Post E3 Stress Syndrome

[GMicek]

From time to time I find myself completely burned out on gaming. I'm not some salty old man who's been playing for 30 years or anything. Sure, i had a 2600 in the early 80's, but I didn't become a real gamer until '88 or '89. But it's not just games that have me burned out at the moment, it's almost anything relating to them.

I used to go to a good number of websites every day in an attempt to keep up on gaming news. But since i got back from E3 i've only had the desire to go to frictionlessinsight and gamedaily on a regular basis while i hit gamersclick from time to time. Maybe it's because it gets a little dull reading the same stuff on every single website out there. What's worse is that a lot of the stuff is simply copy & paste jobs of press releases. When there is new and original content it reads like a paid advertisement for a game(and I used to think only Avault offered that service, heh)

I'm so blah right now that the only gaming magazine i've bothered reading for the past few weeks is Develop. Normally i'll steal some of my friends magazines or crack open some of my old magazines and read them while taking calls at work, but there is a suprising similarity between game magazines published last week and those published 10 years ago, and that's not a good thing(there's a Derek Smart joke in there somewhere).

I'm not even up to playing games at this point. The only titles i've enjoyed over the last few weeks have been Tropico and Spaced Penguin. Soldier of Fortune 2 leaves me angry (it runs that poorly on my machine? you would think that an 1800xp w/ 512 DDR ram and a 128meg GForce 4 would be adequate) and depressed (it's different from SOF1 but that doesn't make it good). I'm even getting burned out on IL2 Sturmovik and Seadogs so things must be really bad. So here I am with a pile of new games, all unopened. sigh.

Funny how this happens every year when i get back from E3. I'm not sure why it is, it's not like i'm dreaming about all the wonderful games i saw. Sure, there were some great ones, but i'm not exactly chomping at the bit to play them.

[Sean Tudor]

I have been more excited than ever about gaming. Games I have currently been playing :

1. IL2 Sturmovik
2. Morrowind
3. Grand Theft Auto 3
4. Independence War 2

I am looking forward to buying :

1. Warcraft III
2. Sea Dogs 2
3. Lock On : Modern Air Combat
4. MOH : Allied Assault

In fact dare I say we have never had it so good. When I look at a game like IL2 Sturmovik then compare that to what I was playing not even 3 years ago there is a huge improvement. Plus I just updated my old computer to an Athlon XP 1900+ and GeForce4 Ti4600 and my gaming enjoyment has increased 10-fold with this new system.

Cheers,
Sean.

[GMicek]

I have been more excited than ever about gaming. Games I have currently been playing :

4. Independence War 2
2. Sea Dogs 2

In fact dare I say we have never had it so good. When I look at a game like IL2 Sturmovik then compare that to what I was playing not even 3 years ago there is a huge improvement. Plus I just updated my old computer to an Athlon XP 1900+ and GeForce4 Ti4600 and my gaming enjoyment has increased 10-fold with this new system.


I loved I-War 1 but I-War 2 was a real dissapointment, I find it difficult to talk about still, heh. Sea Dogs 2 looks great, no doubt about that! I tried to spend some time with it at E3 but the language barrier at the Akella booth was pretty severe. And i know what you mean about upgrading the system. It really does make a huge difference. First thing i did was load up Falcon 4.0 and try to fly some missions in campaign mode, the true test!

[DennyA]

My "excitement" level has certainly calmed a bit with games. I remember in college driving around the campus and literally chasing down the UPS guy after I missed the delivery attempt on F-18 Interceptor for my Amiga. Now I only get that giddy over new hardware purchases. (Canon Pro90 IS camera, baby!)

Still, though, I'm enjoying gaming more than ever. Morrowind (the first RPG I've enjoyed since my Amiga days), Freedom Force, Bridge Commander, Starfleet Command II, Jedi Knight II, Advance Wars, Civ III, etc...

Ironically, it's my "favorite" genre that I'm not finding as interesting. I'm still enjoying flight sims -- IL-2 is amazing -- but I will admit that the gameplay in that genre has lost its magic. Current sim designers need to be strapped down to a 386SX and forced to spend a couple of weeks playing Holland's Battle of Britain, Aces of the Pacific, and Chuck Yeager's Air Combat. I'm hoping that Holland may bring some of that magic back to his new flight sim, but the fact that it's coming out on all the consoles makes me worry it'll be more X-Wing than BOB.

