What aircraft you miss in game?

[Fubar512 1,350]

I disagree. I like the look of the TW (Series 2) cockpits better. Maybe it's just my preference.

 

 

Not even close. Lower poly, lower res bitmaps, limited FOV, and that's just for starters.

[squid 21]

sorry to say that, but although honestly appreciating what many people who devote time and passion on giving us FREE addon planes (and other mods) i can count enough planes from my list that cant stand up to the TW level, maybe according to my subjective preference ofcourse .. In general i prefer too the look of TW models, exterior and cockpits. (i will try the russian birds asap, i haven't tried them yet).

Edited March 19, 2010 by squid

[+Brain32 265]

Not even close. Lower poly, lower res bitmaps, limited FOV, and that's just for starters.

He plays the game on a stone age office laptop, and when you set everything to low, for example default F-4 will scale better as it's mapped on many small textures while MiG-29 for example is mapped with much bigger textures that the game ruins when it sizes it down...

So all in all try setting everything to low and check out stock and 3rd party planes, stock will appear to be less blurry.

[+Brain32 265]

sorry to say that, but although honestly appreciating what many people who devote time and passion on giving us FREE addon planes (and other mods) i can count enough planes from my list that cant stand up to the TW level, maybe according to my subjective preference ofcourse .. In general i prefer too the look of TW models, exterior and cockpits. (i will try the russian birds asap, i haven't tried them yet).

Well that's ok, I can't see how or by what method of measure people decide on that but more accuracy, better and more detailed textures and models with more polys simply can't miss with me.

 

From your list all external models are better than stock if you ask me, some of them have now pretty old cockpits but even those are still atleast as good as stock SF1 cockpits - atleast!

Also you have Mirage3/5 by TW, externals are not quite up to my standards as I rather use 7 years old MF models but the cockpits are very good...you would probably like both external and cockpit model

[squid 21]

Well that's ok, I can't see how or by what method of measure people decide on that but more accuracy, better and more detailed textures and models with more polys simply can't miss with me.

 

From your list all external models are better than stock if you ask me, some of them have now pretty old cockpits but even those are still atleast as good as stock SF1 cockpits - atleast!

Also you have Mirage3/5 by TW, externals are not quite up to my standards as I rather use 7 years old MF models but the cockpits are very good...you would probably like both external and cockpit model

 

 

there are some add-ons that have flawless external models, such are : Grippen, Hornet, AV-8B, (Mig29, Su27 from what i saw in screenshots), Jaguar (some canopy z-buffer issues). But a good external is not enoug for me if its not a complete package on the same level. I cant recall right now most cockpits, my free time being limited :( :(, but from what i recall i cant remember now seeing a cockpit that would feel and look as the TW ones ... textures would be simple and flat comparing to TW, or /and there would be shape mistakes, or 3D model quite simplified etc For example the Grippen cockpit can't keep me in the cockpit, simplified-flat, the hornet from what i remmember is overally good but the canopy frame is more of a hexagon than a curve, etc etc

 

the current mirage 2000 models from what i checked are no way worth keeping installed in any sense ... The external models of single seater F-5s are WRONG period. The two seaters F-5 appear from screenshots to be better than the very inacurate single seaters, they are in my list to check. The mirage F1 too, WRONG.

 

The F-16Cs are also way wrong externally and AFAIK theres no C cockpit, unless i am mistaken, if there is one, i would ofcourse like to check it.

 

The starfighters and Sabres are nice.

 

I notice a big number of addon planes that exist stock in SF and they are both nice according to me, but i don't see a reason to bother use the add-on version, if the stock one is good ... But the addon planes that don't exist stock in SF are rarely on that level and even maybe their number is not that extended ...

 

And higher polys is not a guarantee for a better addon. If the design is inaccurate and the textures poor, poly count in this case only adds more processing load. Actually, the best designs besides being accurate can be recognised by appearing as high poly models when actually their poly count is the most minimal possible (and i dont mean poor ofcourse) incorporating many smart solutions in their making. As polys will always be a deciding factor in processing resources and fps. And all that only makes sense as its one thing having a professional delivering a product for purchase, a professional who only the experience alone in their hands not to mention the rest of factors like talent, know-how, training etc is a factor that can make a huge difference in the shape of a finished project. And on the other hand is the enthusiast, hobbyist. How many times havent you read a readme line like "this is my first 3D model i hope i haven't been far off and that my addon will be as fun for you as it is for me" etc ? This diference must count for something ...

 

Now when it comes to my own criteria. Maybe i am picky and a nit picker but thats something that cant be avoided when you are a preoffessional graphic designer for 20 years and a scale modeller for 35 lol :P and again i am happy with the TW style even if in some cases the models are of a bit lower polycount. (yes the MF mirage 3/5 series was awesome, great 3D model, great skins as well, but now i have two good choices for the same plane family, while i have non for non stock planes ...)

