Have to smile .....

[Tamper 9]

"The bottom line should then be a list of strengths and weakness of the Sim you are testing based on meeting or not meeting your requirements list"

 

I think I see your point - but then, isn't that (the list you mention) where most people form their opinion from? In other words, don't most people form an opinion based on how well their requirements are met? For example: I buy Toyotas, exclusively (hard to argue with 22 years of performance). I have, in my mind, a 'list' of what are the most important points to me (since I'm the one considering a purchase, after all).

 

At the same time I can say that Toyotas meet all my requirements - what right do I have to force my preferences on anyone else? I don't.

 

And, at the same time I can clearly see Toyota is my choice, can I not go over to a Ford lot, and - without ever spending a dime - can I not arrive at an informed decision by comparing the features, functionality, form, and fit of the Ford vs. the Toyota? Of course I can.

 

Why do the car commercials implore perspective buyers to "Drive the Ford Difference"? (or whatever) How can there be a difference, if not a comparison to another product?

 

I genuinely understand your premise (or I think I do) that each should be considered "for it's own merits" as they say. But, the stark reality is, most people decide by making comparisons. Sure, the comaprisons will inherently involve their own list of 'likes and dislikes' - but, if choice is to be made, well...

 

Just my $.02

[sitting_duck 3]

If i didnt know better,,,id say someone copied an old thread from soh and pasted it in here....

[Dirk98 0]

The bottom line should then be a list of strengths and weakness of the Sim you are testing based on meeting or not meeting your requirements list.

 

Yes, buddye, that's exactly what I call 'comparison' and comparative method, lol, between different products to match your requirements.

 

Anyway there's strange comment from Chivas, who says that OFF3 is not populated enough in that discussion:

 

 

"It's hard to get used to it after OFF3, where the ground and skies are full of motion, war and purpose everywhere you go."

 

Thats compeletly different from my experience with OFF3. I flown long flights to the front and seen no activity whatsoever, in the air or on the ground, over terrain the looks OK from a distance until you look close and the immersion quickly disappears. Bridges and rivers are totally unconvincing. You can fly miles along railroad tracks to the front with no, train stations, towns, or villages, but you'll see a train station in the middle of the country side with no tracks leading to or from them. I believe only a few major towns or cities are modelled.

 

This all could and will hopefully be improved

 

There's objective method to test what you said above, Chivas, called Lables On. Unless you played it on ground / air activity @ zero, you'd immediately see what you were missing. I've flown most of the flightsim games you'd mention, and I can tell you that OFF3 is the most populatated one (and not faked). Another example, come over to the noman's land I'll see yet how long you'd last there at 500ft, I'd give you no more than 5, because they are really firing at you (surpised?). Even more, you'd actually be able to find the source of each round that you got under your rear, should you really want to investigate... As to the improvements that could be made, so far I know another good game that really needs them direly and many. OFF3 is a piece of art, gold standard already, I just hope RoF will get there one day.

 

Dirk.

Edited June 8, 2009 by Dirk98

[buddye 1]

And, at the same time I can clearly see Toyota is my choice, can I not go over to a Ford lot, and - without ever spending a dime - can I not arrive at an informed decision by comparing the features, functionality, form, and fit of the Ford vs. the Toyota? Of course I can.

 

Good discussion. I think it why so many players list strengths and weakness that do not personally matter to them (personnally) and therefore do not add value. It may also be why people buy car features they do not require/want.

 

Using your example for Ford and Toyota cars:

 

If I do not require a GPS and a Power Windows, then they should not be listed as a strength (if not on the other car) as they are really an unnecessary cost for me and not really a strength.

 

For a Flight Sim, if I do not require MP, then it is not a strength but if you compare it would be listed even though it would not matter to you personnally. It is OK to compare features you require, I think.

[Bandy 3]

I haven't been online since I posted on pg 1. This thread is a very mature perspective on the issue, hat's off to you gentlemen. Somebody asked about what I thought was good about FE, and that isn't as important as the overall discussion here, besides Thumper41 did a good job...

 

But in a nutshell, FE is as good as you want to make it by spending time modding it which is very rewarding for some, but not necessarily everybody's cup of tea. The code is as open as TK could make it (TK is 3rd Wire), and while some may find this modding a PITA (and it is on occasion...), there is a beautiful freedom there, as well as a sense in sharing beyond only playing the game for the community it has created. I have poked around in some of the OFF-BHAH files, but it ain't obvious what does what yet to me...

 

I feel somewhat trapped in somebody else's view of a WWI sim (and history is as subjective as it gets, trust me!). I would prefer to have a more active AAA-Archie presence, but that has been taken out by the patches... That said, once I realized that the BHAH missions aren't scripted --that you could fly nearly anywhere and get action and be surprised -- that made a huge difference for me! THAT IS UNIQUE AND AMAZING!!!