I want a sim with *optional* realistic flight models and AI (with easier modes for casual players), a good padlock (unlike IL-2), and missions with the "magic" of the sims I mentioned above. I still remember the first time I managed to shoot down an F-4 Phantom in a P-51 Mustang in CYAC. That was FUN. There's nothing to preclude doing a BOB or AOTP style game that has realistic enough AI, instruments, and flight models to allow knowledgeable players to maintain suspension of disbelief.
http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/aircraft/spinjet.gif

But Falcon 4.0 with the user-created realism patches? That ain't a game, that's work!

[wumpus]

Now I only get that giddy over new hardware purchases. (Canon Pro90 IS camera, baby!)
Koolance watercooled case. Best. Hardware. Purchase. Ever.

http://koolance.com/products/pc2-601/

I'm as giddy as a schoolgirl over the fact that my Athlon XP 2100+ is now running at 1933 real megahertz instead of 1733 and.. here's the best part.. the system is running at near silent levels. And miraculously, I can hear again!

The Koolance system is all pre-built -- watercooling for idiots, and as a card carrying idiot, I can attest that it actually works. Filling your reservoir with distilled water and additive, then firing up the pump and watching the water flow through the tubing and the CPU cooler is, for lack of a better word, cool. In an uber-geeky kind of way.

But Falcon 4.0 with the user-created realism patches? That ain't a game, that's work!
A topic I touched on briefly with Bruce Geryk w/r/t his last review for GameSpot, but I heard through the grapevine that Bruce is never coming back to these boards. It's a shame, but then again Steve said that too, so heh.

[TomChick]

Ironically, it's my "favorite" genre that I'm not finding as interesting...I will admit that the gameplay in that genre has lost its magic.

As someone who's still pretty psyched about flight sims, I couldn't disagree more, Denny. As you said, IL-2 *is* amazing, especially with the random mission generator. I reviewed Flanker 2.5 recently and I'm surprised at how well that's held up. I have pretty high hopes for Lock On, which is being made by the Flanker guys.

I want a sim with...missions with the "magic" of the sims I mentioned above.

I have no idea what that means. "Magic" is like "fun": it means so many different things to so many different people that it ends up not meaning anything.

I still remember the first time I managed to shoot down an F-4 Phantom in a P-51 Mustang in CYAC. That was FUN.

"Magic" = "fun"? Sorry to pick on you, Denny, but I've played flight sims since the first Gunship and I just don't agree with this 'good ol' days' stuff. Yeah, Chuck Yeager's Air Combat was great in hindsight. Go ahead and play it nowadays. I give you fifteen minutes before you come running back to MiG Alley, IL-2, or Aces over Europe.

But Falcon 4.0 with the user-created realism patches? That ain't a game, that's work!

Have you tried it lately? The user created patches have been streamlined to where it's pretty simple to install. It does a lot to salvage Falcon 4.0 from the mess in which it was released.

-Tom

[Anonymous]

I have no idea what that means. "Magic" is like "fun": it means so many different things to so many different people that it ends up not meaning anything..

Perhaps the "newness" of the experience had something to do with with the excitment. AOTP was the *first* time I had the chance to really "feel" like I was flying over the Pacific. (The Corsairs look silly now, but compared to the games that had come before AOTP, this was photorealism, baby!)

But there were lots of touches in those games -- little things -- that were lost in later sims. Being able to name your wingmen to me adds more immersion that perfect clouds. "Oh, crap, they shot down Phil!" Flight recorders died for a long time thanks to EA focus groups. I'm very glad to see them back in IL-2 and Flanker.

"Magic" = "fun"? Sorry to pick on you, Denny, but I've played flight sims since the first Gunship and I just don't agree with this 'good ol' days' stuff. Yeah, Chuck Yeager's Air Combat was great in hindsight. Go ahead and play it nowadays. I give you fifteen minutes before you come running back to MiG Alley, IL-2, or Aces over Europe.

Well, certainly the flight models, graphics, and AI wouldn't hold my attention today. But the basic design, the ability to pit aircraft from different eras against each other? I'd love to see that in a modern sim.

