Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


streakeagle last won the day on October 9 2016

streakeagle had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

482 Good

About streakeagle

  • Rank
    Premier Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Orlando, FL USA


  • Website

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Yahoo

Recent Profile Visitors

13,837 profile views
  1. SF2 failed because the market didn't want it. The market that bought SFP1 knew where to go to get it and outright refused to buy it. SFP1 got a bad reputation from the start. Most people believed a "lite" sim meant low fidelity arcade. Many people who tried SFP1 simply didn't like it with too many complaints for me to list here. SF2 needed to offer something radically newer/better to get a large number paying SFP1 customers to buy it again and to attract people who had already dismissed SFP1/WoX. There wasn't much competition at the time, as the combat flight simulator market pretty much collapsed around that time. But the competition that was there, IL-2:Sturmovik and LOMAC/Flaming Cliffs, was making more people happy with their features/graphics/gameplay, so they were selling much better and are still putting out new versions to this very day. Ironically, I think the most successful of the air combat sims from that time frame and maybe even to this day were all the free mods/upgrades to Falcon 4.0, but only after Microprose went broke producing such a complex expensive game for what had become a very small niche.
  2. The addition of the F-14A to SF2 was the biggest draw this sim ever had... and it fell flat. The mission editor had consumed tons of money and time, but didn't draw the money the forum posts promised and the F-14 that "everyone" wanted didn't draw the money either. TK is not without blame. Many of his decisions/code changes were questionable among the die hard fans over the last few releases/patches, but no matter what TK did, the market simply did not want what he was selling. This fund raiser proved that this fact remains true to this day. A few die hard fans does not make a sim profitable. For SF2 to advance, a whole lot of people have to want that to happen and put their money where their mouth is. This fund raiser shows that the fans willing to fund future development just aren't numerous enough. This is the final nail in the coffin of SF series PC development beyond PC ports of Android free-to-play games.
  3. You know your into WWII/aviation history when...

    WTF? Why does a video for a dog being rescued open up with a Spitfire fuselage on a trailer?
  4. It is not really a matter of time. TK could extend it two more weeks, and neither the number of donors nor the amount donated would double. TK cast his lure based on ripples in the pond. But it was nothing but minnows nibbling on the bread.
  5. TK banked everything on the in-game mission editor, the F-14 Tomcat, and the new terrain engine and the dice went snake eyes. The new terrain engine as implemented in Iceland/SF2NA failed to impress me yet took a tremendous amount of time and effort for TK to implement. It wasn't readily supported with clear documentation for modders to make new terrains, which killed a critical aspect in the future of the game. The mission editor was ok, though I was happy with Kreelin's editor. The F-14 looked and worked very well, yet did not draw the money that might be expected from all the forum chatter about it prior to release. I am surprised he is even trying this go-fund-me as bad SF2 development/profitability went for him.
  6. The average doesn't matter, it is the total. Clearly it is not going to hit the mark and I threw my money away. The active SF2 "crowd" is probably less than 2,000 people and only 37 have donated. That's a wrap. When I consider how much money I have spent going to movies that might have entertained me for 2 hours, I don't have a problem with giving TK some more money. I literally played SFP1/WoX/SF2 almost every day for about a decade. The F-4 Phantom is the airplane I love the most and to this day SF2 is still the best sim to enjoy the F-4 in its historical environment. The FSX/P3d F-4s I have from Milviz and Simworks Studios are amazing, but are almost useless in that environment. TacPack is cool, but it doesn't even come close to providing the experience you can get in SF2. At this point, DCS World is the only combat flight sim available that satisfies me. But even after the F-4E is available in DCS World (2 to 5 years away?), DCS World still won't have the century series or a full Korean War environment with flyable F2H-2s (and numerous other aircraft not likely to ever be modeled in DCS World). It is a shame that TK couldn't find a way to keep the SF2 series profitable and continue development.
  7. "$25,000 USD is the minimum we need to cover the cost of development and testing. At this level funding, the update will simply be Windows 10/DirectX 12 update with no other fixes, enhancement or improvement." 2 months is a fair (perhaps even optimistic) estimate for the specified work. $25,000 for two months (8 x 40-hour weeks: $78/hour) is a fair, maybe even cheap price for a programmer with his knowledge and experience. Have you ever priced programmers? In the controls industry, you typically pay $100 to $200 per hour for a contracted controls programmer / engineer to edit existing code. Just hiring electricians to pull wire, etc. is $80 to $100 per hour. Keep in mind, that is not his take home pay, there are expenses. In TK's case, he is a one man company, so that pay gets divided into things like retirement, healthcare, business expenses, etc. TK has made it pretty clear that there is nothing that can't be done if the money is right. But there are no specific guarantees about where any excess money would go. So, it would not be prudent to exceed the $25,000 requested. He should have provided funding gates for the options he was willing to do in the order he was willing to commit to them... things like air-to-air refueling, VR, etc. TK has set a pretty low bar on what to expect and made it clear what the projected timeline is expected to be. Now it is up to the SF2 fans to pony up or shut up. If you ever want to see SF2 progress, this baseline project is the first step. If SF2 fans won't fund this, there will be no other updates/improvements. If there were just 5,000 fans donating $5, this bill would be covered. But the active SF2 community is probably much smaller than that and of those there probably aren't enough people willing to pay to even get this small update done.
  8. Nice job! DCS World looks stunning at this point. Unfortunately, I lose that quality when I fly VR.
  9. I try to rotate through everything but find myself flying the F-5E a bit more than anything else, but I really enjoy flying the F-86F as well. I try to get in at least one flight every night... either a cold ramp start/takeoff/landing or a quick dogfight. Some nights, I start flying early and go to bed way too late. Nevada is my favorite terrain... a throwback to Jane's USAF. So any aircraft that has a quick start air-to-air mission over Nevada gets some of my flying time.
  10. SU-57 and wow