 

I could list a number of issues where the sims could share traits and be vastly improved. Most of the drawbacks with BHAH are due to the limits of CFS3 (sorry it's true), such as in TIR4 when you lean into the screen only the cockpit features get zoomed in, not the features in the distance like aircraft. You should be able to zoom in on distant objects to see better at a distance, but it is not supported. These aircraft should be seen at a greater distance, but that is a weakness of all sims and hardware.

However I do want to be able to fly with ONLY the in-game BHAH map, but the map's rivers, roads, cities and what I see from the cockpit do not match up. If the in-game map can be improved THAT would be GREAT.

 

FE does not have as good a damage model as BHAH which has a great one, but FE's flight model is better. Spin an aircraft in FE sometime --it truly feels out of control and you struggle to correct-- where as in BHAH all I have to is automatically apply opposite rudder and I'm out of it without a problem for the most part unless I flew into a cloud, then all bets are OFF. Then on the other hand, I cannot feel as though since the FE game engine is basically a child of jet sims that it doesn't entirely reflect stick and canvas kites. I don't know where 'reality' is here...

 

Again, as I mentioned when BHAH first came out here LINK that the best WWI sim would combine features of both. I still mean that... BOTH have great community members and developers that truly love and care about the sims they've created.

 

I do not care to choose one over the other. I love WWI flight sims, and would buy and play them all, but the marketing strategy with the online connection of RoF has turned me completely off.

Edited June 8, 2009 by B Bandy RFC

[buddye 1]

I just have to say that I have nothing but respect (and thanks) for TK and his team who take an older Flight Sim and "extend" its life for the players enjoyment.

 

The same can be said for Winder and his team who had the ideas and skill to extended OFF and the same can be said for many other flight sim teams as well.

 

They all need to be supported by our small (and growing smaller) flight Sim community.

 

When a Flight Sim meets your own personal "requirements" then take the time to "get it" and complete an analysis of its strenthgs and weaknesses first hand. We owe it to our fight sim community, IMHO. Do not let somebody else do this homework for you.

Edited June 8, 2009 by buddye

[Hellshade 110]

The incredible irony is that ViKs, one of ROF's main developers, was one of the worst online cheats in the IL2 community, and a member of a russian squad that was full of cheats. They were caught red-handed exploiting the engine-off bug for months, and provided the most insultingly lame excuses, and ViKs was master of the bat-turn bug. They also favoured hitting the screen-print button to purposely lag when somebody was on their tail, and then went on to using the CPU speed-hack to do the same. The most recent suspicion is that they'd cracked the IL2 code years before it was first known to have been done and 'tweaked' their planes. I lost count of how many times I personally witnessed the most outrageous examples of impossible maneouvering, and I was far from alone.

 

I feel entirely safe in predicting that ViK's russian squad will be suprisingly awsome with ROF online. It certainly won't be getting a penny of my money.

 

I doubt, but hope then, that ROF will allow me to fly on-line in my own "private" war with only the people I invite. If I'm forced to fly against known cheaters with a 214:1 kill / death ratio I'll lose interest in about the first 30 minutes if the cheating becomes blatantly obvious. I have read that they are supposed to have a fairly in depth mission creator built into the game which is nice, but pre-generated missions don't have the suprise value of the OFF campaign.

 

And while ROF appears to have incredible damage and flight models, I can only shoot down the same 2 types of AI piloted aircraft so many times before the excitement wears thin. No, until they add significantly more aircraft and have a proven AI like BHaH, the main draws for ROF for me are the state of the art damage modeling, cool graphics and most importantly, the MP combat against live opponents. If the MP combat is borked due to rampant cheating (and I genuinely pray that it will not be, but I am having doubts), then the game loses all appeal to me because if the only damage modeling effects I ever witness are on my own plane as my opponent flies by at 350 MPH shooting 5,000 rounds of ammo into me, then I really won't have any use for the game.

 

I'd like to say that none of this is a personal attack on RoF or it's developer. I think the game looks beautiful and I am extremely eager to play it. It'll put my recently revamped computer to the test as I read it is written to be multi-core aware and quad core processors get 30% to 40% more performance out of it than a duo Core 2 does. Against a live opponent, the game has the potential to be a real winner in my book, especially if they stamp out any cheating and add a bunch more planes. I'm just stating that I'm worried lack of security could ruin the game. But I was afraid the CFS3 engine would ruin BHaH and those fears turned out to be completely unfounded. Perhaps I'll get two miracles in a row.