Have you tried it lately? The user created patches have been streamlined to where it's pretty simple to install. It does a lot to salvage Falcon 4.0 from the mess in which it was released.

I haven't looked at the latest versions, to tell the truth. I need to. But when I read about a recent patch that required you to go through the actual switch sequence just to start the freaking engine, I began to wonder about the priorities of the guys working on these.

[Sean Tudor]

Hi Denny,

Ironically, it's my "favorite" genre that I'm not finding as interesting. I'm still enjoying flight sims -- IL-2 is amazing -- but I will admit that the gameplay in that genre has lost its magic. Current sim designers need to be strapped down to a 386SX and forced to spend a couple of weeks playing Holland's Battle of Britain, Aces of the Pacific, and Chuck Yeager's Air Combat. I'm hoping that Holland may bring some of that magic back to his new flight sim, but the fact that it's coming out on all the consoles makes me worry it'll be more X-Wing than BOB.

The magic ? I will admit there was a lot of magic in Secret Weapons Of The Luftwaffe and other sims but I certainly wouldn't play those sims now. My rose colored glasses have well and truly faded. 320x200 graphics just do not cut it anymore.

When you look at IL2 Sturmovik this sim is just light years ahead of the rest of the pack. I have had more fun in IL2 Sturmovik in the last 7 months than I have had in the entire history of the flight-sim genre. The graphics and effects are astonishing. The damage model is A1 - no hit bubbles. The flight model is all real time with NO lookup tables used.

Best of all IL2 has the sweetest multiplayer code of any game I have ever played - including all the latest first person shooters. What other game allows me to play against or with 20 other people in a mission on my 28.8Kbps modem connect ? None.

I want a sim with *optional* realistic flight models and AI (with easier modes for casual players), a good padlock (unlike IL-2), and missions with the "magic" of the sims I mentioned above.

IL2 is fully scalable. But please explain what this magic is ?

I still remember the first time I managed to shoot down an F-4 Phantom in a P-51 Mustang in CYAC. That was FUN. There's nothing to preclude doing a BOB or AOTP style game that has realistic enough AI, instruments, and flight models to allow knowledgeable players to maintain suspension of disbelief.

I think what you are really describing are your very first experiences playing flight simulations. Maybe you have become jaded. I have been flight simming since I purchased SubLogic's Flight Simulator I for my Apple ][. I have never lost the thrill or magic of flight simulations - both civilian or military.

The suspension of disbelief in a sim like IL2 is incredible. Just the other day I joined a co-op dawn mission online. Mist was floating through the mountains and the sun was casting a beautiful dawn light over the landscape. I have to tell you it was breathtaking. I certainly can't get this feeling playing any of my old simulations.

Heck I've even had trouble trying to get back into Rowan's Battle Of Britain. There really is no comparison. I certainly can't go back to CYAC after playing any sims of the last 3-4 years or so.

Lastly, I have matured. I simply do not have time for simplified combat sims anymore. Now I want more - full realistic flight models. I know how to land an aircraft. I know how to lead a target. I know how to recover from a stall. I have read Shaws book on combat maneuvers. All these skills have been practiced over and over again in past sims.

But Falcon 4.0 with the user-created realism patches? That ain't a game, that's work!

I'd have to agree with Tom - if you are a true Falcon 4.0 fan the latest Superpak 3 makes this one of the best combat sims around.

Denny - wake up man ! You've never had it so good ! :wink:

[Gordon Berg]

I'm with Denny on this one, sims have lost their magic for me as well.

I constantly mull over this topic in my mind and still can't decide if I'm entirely to blame or if the fault lay with simulations. So fuck it, I'll just split it down the middle and say each party is 50% guilty.

The point that we mature as players is a good one, but the flip side to that coin is one of burn out. After a steady diet of fantastic simulations, I'm stuffed. It doesn't matter that IL2 is phenomenal in so many ways because I simply don't care anymore. Now I get my jollies from other genres (NWN will probably be the death of me). So I'll take the blame for being jaded, but there hasn't been a big enough shift foward in sims to overcome my dispassion.

Yet.

I had a good chat about this with Tucker Hatfield (head cheese over MS CF3), and he agreed with me. That's why I'm hopeful, and dare I say it, excited over the prospect of Combat Flight Simulator 3 and what is proposed in the feature list.

