Lomac Shelved

[BirdDogg 0]

Well here I go again,

 

First off let me start by saying that I have been a Flanker player for a long time, to me LOMAC picks up where Flanker left off. The guys at UBI Soft put some work into this Sim and for that I am grateful.

 

Plainly said: I'm not *feelin* LOMAC, maybe after it's patched and more mature, but for now I don't care that much for the beast. My systems falls at the middle of the road when it comes to the posted box specifications. but no joy in getting good FPS even turn down low. To know that I get simular FPS then others with much more machine behind the game makes me really raise an eyebrow

(Think Mr. Spock facial expression after Dr. McCoy says something really human ;) ).

 

After being a Flanker Flyer, and IL2-er, I'm quite tired of the Crimea, Can't help but feel that some other Map area would bring to me a feeling of getting a new game. The old arguement of the Plane selection stick outs, I'm realy wishing for something more on the Mud Moving side, the A-10 just dosen't do it for me. The Su-25 is nice but the Soviet Avionics as modeled, makes you wonder how effective their stuff is.

 

The last three Sims I purchase IL2\FB, SFP1, LOMAC I 'm so far 1 out of 3. and what sucks is that I'm really not into WWII stuff, but the Sim (IL2) is just a hard act to follow. I cannot understand how a developemnt house can put out two titles with such differing performance levels (Granted, I'm aware that it's 2 different development Teams). Have you ever flown the Jets in Il2? guess what, they feel and fly like Jets!

 

Don't get it twisted folks this is not to bash LOMAC or UBI at all, but LOMAC isn't what I wanted or hoped. I like Jet flying better in IL2, and much as I dislike the SFP1 Patch2 situation, I can at least say I get decent respectable FPS. What is modeled, or over-modeled in LOMAC that scews it up FPS-wise?, it's not the Avionics.

 

Well, once again This one does little for me that Flanker didn't already do, Great DogFights, lite on the Air to Ground, Same thing with SFP1, So for me there's just not enough of the action, plane mix, or suspension of reality (due to FPS issues) I'm looking for.

 

Not a Rant, Whine, Bash, or Complaint, just and opinion.

last I checked we were still entitled to those

 

Happy Holidays

 

BirdDogg

Edited December 22, 2003 by BirdDogg

[Cretin 0]

Fair enough, BirdDogg. Simply your honest opinion to which you are most assuredly entitled. Sorry that you have had so many disappointments. That gets pretty frustrating. I also fly IL-2:FB and SFP1 and have the same feelings about them that you do. Hope that despite the disappointments that you have a merry Christmas and a happy new year. ;)

[Cretin 0]

P.S. Live long and prosper. :ph34r:

[olaleier 0]

I've been spamming the Ubi-forums since Aug last year, waiting for Lomac.

And I honestly have to say, it's not sweeping me off my feet.

 

After I got TrackIR, FB is a totally different game, I'm loving every second of it.

 

Atmosphere is so hard to put your finger at, FB gets a free ride from history which is hard to compete with.

 

Lomac is a brilliant game, perhaps it just needs a little time to grow on me.

[zzzspace 2]

I've been spamming the Ubi-forums since Aug last year, waiting for Lomac.

And I honestly have to say, it's not sweeping me off my feet.

 

After I got TrackIR, FB is a totally different game, I'm loving every second of it.

 

Atmosphere is so hard to put your finger at, FB gets a free ride from history which is hard to compete with.

 

Lomac is a brilliant game, perhaps it just needs a little time to grow on me.

 

You say, "Lomac is a brilliant game, perhaps it just needs a little time to grow on me.", but IL2FB is a fully mature, patched then redeveloped and re-patched again sim. And that sequencial process made it as it is today; truely great.

 

It's not that Lock On has to grow on you, it just has to grow, become fully mature, be patched, then redeveloped, and re-patched again ... it will then be a truly "all time great" combat flight sim.

 

I for one am enjoying Lock On very much, and it is a bit better than I actually expected; but the missions and campaigns lack a convincing structured outlook or goal, nor any really serious tactical and strategic thinking about how to take down the opposite side with all the amazing tools and potential tactics possible. Those sorts of things have yet to be strung together for Lock On. Until then Lock On will remain bit one dimensional--it has not grabbed me yet at that level (as did sims like the classic and very addictive Tornado series).

 

Add to this the present clumsiness and non-ideal lay out of the mission planner, plus no levels of undo if you change your mind, or have made an error; plus the very discouraging 64k file size upper limit for multiplayer mission files ... and it all makes developing the deep potential of Lock On that much more difficult and slower.

 

I hope they intend to review the layout of the mission planner/editor, because options that are commonly used should be much more accessible (and definitely more intuitively findable and self-explanatory!!).

 

What I know is that in a year from now LOMAC will be a much better and smoother sim for most people, and behave significantly differently than how it does today.