 

I'll find out when I get back from my Honeymoon on June 25th. Unless there is already widespread criticisms of ROF, I plan to order it then. Meanwhile, I'll keep enjoying BHaH (and Oblivion, I finally started playing again) and anxiously await the next patch or add on to BHaH that the flight code Masters of OBD see fit to grace us with.

 

/salute

Hellshade

Edited June 9, 2009 by Hellshade

[rabu 9]

..snip...

 

I'll find out when I get back from my Honeymoon on June 25th. Unless there is already widespread criticisms of ROF, I plan to order it then. Meanwhile, I'll keep enjoying BHaH (and Oblivion, I finally started playing again) and anxiously await the next patch or add on to BHaH that the flight code Masters of OBD see fit to grace us with.

 

/salute

Hellshade

 

Congratulations!!!! I wish you a long life of marital bliss.

 

And don't pass judgment on ROF, any more then you would have on OFF. I think we should all be open with our opinions and just wait for the feedback on ROF, which won't be very long in coming, right?

 

Thanks to everyone for all your very well explained opinions, concerns and desires.

[Dirk98 0]

I read your post at SimHQ Dirk. I'm just waiting to see how long it takes for Ming and Flyretired to get on your six and beat you down 'til you die.

 

CJ

 

As I said it wouldn't happen. The discussion there has turned in a more reasonable direction (including Chivas):

 

Dobby's RoF review on SimHQ thread

 

 

So fear not next time, Cameljockey, and speak out if you have to say something. Important - keep it positive and no one will be beaten. ;)

 

Dirk.

Edited June 9, 2009 by Dirk98

[UK_Widowmaker 571]

If i didnt know better,,,id say someone copied an old thread from soh and pasted it in here....

 

Yes, possibly!...but without the flame war!.... this is being discussed in a mature manner (which is great!)

[Check Six 2]

I became interested in this sim after reading a thread on "The Aerodrome" Forum, and checked out some YouTube footage etc and was amazed at the eye candy. I joined this Forum and read as many threads as I could to get a "feel" for it. (I do my "homework" thoroughly).

ROF does look good, I must admit, but it's the sheer depth of OFF that made the decision a no-brainer. Thousands of skins, realistic historical situations, excellent scenery, realistic flight models all made OFF a must-get for me (and i'm SOOOOOO glad I did) To be honest, I was never aware of the problems the online gaming community attributed to CFS3.

As for ROF, I myself have never played a game online and always play against AI (good thing too, 'cos I think I'd be PWNED too often by the online vultures waiting to pounce on noobs to increase their "score"), so the lack of a single player game just made me think this game was not for me. With only a few aircraft now, who is to say that they will provide more? and how many? and how often will they arrive? As they require connection to the internet to play, will they automatically search for, retrieve, and install updates (possibly with an essential reboot) EVERY time you log on, making it a 5-10 minute wait to play?

OFF is far better for MY needs/wants and I doubt I will get ROF despite the eye candy mainly for the online only reason, but the lack of numbers of aircraft now is another reason. If the company goes bust, you're stuck.

 

My two cents worth

Edited June 9, 2009 by Steve Drew

[sitting_duck 3]

lol....well,,,,thinking back on the number of posts that i have thout about making,,but didnt, (and glad i didnt)...i hope this doesnt turn out to be one of them...

 

Personnaly, imho, etc etc,,,,there are plenty of sites out there that are dedicated to flight sims in general, with no allegiance to any one particular game or genre...

 

If for no other reason than to show a degree of loyalty to the people that gave this community two phases free, and BHAH, I dont see any reason for discussing a competitors game in this forum.

 

And there will be some that say they are not promoting the game, but promoting wwi sims in gerenal, and try and pass that off as a good thing.

 

But I find it hard to belive that anyone would not agree the devs are not thrilled about seeing threads like this develope, and if for no other reason than that I hope this is the last one we ever see...

[Womenfly2 0]

I will predict this .... no matter want anyone said here, at some point 90% will purchase RoF in the future along with any BH&H phases released.

 

Why you might ask? ......." Because we are addicted to it! "

 

As with OFF Phase -1 and 2 .... Pisss, hey you, come here, I have this game, here have a taste, try it, .... said from a dark corner of an old rundown hanger on some desolate airfield in English. .... and you know the rest of the story.

 

Cheers,

WF2

Edited June 9, 2009 by Womenfly2

[OvS 8]

lol....well,,,,thinking back on the number of posts that i have thout about making,,but didnt, (and glad i didnt)...i hope this doesnt turn out to be one of them...

 

Personnaly, imho, etc etc,,,,there are plenty of sites out there that are dedicated to flight sims in general, with no allegiance to any one particular game or genre...

 

If for no other reason than to show a degree of loyalty to the people that gave this community two phases free, and BHAH, I dont see any reason for discussing a competitors game in this forum.