[Sean Tudor]

Hi Gordon,

Yet.

I had a good chat about this with Tucker Hatfield (head cheese over MS CF3), and he agreed with me. That's why I'm hopeful, and dare I say it, excited over the prospect of Combat Flight Simulator 3 and what is proposed in the feature list.

I am trying hard to get excited about CFS3 with little success. From the many reports on the sim it seems it will favour eye candy rather than hardcore features. IL2 has both hardcore features and eye candy.

Some strikes against CFS3 :

1. CFS3 still uses hit bubbles for damage - yes they are smaller but still there. IL2 uses a realtime damage model. A round entering the aircraft skin will travel through to the frame, fuel tank, or vital engine components.

2. CFS3 still uses fixed lookup tables for flight modelling. IL2 uses full realtime dynamic airflow calculations.

3. In IL2 new flight models and aircraft must be approved by Oleg Maddox before being released to the public. This stops the hacking of FM's that has plagued the CFS series.

4. The netcode in CFS2 was terrible with limited online oponents. I'd love to see this improved in CFS3 but am not holding my breath. We all know just how well IL2 multiplay works.

What we are seeing is a fundamental difference in the way these two companies work. Oleg Maddox is an aircraft engineer and enthusiast and is passionate about his flight sim to the point of being anal. Result ? We get a sim - IL2 - that is at least 3 years ahead of the competition.

CFS3 on the other hand is still being marketed to the masses and hence has a number of dumbed down features. One of the editors at SimHQ noted the awful gunsight in CFS3 which was not very realistic at all.

I am still puzzled why everyone is having "flight sim burnout". We have had so few titles over the last couple of years. The Janes label is long gone, Rowan has ceased to exist as a flight sim company, and Razorworks is defunct. The only major title that has been released has been IL2 Sturmovik.

What have we got to look forward to ?

Lock On : Modern Air Combat
Falcon V
Project 1
CFS3

I wouldn't call that burnout material. :wink:

Cheers,
Sean.

[Gordon Berg]

I am still puzzled why everyone is having "flight sim burnout".

Because the more realistic and lifelike it becomes, the more excited you get.

Not me. I'm no longer thrilled with the lure of realism. Although Tom has pointed out that the sims we cut our teeth on would have us running and screaming from the room if we played them today, it's hard to let go of how they evoke a nostalgic game-like memory. I wish I could feel like I'm once again playing a game in a sim environment.

All those strikes you listed against CFS3, well, I could give a shit. I'm hoping CFS3 does a good job of incorporating some classic roleplaying hooks that have been missing from this genre for a long time, if they were ever there at all (I know SWOTL used to make me think they were, so it disturbs me a bit that I find I'm not intrigued by Larry Holland's next project. I guess I don't think he pull it off).

Dear Admin, time to move this thread over to GAMES.

[Sean Tudor]

Hi Gordon,

What other games have you been playing lately ? And apart from NWN what are you looking forward to ?

Cheers,
Sean.

[TomChick]

The point that we mature as players is a good one, but the flip side to that coin is one of burn out. After a steady diet of fantastic simulations, I'm stuffed. It doesn't matter that IL2 is phenomenal in so many ways because I simply don't care anymore.

That's fine, but you're talking about something personal rather than something that applies to the state of sims. We all know about your own meltdown from your last CGW column. :)

When Denny talks about how sims don't have the same magic they used to have, I don't really understand. It sounds to me more like burnout than the decline of a genre. Because as someone who still enjoys the genre, I just see a decline in quantity, not quality.

BTW, I'd put Lock On on my list of top five most anticipated games. Aren't you even looking forward to that, or are you just totally over sims? Oh, wait, there aren't any house fans in Lock On...

-Tom

[mtkafka]

I dont play sims much anymore (since EAW), but I bought Il2 and even though I havent delved into it too much, I can pretty much tell its THE flight sim to beat...

Lomac I am interested in because it seems to be taking the Janes multi jet sim approach, with some old Lucasarts BoB/SWoTL and Aces of the Pacific with jets gameplay. I like the idea of the game. Sorta like a more grown up version of Janes USAF but with a campaign generator thingy. Oh yeah its also by the nation thats also making Sea Dogs 2 which I think will be an underdog underrrated game. Those Russians are rocking now!

