Jump to content

squid

ELITE MEMBER
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    1,169

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by squid

  4. Posted · Edited by squid

    MiG-29 missing afterburner effect, and target symbology in HUD. Brain32 provided me the simple fixes for that. Some SF2 related minor changes in Mig29.ini, MiG-29A_AVIONICS.INI (& MiG-29C_AVIONICS.INI). Also something like the seat and/or the pilot are casting an own indepedent shadow off the plane (some offset) Note the second shadow a little above the cockpit area of the Fulcrum shadow near the Pyramids

  14. Posted

    Nato4+ has an absolutely amazing amount of work included and made of ... its a definite must. The other good thing about it is that with SF2 you can easily isolate and make AI or delete what you possibly dont like. The Russian birds in it, especially the MiG-29 is, what can i say, a pure sin that is freeware ... scandalous ... actually the whole package is of payware level. Amazing work in that MiG-29. The Flanker is great too but the MiG-29 cockpit could lend some details to the Su27 pit, some elements that are common and are awesomely modeled in MiG29. Will check later my other two favorites, MiG23 and Su-17

     

    (cudos ofcourse also to the Gulf war gigantic addon pack)

  19. Posted · Edited by squid

    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)

  20. Posted

    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 :good:

     

     

    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 ...)

  21. Posted · Edited by squid

    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).

  22. Posted · Edited by squid

    My list refers to TW stock aircraft or at least of absolutely equal quality and completion level addons

     

    Basicaly :

     



    • F-16C Block 30 (or 40 or 50)
    • Mirage 2000 C or Mirage 2000-5
    • F/A-18A/C

     

    Secondly maybe

     

    • F-5A/B/E/F, Talon
    • F-104A/C/G, TF-104 (with some solution regarding the Lockheed copyrights ...)
    • Korea Theater warbirds
    • Falklands Theater warbirds
    • 80-90's Russian birds (MiG29, Su27, Su25, MiG25)
    • Full Jumpjet range (especially FRS1 Sea Harrier & AV-8B)
    • A Tornado, Jaguar, Mirage 3/5 (easily done), Mirage F1, Vigen, "Europack" (♥)
    • 4th generation jets (EF2000, Rafale, Gripen, Raptor, F-35)

  25. Posted

    Thank you guys. I think its maybe not the same F-16 3D model ... For one, the canopy in this screenshot has surface effects similar to stock F-16A, which the one in this semi-LANTIRN mod (MF?) doesnt have. I think all the MF F-16s dont have those canopy surface effects. Then the LANTIRN in the screenshot i post looks to be more on correct scale, while the pods in the semi-functional LANTIRN mod look kinda out of scale?

     

    (thats probably a mod we can use with any F-16 model i guess? will check later ...)

×

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..

  I accept