 

And there will be some that say they are not promoting the game, but promoting wwi sims in gerenal, and try and pass that off as a good thing.

 

But I find it hard to belive that anyone would not agree the devs are not thrilled about seeing threads like this develope, and if for no other reason than that I hope this is the last one we ever see...

 

 

Actually, we don't mind. We need the feedback and the exposure of the faults in OFF. It helps us learn more about you all and what we can do to make OFF better. You see... we are no better than you, never were and never will be... and we listen. So that alone brings the community into our game a little bit closer than just pulling it off the shelf, paying for it, and thinking...man.. there really isn't too much to this game I just paid $50 for!!

 

Personally, I think it's OK to talk about the other sims, and compare them in a fair leveled conversation. As we can all see, we've all matured a lot since leaving SOH, and it's a good way we can learn about what you want out of a WWI sim.

 

All the best,

 

OvS

 

PS.. more planes are coming... Pol is just finishing the saftey wiring on the first addition to the next version of OFF... and it's to be delivered to my paint Flugwerks shop soon.... but I can't tell you what it is.

[UK_Widowmaker 571]

well said OvS....Indeed, we should constantly strive to make WW1 simulation even better at everystep.

 

For that reason, May I suggest we have a Sopwith Snipe in the next addon?

 

I am not sure if I have mentioned my interest in this particular aeroplane before, but........ blah, Blah, Blah

[Hauksbee 103]

I will predict this .... no matter want anyone said here, at some point 90% will purchase RoF in the future along with any BH&H phases...

I think she's got our number.

[shredward 12]

At the risk of derailing the thread:

Steve Drew - I love the website you and Andrew are putting together.

http://www.ozrnas.org.au/

The RNAS has always been my favourite field of interest in Great War aviation, and this is a great thing you are doing.

Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.

[Cameljockey 3]

I think she's got our number.

 

If they persist with the log on requirement for SP, I'll be in that 10%. Since MP really isn't my cuppa, the game is pretty much useless to me.

Edited June 9, 2009 by Cameljockey

[TSmoke 2]

Personally I am with Cameljockey.

 

However if the made the internet hookup for single player selectable and only update the game at my lesiure and if and when I decide to go multi-player, then I would buy it. Besides right now for 60 bucks and 2 planes I have no interest in it so it's not gonna happen.

[Duce Lewis 3]

When FE came out I was intrigued

But it seemed to be rushed with much less detail than OFF

There were only a few planes and if you wanted more, you had to buy them

I sat on the fence for a while but eventually decided there just wasn't enough there or anything that OFF wasn't supplying already

 

ROF looks to be in a similar situation now

Very few planes and some quirky log-on requirements

I will admit, the eye candy and DM look to be top notch though

Back up on the fence again

 

It's good to see that FE's progressing with mods, etc

I might take a 2nd look

 

But how can a sim with heavy modder input remain balanced?

I wonder if DH2's will outperform DVII's because that modder got a little crazy with the FM

One of OFF's greatest advantages is that the whole biiiiig package was researched, created, tested, & tweaked by 1 team

 

It sure is nice to be able to sit back and wait until they produce something that meets my needs ...thanks Devs!

 

And I'm also sure that the FE/ROF devotees are benefitting from all this too

Their Devs undoubtedly have copies of BHH, saying, how can we improve on this?

In the end, we the consumers are the winners ...why fight each other???

[Davy TASB 0]

I may or may not eventually decide to buy RoF seeing as I am basically a single player gamer.

However , I DEFINITELY wont be buying it if no British flyable

planes are included in the boxed copy.

 

A World War 1 Air sim with no option to play as a British Pilot.

 

Yer joking aren't yer!

Edited June 10, 2009 by Davy TASB

[Gremlin_WoH 0]

...

 

PS.. more planes are coming... Pol is just finishing the saftey wiring on the first addition to the next version of OFF... and it's to be delivered to my paint Flugwerks shop soon.... but I can't tell you what it is.

 

James, just out of curiosity: where is this safety wiring located at on the Fokker D.VIII you are speaking of?

[Cameljockey 3]

From what I gather, the only flyables available at this point are the SPAD XIII, Fokker DVII, and the Nieuport 17. As of now the British are excluded. I personally am taking a "wait and see" attitude on RoF. Right now it's the same price as BH&H, but has nowhere near the content. If they persist with the log on requirement for SP I won't be buying at all. Like I said, wait and see.

 

CJ

[Cameljockey 3]

James, just out of curiosity: where is this safety wiring located at on the Fokker D.VIII you are speaking of?

 

Do you know something we don't Gremlin, or are you just phishing?

[shredward 12]

Whots that, me young trout?