And nothing beats the phallic jet love I have of yesteryore my loinds. The F-15 is my favorite jet with 2 pratt and whitney turbo engines up your airhose! You betcha!

etc

[Ben Sones]

Personally, my biggest beef with sims today is that they focus on realism first and fun second. I don't have a problem with realism, mind you, but many of today's sims play like a great engine in search of a game. Sturmovik is a prime example [dons flameproof suit]. The individual missions are fun, but ultimately it feels like just that--a bunch of missions. The engine is one of the best I've ever seen. As a game, it left me somewhat cold.

CFS3 looks like it could be an exception. Sean's beefs aside, the campaign engine looks a hell of a lot more interesting than Sturnovik's. And so what if the physics are based on a set of fixed tables? Microsoft's had a couple of decades to tweak those tables, and the game's physics feel plenty realistic to me. I find it hard to get upset over something that far under the hood. I'd probably never have noticed if it weren't pointed out to me.

[Gordon Berg]

That's fine, but you're talking about something personal rather than something that applies to the state of sims. We all know about your own meltdown from your last CGW column. :)

What meltdown? I was merely relaying Canonical Truth to sim lay people. ;-)

Yeah, I'm interested in LOMAC, but for only one reason. I'm hoping it will be the A-10 sim we never got to fly before. And don't knock housefan flying, junior. You and your BVR. Wuss.

Sean: *Still* trying to finish up BG2 and haven't even started on the Throne of Baal add-on yet. Running parallel games of MOH, JK2, and AVP2 (you don't have MOH yet??? Are you nuts?). Holding off on Freedom Force and Morrowind for the time being. Just got over my addiction to Dark Age of Camelot. That mostly filled the sim void for me these past nine months.

I find that now that I have steady access to broadband speeds, I've been playing a lot of fps multiplayer online with the bulk of playtime going to Counter-Strike and Day of Defeat.

[Desslock]

>Personally, my biggest beef with sims today is that they focus on realism first and fun second.

Yeah, that's true. I like realism, but I'm more interested in someone actually trying to make the sim genre more than just "limited arena fighting". It's the same reason, I believe, space sims have all but died out (where realism obviously isn't a problem) -- the genres are stagnant. They focus almost entirely on just improving graphics, adding a few more planes, better clouds, better damage modeling -- but never think outside the box. They need to do something more ambitious -- make the world far more interesting, dynamic -- and not just by having tanks shoot at each other. Sims are repetitive and the arenas are stagnant -- I'd like to see a game that featured a great sim component, but also offered more.

That said, I think IL2 is one of the best sims to come along in a long, long time.

[DennyA]

Ben expressed what I was trying to get across well... Sure, IL-2 is amazing. Flanker 2.5 is impressive. But both games are wonderful equipment simulators, with sterile missions that just aren't engaging. Fly the way points, blow crap up, limp home.

(Gordon, on the other hand, is just burned out. <g> I'm not that far gone. I've spent dozens of hours enjoying IL-2. Despite its crap padlock.)

Dig out your library and read some of the war stories... Reading Boyington, Yeager, Gillchrist, and other describe these missions is great for using your imagination to fill the gaps in on "waypoint" missions, but I'd prefer the game developers do it for me.

And Sean, you're the problem. :-) Most of the stuff you cite as problematic in CFS3, I could give a rat's tuckus about. My main desire from a sim centers on it being CONVINCING, rather than 100% realistic. There needs to be a balance between realism and fun. The current slider is way over on the realism side. I think a lot of the changes cited for CFS3 may bring some of the fun back--we'll see!

I think we need sims that are more like war movies, in a way, than real war. "We've got to take out that Nazi ball-bearing factory, or the skies will be crawling with Messerschmitts!" Get the player more involved in a storyline. When you read pilot memoirs, the air combat is a small part of it. Being part of the big effort, losing your newbie wingman, taking out crucial targets, etc -- that stuff is all key, but it's largely ignored in today's sims.

The fact is, if you've ever flown in combat aircraft -- or even laser-equipped training planes -- you know sims are NOT "realistic," and they never will be. And if you've read pilot memoirs, you know that "realistic" missions would be boring as hell -- fly hours to the target, take one pass at the enemy planes, fly home.

