with a bunch of friends, something the DCS series has yet to give me personally, despite it's technical excellence. IMHO. Oh yes, IL2 deserves a LOT of credit. What I was observing in my original post was that after tasting the glorious 'feel of flight' and experienceing the take off handling that here-to-for I have only ever read about, I realise that I won't ever be able to go back to IL2 without comparing MY experience when flying each sim. In essence, my new experience (DCS P51) has overtaken my old experience (IL2); which now 'tastes like card-board'. This is entirely natural because as quite a few of you have pointed out, IL2 1946 is a venerable OLD game, well deserving of a permanent place in the Great Combat Flight Sim's Hall of Fame. Hope I haven't confused the issue further, and certainly wasn't out to ruffle any feathers! Cheers! "A true 'sandbox flight sim' requires hi-fidelity flyable non-combat utility/support aircraft." Wishlist Terrains - Bigger maps Wishlist Modules - A variety of utility aircraft to better reflect the support role. E.g. Flying the Hornet ... big yawn ... flying a Caribou on a beer run to Singapore? Count me in. Extracting a Recon Patrol from a hastily prepared landing strip at a random 6 figure grid reference? Now yer talking!
TAGERT Posted May 16, 2012 Posted May 16, 2012 It was a reply to TAGERT's. He said a pilot's perception doesn't mean it's reality. That is not exactally what I said.. Here is what I said There is a reason test engineers instrument planes.. Because pilots, even trained test pilots, 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on. With that said, the 'reality' is that the human senses can be easlly fooled.
reschke Posted May 22, 2012 Posted May 22, 2012 Wow. IL2, the single greatest WW2 air combat series in the history of simming, is remembered like this? Come on guys, it deserves better. Of course it had tons of quirks, and of course it's now showing it's age - ............ IMHO. I don't know about the single greatest WW2 air combat games. Maybe you can stick the original one in there but the rest of them were nothing but eye candy from my perspective. You can polish the turd of CLoD all you want to but it is still a turd. I would even toss the Forgotten Battles and Pacific Fighters into the mix on the turd side as well. Someone mentioned trying to take off fully loaded with fuel and weapons aircraft off that is of the same type versus on that is lightly loaded with fuel and weapons and the plane performs the exact same way...to me that is a porked FM. Eye candy...great; all other aspects of being a "flight simulation" not so great AFTER the first IL-2 was released. Warthog #1397...compliments of SimHQ
mmaruda Posted May 22, 2012 Posted May 22, 2012 Mind you, we're not talking about the CloD turd. The last version of IL-2 really has some great features that make far better than the original one. IL-2 still firmly holds the title. It's got great new AI, FMs are in line with what you might expect from books on the subject, the new engine overheat and management rocks and with the amount of maps, planes, dymanic campaigns and multiplayer there is still tons of things to enjoy. Yeah it does still feel a bit generic and souless, but as a survey sim, it's the best there is. The only problem with the current version (4.11.1) that is observed by the experts in the matter (not me) is the lack of punch of some weapons - mainly the late war German 190s don't shred bombers as they're supposed to. Yeah, it's old, has some issues, not really up to today's standards set by DCS and other study sim addons for FSX. However, noone has made anything better in terms of WWII combat sims, so IL-2 still is king. I'm sure the DCS: Mustang is great, but it has no WWII theatre. Hopefully, ED and modders will fill the gap soon.
Pikey Posted May 22, 2012 Posted May 22, 2012 If there weren't commercial decisions involved moving against realism factors in IL-2 i'd be suprised, every successful franchise has to start bending things for money. ___________________________________________________________________________ SIMPLE SCENERY SAVING * SIMPLE GROUP SAVING * SIMPLE STATIC SAVING *
skouras Posted May 22, 2012 Posted May 22, 2012 everybody have something to say about IL2 But everybody have fly it;) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]W10(64bit)Asus Rog Strix Z370-F - i7 8700K - Dark Rock Pro 4 - 16 giga ram Corsair vengeance 3000 - MSI RTX 2070 Super - Asus Rog Phobeus soundcard - Z906 Surround speaker - Track ir5 - HOTAS Warthog
ZQuickSilverZ Posted May 22, 2012 Posted May 22, 2012 Wow. To me this thread is as foolish as people complaining that the aircraft's paint job is one shade off. Niel Goldman Voice "As you can see the font is incorrect on the heading indicator and the landing gear paint job is one shade off CLEARLY making the aircraft unflyable." Thats you. Thats how you sound. I need, I need, I need... What about my wants? QuickSilver original. "Off with his job" Mr Burns on the Simpsons. "I've seen steering wheels / arcade sticks / flight sticks for over a hundred dollars; why be surprised at a 150 dollar item that includes the complexities of this controller?! It has BLINKY LIGHTS!!" author unknown. These titles are listed in the chronological order I purchased them. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
mmaruda Posted May 22, 2012 Posted May 22, 2012 Wow. To me this thread is as foolish as people complaining that the aircraft's paint job is one shade off. Oh come on! Discussions like that are part of the flight simming community folklore! Where would we be without psychotic attention to detail? Anyway, if you want to see some really crazy stuff, go over to the "yellow forum" (1C) and check out all the "porked FM" threads, especially the ones about the Corsair and 190 after the latest patch. You'll find that this thread is actually very light. :thumbup:
Recommended Posts