[+Piecemeal 450]

I think guys that you can't fault the SF2 cockpits; especially when you compare them with SFP1 versions. When I first purchased SF2 I was totally gobsmacked with the effort that TK put into them. For anybody that doesn't have the SF2 series - what are you waiting for?!!! The cockpits alone are just one of the good enough reasons to invest in them Since I bought the SF2 series I haven't looked back once.

 

As for aircraft I'd love to see more of; well I know the Jaguar is already available in Column5. But lately I added it to SF2 and although the flight model is pretty good I do miss little cockpit additions you'd find in the SF2 models like (for example) the control stick. I don't know if I've ever seen any French Air Force versions either.

 

Other models that are available but I think could do with a little work are two of my add-on favourites; the Mirage F1 and the Mirage IIIE. Fantastic models for the most part otherwise

[+Brain32 265]

there are some add-ons that have flawless external models, such are : Grippen, Hornet, AV-8B, (Mig29, Su27 from what i saw in screenshots), Jaguar (some canopy z-buffer issues). But a good external is not enough for me if its not a complete package on the same level.

 

This I agree with, no-pit planes are AI only in my installs. I'm a pit nazi lol but I still like to have good no-pit models very much, variety is a great thing...

 

I cant recall right now most cockpits, my free time being limited :( :(, but from what i recall i cant remember now seeing a cockpit that would feel and look as the TW ones ... textures would be simple and flat comparing to TW, or /and there would be shape mistakes, or 3D model quite simplified etc For example the Grippen cockpit can't keep me in the cockpit, simplified-flat, the hornet from what i remmember is overally good but the canopy frame is more of a hexagon than a curve, etc etc

 

HornetA pit is very old now, and still apart from the not so curved canopy frame it's in the same league as TW cockpits in detail, but when it came out TW pits couldn't compare with it IMO.

Gripen pit on the other hand is perfectly accurate, ofcourse it's flat as the real thing basically consists of 3 large MFD's it can't leave the impression of a Tu-95 cockpit with a thousand switches and gauges, it would be utterly wrong...

As for other planes from the list, the F-35's are brutally detailed, EF-2000, TornadoF3 and AV-8B series are also incredibly detailed, MF's MiG-29 looks like it's from another super-HD game that is yet to be realeased!

 

the current mirage 2000 models from what i checked are no way worth keeping installed in any sense ... The external models of single seater F-5s are WRONG period. The two seaters F-5 appear from screenshots to be better than the very inacurate single seaters, they are in my list to check. The mirage F1 too, WRONG.

 

TW's F-16A is a mutant of F-16A and F-16C, not so accurate at all either...

Truth be told I wouldn't notice that but MiGBuster showed it perfectly and the error is not so small at all...

 

And higher polys is not a guarantee for a better addon. If the design is inaccurate and the textures poor, poly count in this case only adds more processing load.

This is true but I've rarely seen polycount abuse, most of the time higher polycount means much better looking model, there are exceptions ofcourse, but on many TW models(expecially AI) you can see immidately where the savings are...ofcourse they have to keep it light becuase they need to take care for a wide spectrum of users, but some models are a bit too early 2000's era if you know what I mean...

 

Now when it comes to my own criteria. Maybe i am picky and a nit picker but thats something that cant be avoided when you are a preoffessional graphic designer for 20 years and a scale modeller for 35 lol :P and again i am happy with the TW style even if in some cases the models are of a bit lower polycount. (yes the MF mirage 3/5 series was awesome, great 3D model, great skins as well, but now i have two good choices for the same plane family, while i have non for non stock planes ...)

Well buddy we all like nice looking models, it's not like I'm attacking you for your comments or anything like that, I just find this discussion interesting :)

[viperBAT32 2]

LOL..at the very least, the Mirage Factory MiG-29A is superior in every way to any of the TW-suppplied aircraft. Higher poly model, better cockpit, etc.

 

i completely agree! the MF MiG-29A is a gorgeously modeled A/C.

[AgapheM 4]

SNOOPY/FAC aircrafts for sf1 series................

 

hoping : Su-30MKI

Su-30MKM

Su-33

Su-32/34

At least we have work around mods...........

[squid 21]

oh i am not being aggressive at all either :D i like these discussions very much myself too :D

 

Yeap adding nice externally planes as AI, i do that myself too :D the more the better applies definitely here :D

 

Gosh the Viper ... so many years, and still waiting. The poor Viper being undermodeled for so long (i think is my most SF flyable plane along with the Phantoms) Yes the TW F-16 has indeed inaccuracies too but from all the F-16 models available for SF the TW i think is the most acceptable, for an A variant at least. I wish i was a pensioner to start working on one or somehow an accurate C would appear soon ...