I don't want dumbed down, arcade airplanes. I want the aircraft to be convincing, but with concessions for the fact that you're flying from a desk and not sitting a real cockpit -- a super-padlock isn't a "cheat," it's making up for the fact that you can't whip your head around to look for enemies, for instance. At least make that an OPTION in games like IL-2.

And I want missions like the ones in F-14 Fleet Defender, BOB, and PAW -- missions that tell you the goal, have interesting surprises, and make you feel like you're part of history. But I want those peppered with all the modern advancements -- random enemy starting locations, planes on the ground that will scramble if you come near their airfield, etc.

I'm not asking for a regression to CYAC days. But I want to see some of the "fun" that was in the mission and general sim design brought forward to modern engines.

And Sean, I want the realistic flight models, damage models, etc. There's no reason you can't have those in a more accessible, and more entertaining, game.

[Mark Asher]

I can't even get my planes to successfully take off. I'm aces at Sim Crash Landing, but that's it.

I like Il-2, but it's not as good as Everquest.

[rdarnese]

I'm with Denny on this one, sims have lost their magic for me as well.


I remember playing Battlehawks and thinking that this was the best thing since sliced bread. I still got that feeling (but muted) playing EAW and Mig Alley, but I just can't get into most modern sims. I think the problem with me is I don't have the time these days to sit down and learn ALL of those combinations that are required to fly the plane. And this is coming from someone who LIKES turned based wargames ;).

[Sean Tudor]

Tom Chick said :

We all know about your own meltdown from your last CGW column. :)
Oh please tell - what did Gordon say ? 8)

Ben Sones said:

CFS3 looks like it could be an exception. Sean's beefs aside, the campaign engine looks a hell of a lot more interesting than Sturnovik's. And so what if the physics are based on a set of fixed tables? Microsoft's had a couple of decades to tweak those tables, and the game's physics feel plenty realistic to me. I find it hard to get upset over something that far under the hood. I'd probably never have noticed if it weren't pointed out to me.
The fact that the Microsoft simulation series is still using lookup tables speaks volumes for the type of sim developers at Microsoft. Lookup tables is so old hat it just isn't funny. We have 1.6GHz+ CPU's now that have more than enough power to run full dynamic flight model calculations.

Once you have flown a simulation that doesn't use lookup tables there really is no going back. All other sims seem sterile. And you don't have to be a hardcore anal flight sim junky like myself to notice the difference.

Gordon Berg said:

Sean: *Still* trying to finish up BG2 and haven't even started on the Throne of Baal add-on yet. Running parallel games of MOH, JK2, and AVP2 (you don't have MOH yet??? Are you nuts?). Holding off on Freedom Force and Morrowind for the time being. Just got over my addiction to Dark Age of Camelot. That mostly filled the sim void for me these past nine months.
Yes I must be one of the last people on this planet not to have MOH:AA. I have played the demo and loved it. I am just waiting for it to come out as a budget title. Which could be a long wait. :cry:

I do have Jedi Knight 2 and MorroWind and absolutely love both titles. The later stages of JK2 are amazing once you get full force powers and light sabre combat. Morrowind is one of the reasons I upgraded my computer system this year (after 4 years). The title plays and looks fabulous on my GF4 Ti4600.

Desslock said:

Yeah, that's true. I like realism, but I'm more interested in someone actually trying to make the sim genre more than just "limited arena fighting". It's the same reason, I believe, space sims have all but died out (where realism obviously isn't a problem) -- the genres are stagnant. They focus almost entirely on just improving graphics, adding a few more planes, better clouds, better damage modeling -- but never think outside the box. They need to do something more ambitious -- make the world far more interesting, dynamic -- and not just by having tanks shoot at each other. Sims are repetitive and the arenas are stagnant -- I'd like to see a game that featured a great sim component, but also offered more.

But a sim is a sim is a sim - except when it isn't. :wink: What you are really describing is wanting a game like Crimson Skies. I assume you have played this ? It is more of a UFO simulator than a flight sim but it is fun in a Strike Commander sort of way.

My enjoyment of IL2 increased ten-fold for two reasons :

1. My new computer
2. I joined an online virtual WWI/WWII squadron

Once I joined a squadron it became a whole new ballgame. Now I am responsible for real wingmen. Plus my squadron also participates in major online wars between other squadrons. This role playing aspect has added a lot to my enjoyment of IL2 apart from the reasons I have mentioned in earlier posts.