Edited December 22, 2003 by zzzspace

[Cretin 0]

I knew that LOMAC would have it's problems. Heck, "Su-27" and "Flanker" certainly had their share! After all of this time we just recently had another update/patch for IL-2:FB. The one thing that all of the sims I mentioned have in common is that they have all pushed the envelope in some way. Think of how many "arcade" combat flight sims have come and gone. "Falcon 4.0" is still alive because it too pushed the envelope.

 

So why do I want to buy a new sim that I KNOW is going to come with problems? Two reasons. First, I already know, based on past history, which companies are going to offer long term support, patches and updates which, in the long run, will result in a great product. More importantly, if hardcore sims, for better or worse, don't sell, then no one will produce them.

 

Personally, I would rather have paid twice the price for LOMAC and gotten a well-finished product but that is just not the way things work. The "business" doesn't allow for that. I don't want to see PC hardcore combat flight sims go away. I am willing to "invest" in order to keep them coming. Hey, it may be lumpy but it's still gravy! :D

[ARCHER 0]

boils down to a xmas launch ,ubi didnt hold back on release to address

game issues , i to feel the code was hurried up for xmas.

[GhostDog 0]

I have read most, if not all, of Carl/Stormins posts on boards since release and if i read him correctly he wasn't all that happy with the decision to go gold so soon. But he is a loyal guy and would probably never say so publicly even if i am right. Since he probably has more say over when to release the patch, i am certain he will try to make sure that it fixes more than it breaks before releasing it.

Edited December 23, 2003 by GhostDog

[SlickWili 0]

There's no doubt that Wags & Stormin will stand by their product. Apart from the multiple patches that will be released (I distincly recall Wags stating that item A, B, and C will not be in the first patch) they're also looking into enhancements and add-ons. The dynamic campaign thread on the ubi.com forums is intriguing.

 

I guess the bigger question is if one is up to learning and "growing" with the game. If you've been bitten by the flight-sim bug bad enough.... you will. ;)

[BirdDogg 0]

I'm sure LOMAC will mature and become a classic Sim.

 

UBI and Eagle Dynamics will more then likely support LOMAC with patches and additions for some time to come. For me, after owning Flanker 2.0/5 there's just not a heck of alot I feel that's new. Granted the Sounds are one of the biggest improvements! Graphics are nicer.

 

I've been able to use my Flanker Manual to operate LOMAC and I'd say that about 90% of the control keys are the same, not a bad thing mind you. But take away the A-10 and F-15 and the plane set is about the same as 2.5 (I had the fake Su-35 addon). Once again not a bad thing, but not a new thing (for me, or other Flanker fliers).

 

I'm pretty sure that an FA-18 is going to come to LOMAC in the future, that will be a welcome addon since the sense of speed is over all better than Janes FA-18 IMHO, but there again; it's been done already. Give us something new, Try Marine aviation, put in the Harrier and WASP to land it on, put in the YAK-141.

 

We have the whole Crimea penninsula which one would think warrants' an amphibious operation (simulation\campaign) of some sort.

 

LOMACs on my harddrive and will be there, for sometime unlike another sim *cough* Strike Fighters *cough* but until some more atmospheric changes\enhancements are iron-out and added, I just can jump up and down with excitement about this one. That said, I await LOMACs true arrival, and I believe it will get here!

 

BirdDogg.

[SlickWili 0]

I posted an interesting question a little while back on both the LockOn and Flanker2.0 forums at ubi. It was about Flanker2.5 and whether or not it will help as a ramp-up to LockOn. They were all "yes" replies.

 

This speaks to your comments regarding the "not a whole heck of a lot is new" feelings. <_<

 

Here's hoping there will be add-on packs that bring different planes and new territory into the mix to keep the continued interest of the long-time fans.

[Cretin 0]

I hear what you guys are saying and I can't take issue with it. I guess I see the addition of two new aircraft as a bigger deal than most. Why do I think that the addition of two new flyable aircraft is a big deaL? First of all it changes the mix and increases, exponentially, the possibilities for "new" missions and campaigns. Secondly, the new planes aren't just pretty skins sharing a common flight model. There has been a lot more than that put into them.

 

I suppose I value having aircraft with flight models that are as realistic as possible, and realistic relative to one another, more than anything else. If the flight models are great and everything else is not great, I can still be happy. If frame rates are great, the eye candy is great, the interfaces are great but the flight models are "arcade", I'm not interested.

[zzzspace 2]

I suppose I value having aircraft with flight models that are as realistic as possible, and realistic relative to one another, more than anything else. If the flight models are great and everything else is not great, I can still be happy. If frame rates are great, the eye candy is great, the interfaces are great but the flight models are "arcade", I'm not interested.

Yeah ,that's it, when I 'fly' an aircraft in LOMAC if really 'feels' like, and most definately looks like I am flying--that is priceless ... that is unmatched, full stop.