    The F-35 is no sweetheart, but its Boeing competitor was even worse.
  11. Track IR and FE 2

    This is an ini file for each individual aircraft the filename is the name of the aircraft followed by "_cockpit.ini". This is applicable to both SF2 and FE2 games as they are essentially the same engine and use almost the same codebase.
  12. SU-57 and wow

    Looks like a cross between and F-23 and an Su-27. I have never cared much for the looks of an F-22 as it is more or less a fat ugly version of an F-15 with stealth features. The production F-22 is sleeker than the prototype, but it is still ugly from many angles. The F-23 is just racially different from anything else flying. I would have gambled on developing the F-23 into a production aircraft rather than going with the "conservative" F-22. Su-57 looks very nice, but I think the F-23 is the standout aircraft despite never going into production.
  13. Mig Monday Video

    MiG-25s, as originally built, carried 4xAA-6 Acrid and had no gun. Theoretically 2xIRM and 2xRHM. They were built to intercept high altitude Mach 3 aircraft like the XB-70 and SR-71. They were not dogfighters and had no lookdown/shootdown capability. The most useful variants were the recce versions, which were poor man's SR-71s. An Iraqi MiG-25PD most likely shot down an F/A-18 with an AA-6 during Desert Storm.
  14. Track IR and FE 2

    The game developer decides which things to support or not support. TK/Third Wire was an early supporter of the original TrackIR with 3 DOF. When "Vector" was released supporting 6 DOF, he added moving left/right, up/down, but did not add the ability to tilt your head. The left/right and up/down are also very limited movements. All Third Wire games support TrackIR in "Enhanced Mode", which means the game was designed to use it fully/correctly. Once you can get TrackIR working correctly in your games, the key is to create custom profiles to match your preferences. I like to disable all of the TrackIR button functions except "Recenter", and I map that one to the POV hat center "push-down" position on my throttle in all of my games. I also uncheck the "trap" option so that I can still use that same button in games to reset my view to the default forward view... so one button brings me back to the default view and recalibrates my TrackIR center at the same time. I just have to be looking at the center of the screen when I do so to get the re-center correct. It takes some time playing with the axis profiles to find out what you like. Smooth? Fast? Deadband? Flat curve? Ramped curve? I can't tell you what to do. Just pick and axis and try switching between the default profiles as well as playing with the speed and smoothness settings. You may like different profiles for different games.
  15. Track IR and FE 2

    You shouldn't need mouse emulation for FE2, 5 out of 6 degrees of freedom TrackIR support is built in.

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..