Plus I do not have to make the huge time commitments online with IL2 as I would with another online game such as EverQuest. Oh and it is free.

Can I ask you one question ? If IL2 Sturmovik had been set in a familiar Western Front theater with allied aircraft would it have made a difference to you ? I can say I almost passed over IL2 Sturmovik for this reason since I knew nothing about the Eastern Front air battles of WWII. Thank god I played the demo.

Cheers,
Sean.

[Ben Sones]

But a sim is a sim is a sim - except when it isn't. :wink: What you are really describing is wanting a game like Crimson Skies. I assume you have played this ? It is more of a UFO simulator than a flight sim but it is fun in a Strike Commander sort of way.

Well, that's one good example, actually. But as Denny said, you needn't even leave the "hardcore" sim genre to find games that did it right. Look at Gunship 2000, for instance. The campaign in that game blows away most modern fare, and it's over ten years old. Why can't we have more games like that?

Once I joined a squadron it became a whole new ballgame. Now I am responsible for real wingmen. Plus my squadron also participates in major online wars between other squadrons. This role playing aspect has added a lot to my enjoyment of IL2 apart from the reasons I have mentioned in earlier posts.

I don't deny that the player community has done a lot to make up for Sturmovik's shortcomings, but the shortcomings are still there. Give me Sturmovik's flight engine with Gunship 2000's metagame structure, and I'd be happy. I find it hard to believe that modern sims can't even manage to replicate (let alone improve on) gameplay from a game that shipped on a couple of 3.5" floppies.

Can I ask you one question ? If IL2 Sturmovik had been set in a familiar Western Front theater with allied aircraft would it have made a difference to you ?

Yes, I would have liked it a little less. As it is, I admire their efforts to do something new (even if I wish they had extended those efforts to the gameplay).

[Desslock]

>But a sim is a sim is a sim - except when it isn't. What you are really describing is wanting a game like Crimson Skies.

Ugh, not at all. That's just an arcade action game, that doesn't really interest me. I'm just looking for a sim that instead of spending an exponentially greater amount of time looking to incrementally improve the flight model, spent that time fleshing out the world and making it more interesting.

I don't want a decline in 'realism' - I don't want a simplification in flight models - I just think the current state of the art flight sim has a great flight model, and I don't want it further improved. But a game with a more realistic, interactive environment, or lots more depth other than a few planes and a handful of vehicles on the ground, it's what's need to revitalize the genre.

Here's an equation for ya: Think of actually "flying" and what that experience entails -- now imagine flying in a combat situation and add in what you think that experience would be like -- now subtract all the aspects of that experience you know/can imagine that current flight sims already do well = All the stuff that's currently missing in modern computer flight sims. Flight sim "worlds" don't seem real, or interesting -- they're stagnant, and lacking depth.

Stefan

[Sean Tudor]

Here's an equation for ya: Think of actually "flying" and what that experience entails -- now imagine flying in a combat situation and add in what you think that experience would be like -- now subtract all the aspects of that experience you know/can imagine that current flight sims already do well = All the stuff that's currently missing in modern computer flight sims. Flight sim "worlds" don't seem real, or interesting -- they're stagnant, and lacking depth.

Stefan
Well I am not sure what is missing Desslock ?

Example of a recent mission my squadron took part in :

I join a mission in IL2 and my flight (B Bomber Flight) is tasked to take out four German tanks which are threatening a Russian town. We have to follow four set waypoints as they take us down a river valley and will make us hard to find by any enemy fighters in the area. All my wingmen are real human beings all relying on each other to protect each others backs.

My squadrons other flight is flying escort (C Escort Flight) for us at plus 2000 metres slightly forward of our position. On reaching the town the Huns immediately set upon us. Bomber flight is taken by surprise and we immediately lose two IL2's to two BF-109G/AS's. The other two 109's are chased by escort flight while the remaining two IL2's launch rockets at the tanks.

One of my escorts is shot down and the other loses a rear stabiliser and has to RTB. We manage to take out two tanks but have to RTB due to lack of ammo.

This was a particularly exciting mission due to the sudden appearance of the 109's.

