RAF_Louvert 101 Posted July 10, 2009 I have sent the following email in an effort to address this continuing misconception. I hope that something good may come of it. We'll see, I guess. Mr. Ben Dunnell Deputy Editor Combat Aircraft Magazine Dear Mr. Dunnell, I am writing in regards to a recent article published in your magazine by Jay Slater, entitled "Canvas Knights: A New Dawn for IL2". It was an informative and well-written piece about the upcoming WW1 combat flight sim Canvas Knights, scheduled for release this fall. I would however like to comment on one item. Over Flanders Fields is mentioned in passing but is quickly dismissed as somehow being out-of-date in comparison, due to its use of the CFS3 engine. I have seen such inferences made before as concerns this sim and it troubles me a bit as it seems to be made from a uniformed position. Both the CFS3 and the IL2 engines are pushing the decade mark in age, and while the IL2-based project does seem to offer more possibilities in the multi-player theater, it honestly pails in comparison to what the OFF devs have done with their 5-year CFS3-based project and it's recent finished release, "Between Heaven and Hell". This is not simply an add-on to CFS3 but is in fact a complete rework from the ground up, and an outstanding one at that. The number and quality of flyable aircraft, the flight and damage models, and the sheer volume of squadron and ace plane skins is phenomenal. It is a full-immersion dynamic campaign experience, with all-new ground objects, date-accurate weather for the 1914-18 period, and the entire Western Front to fly and fight over. The virtual pilot can choose to fly for any of four separate air services, as either a scout or bomber/recce pilot. The missions are many and varied, and there are even such challenges as fending of Zeppelin attacks and night bombing raids over London, complete with searchlights. And, while it is more geared towards the single-player side, we have a growing and active online MMP community as well. I honestly believe that if you were to drop by the OFF website and spend but a few minutes looking at the results of this long-running project you would quickly see just how astounding this Great War combat flight sim really is. Here is the link: http://www.overflandersfields.com/info.htm I find it unfortunate that OFF's Between Heaven and Hell has been so overlooked by nearly every publication that devotes time and resources to such items of interest. I am certain that the folks who have enjoyed such classic WW1 flight sims as RB3D would thrill to the rich experience BHaH has to offer, every bit as much as that being hailed in Rise of Flight, Canvas Knights, and others. Perhaps this is an oversight that your outstanding publication would consider addressing. Thank you very much Mr. Dunnell for your time and consideration, and I hope you will consider giving OFF Between Heaven and Hell a brief write-up. Best Regards, Steven Larson (a veteran WW1 combat flight simmer) . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hauksbee 103 Posted July 10, 2009 Well said. Well said, indeed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hasse Wind 46 Posted July 10, 2009 Superb! That should be enough to get anybody's attention. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CaptSopwith 22 Posted July 10, 2009 Very well written letter sir. Hopefully that will get the ball rolling and get OFF some positive attention. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fortiesboy 3 Posted July 10, 2009 Well done indeed.! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wels 2 Posted July 10, 2009 Well done indeed.! Yes, well said and done. It is "unfortunate" that RoF came out shortly after OFF phase 3, and spent a hell of a budget for advertising, which OFF did not have. I somehow get the feeling that some of the OFF reviewers did not really get into the depths of the simulation, just a strifing look and "let's move on". There's certainly not much of WW1 flight sim fans around, compared to the mainstream sims. There are not so much people apart from real pilots that may judge a flight model and compare it to other planes, of an era a hundred years ago. But i guess rumours of OFF's quality and fun will also spread by "word of mouth" (does one say that?), if not so fast. Just let's not go down on some other's niveau and slap other sims one don't even played yet. I also think there's no problem of having both sims on one's drive, on mine there's even RB3d with HASP and FCJ to choose from . Thanks and greetings, Catfish Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Olham 164 Posted July 10, 2009 Well done, lou. It may well be, that some of these magazines don't even try out each sim, they mention and tread down with a few words - which is a real shame. I hope they'll have second thoughts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OvS 8 Posted July 10, 2009 Steve, We can't thank you enough for bringing out the 'bias' point to yet another magazine. All sims, no matter what the engine, deserve the same amount of attention as the next. And OFF is no different. Within 2 seconds of looking at that article, I could see the model issues of both the Alb D.III and the N.11 from that game. So if they want to clamor about the 'old CFS3' engine OFF is built on, they should clamor about the differences between the look and depth of OFF verses all the others. As you pointed out, there is a lot more to OFF than pretty airplanes, and some really sweet scenery. In OFF, you are part of the war, you're not just playing a game. OvS Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SGCSG1 0 Posted July 10, 2009 Outstanding letter. GOOD JOB! It will be very interesting to see if anything comes of this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rickitycrate 10 Posted July 10, 2009 Right on the mark old man! Most excellent work on your part. May it bare fruit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