 

Even Gripen (*) style glass pits can be made in a way that could make you go "oh, wow and i thought this couldn't get any better" From a point after its a matter of professional illustration work ;) trust me, a LOT lies in the textures :) If i could only afford that luxury to devote time and paint a demo, would give an idea of what i am talking about ... detail needs artistic experience , research and talent on it at equal degree ... ( i think i recall that Tornado cockpit canopy frame being thin like toothpick ... :P )

 

 

(* actually that external 3D model i think could be maybe the best 3D work i have seen ever in SF planes. playing with external views I often find myself wanting to lick that aircraft :P)

Edited March 19, 2010 by squid

[+Brain32 265]

Yes the TW F-16 has indeed inaccuracies too but from all the F-16 models available for SF the TW i think is the most acceptable, for an A variant at least.

Maybe but old MirageFactory F-16A's do not have those errors...

Edited March 19, 2010 by Brain32

[squid 21]

but they have other errors and the finish quality isn't the same either :(

[+Brain32 265]

Well yeah but I prefer smaller errors that my, I have to admit not so observant eye can't spot(I really don't know what's off on MF's A model) to the whole vertical stab being about 1/2 meter too long and some not small either bulges that belong on the C being on the A model, those errors are not small.

I wish MiGBuster never pointed that out, now it's just poking my eye lol

 

Look here: http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=7417

Not what I would call a small error...

Edited March 19, 2010 by Brain32

[+Dave 2,322]

How has this turned into a thread from what aircraft are missing to what aircraft model is better? Not a good place to say a dead modlers planes are wrong. Let's keep this on the subject please.

 

 

RIP Oli.

[+76.IAP-Blackbird 3,557]

Good said Dave

 

What Im waiting for is the X-plane series from FC, the XB-70 for example and some more which name I can`t even remember F-103 or so... Still waiting patiently, they would poos me in the mood to reinstall SF2 again after my crash ..

 

All I have to say is,some models are old and not updated, so who cares .. I fly them and like them, you can always make better stuff or just improve a small part .. but hey we play this now for nearly 10 years and we have tons of free stuff to play with .. Birds I have never heard before or even seen .. so I`m happy with what I have. If I don`t like it I don`t use it, If I can help to improve some stuff.. so I try it ...

 

we will keep the birds coming and that`s a good fact!!!

[Spinners 15,986]

Fokker S.14 Machtrainer

 

Never knew it existed but it looks delightfully esoteric and kinda cute.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fokker_S.14_Machtrainer

[rotarycrazy 4]

XB-70 (wip)

CL-1200

CL-1010

XF-108 (wip)

F-20 (wip)

YF-17

B-2

M-50 bounder

TU-160 (wip)

FTC-2000

F-101D

S-67 BLACKHAWK

YAK-130

F-106X

NR-349 (interceptor version of the a-5)

O-2 skymaster

 

I think thats about it

Edited March 30, 2010 by rotarycrazy

[Derk 265]

Fokker S.14 Machtrainer

 

Never knew it existed but it looks delightfully esoteric and kinda cute.

 

http://en.wikipedia.....14_Machtrainer

 

Very likeable and dependable trainer

Only 20 build, my eldest brother (retired teacher

College of Aeronautics) probably has a few spare parts left...

 

Hou doe,

 

Derk

[Slartibartfast 153]

Okay we have the TSR-2

 

Can we have a Buccaneer S.1 and S.2 pretty please with a cherry on top...

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

Okay we have the TSR-2

 

Can we have a Buccaneer S.1 and S.2 pretty please with a cherry on top...

 

 

i just got released today from hospital ( i stay ther over 3 months )

 

and i will go back to work on the Buccaneer as soon as possible i just have to finish one other project first the Swiss Hunter it is almost done and Soulfreak is waiting a long time for it

 

so please be patience

 

 

[macelena 1,070]

i just got released today from hospital ( i stay ther over 3 months )

 

 

What did you get? Everything fine now?

[Spinners 15,986]

That'll do me!

 

Sorry to hear that you've been unwell ravenclaw_007 and I hope that you are now in good health.

[Derk 265]

Alles Gute Volker !!!! Hope you get well soon !!!

 

Derk

[rotarycrazy 4]

hope you get well soon ravenclaw

 

Thats a great looking buccaneer you got there, keep up the good work

[ZO9 0]

Theres a Couple i missed on my original post

 

the Avro Shackleton mk3

and Skyraider AEW.1