Maybe IL2 is more of a sim for online gamers. For offline gamers there are some very good campaign generators. Eg. IL2Gen.

Cheers,
Sean.

[GMicek]

I like Il-2, but it's not as good as Everquest.

I'm in complete and utter shock.

[Matthew Gallant]

I like Il-2, but it's not as good as Everquest.

I'm in complete and utter shock.

And you haven't read the latest Shoot Club to boot.

[GMicek]

I like Il-2, but it's not as good as Everquest.

I'm in complete and utter shock.

And you haven't read the latest Shoot Club to boot.

I'm so lame, ugh. I was too busy looking watching the Triumph videos. The John Stewart one is great.

Anyway, i like to save Shoot Club until i'm in the middle of a really long call at work, gives me something to do besides pay attention to the customer.

[Anonymous]

Sean,

Well, as you say, you're talking multiplayer, which is a whole different ball of wax. I think we're all bitching about single player here.

Okay, imagine the mission you described in a single player game. Not gonna happen. Where's the "squadron" element in single player? Where are the surprises and the "living" worlds. I want to be flying home and encounter a crippled friendly bomber being attacked and bail him out. I want to come across a random tank battle or an enemy train while on the way back from a target and expend my remaining ammo on the bad guys. I don't want all the action in the game centered on the target waypoint -- I want a convincing, living world. In most sims, we have a nicely rendered world and realistic airplans and somewhat realistic pilots (watch the AI tactics in IL-2 in computer vs. computer fights and you'll see they have a LONG way to go still), but a world that still doesn't feel "alive."

Hell, even a mediocre sim is a BLAST in multiplayer. Warbirds was never as great as its fans claimed it was, but it was amazingly fun because of the coop elements and playing with real people.

But for those of us who just want to get in a 15-minute mission when we can due to busy schedules -- and for the hundred thousand people you need to buy a sim for it to finance the next sim -- you gotta have strong single player.

[Sean Tudor]

But for those of us who just want to get in a 15-minute mission when we can due to busy schedules -- and for the hundred thousand people you need to buy a sim for it to finance the next sim -- you gotta have strong single player.

You're probably right. Without the third party campaign generators for IL2 the single player experience in IL2 is somewhat muted. It would have been nice to have a dynamic campaign in IL2. Maybe something along the lines of that in Mig Alley where you can affect resupply rates to the front by bombing supply dumps and tank farms.

But we still have great third party campaign generators like IL2GEN and IL2DCG.

There was a push to try and get Oleg Maddox to build more functionality in to the single player experience in IL2 but Oleg Maddox is almost totally focused on the multiplay experience.

Hell if IL2 didn't work so well with 28.8Kbps modem connects I probably would not be raving about it so much.

[Brad Grenz]

Yes I must be one of the last people on this planet not to have MOH:AA. I have played the demo and loved it. I am just waiting for it to come out as a budget title. Which could be a long wait.

Ack, I still haven't bought it either. Sadly, I think it just got bumped behind Neverwinter Nights in my list of planned purchases.

[Bullhajj]

I am not going to agree that sims have lost their magic. I will admit that I’m nostalgic for a campaign like the one in Gunship 2000. I hated when I lost my team members. I loved flying in the artic and watching my compass spin like crazy. But that doesn’t mean that we haven’t had great games since. RB3D has a campaign that comes pretty close. Mig Alley is another.

The Janes games always seemed to focus too much on realism, not enough on gameplay. But this doesn’t make them less of a game for me. Am I the only one who buys these things to learn how to successfully operate the systems? I have yet to finish the campaign in F/A-18, but I can’t tell you how many times I’ve spent an enjoyable hour attempting to trap on a pitching deck. Walking through Desert Storm campaign in F-15 was enjoyable for the same reasons—not so much game play as reenacting the war.

I am excited about CFS3 too. If anyone can make a great campaign, TH can. Nevertheless, I am really disappointed it’s an Eastern front sim. What is up with that? I would have loved to have had something different to look forward to and they give me the same thing they did in the first game. Boring. I was hoping we might even have left WW2 behind for a bit and tried something else. Way back before CFS2 was developed I understand they were thinking of an F/A18 sim. But it got canned because Janes and another house (can’t remember) were working on the Hornet. I would have loved a modern sim with the campaign they are talking about for CFS3.