![]() |
|
IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games. |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I like their products but i think expecting that kind of quality in a survey sim is an unfair comparison: buying just one of their planes + the accusim pack (no terrain/environment and no DM, just the planes and their systems modeling) costs about as much as CoD.
That's how they can afford to do it. I'm not saying it's bad, they're very good and i've had the pleasure of flying some of their add-ons on a friend's PC, it's just that i find the comparison a bit too "apples and oranges" for my taste. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
There shouldnt be or cant be any comparison between that and CoD.. As BD said, they can solely concentrate on the Model, they dont have to worry about anything else ingame and yes they get paid for it...quite well in fact |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
It is impressive. I have the Spit I and II, they fly beautifully. Looking forward to the P51D very much.
__________________
klem 56 Squadron RAF "Firebirds" http://firebirds.2ndtaf.org.uk/ ASUS Sabertooth X58 /i7 950 @ 4GHz / 6Gb DDR3 1600 CAS8 / EVGA GTX570 GPU 1.28Gb superclocked / Crucial 128Gb SSD SATA III 6Gb/s, 355Mb-215Mb Read-Write / 850W PSU Windows 7 64 bit Home Premium / Samsung 22" 226BW @ 1680 x 1050 / TrackIR4 with TrackIR5 software / Saitek X52 Pro & Rudders |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Whats the main differences between those and what we have in game here..? more complex CEM or...??? |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
The Accusim add-on to the main Spitfire software adds monitoring of engine wear and other systems like coolant, oil, fuel, coffman starter cartridges and oxygen levels all of which need replenishing after a flight or the position gets caried forward to the next flight. If you don't turn on the oxygen or don't set it for the height and climb too high you pass out. Its aimed at people who want to know what it was like to have to handle all those issues. Some of the guys pride themselves in taking it as far and for as long as they can before an overhaul is necessary. You kind of 'live' with the aircraft but you can of course go to the hangar, get a report and hit 'fix it all for me please' which I have had do do many times ![]() But as some of our guys have said, to take all that on in a combat sim would probably require a Virtual OCU course and mean sticking to the same aircraft most of the time. I think some CoD players may feel/have felt like that when they first tried it out. I think we probably have a good balance in CoD with some of its aircraft handling 'generalisations' (once the FMs get sorted).
__________________
klem 56 Squadron RAF "Firebirds" http://firebirds.2ndtaf.org.uk/ ASUS Sabertooth X58 /i7 950 @ 4GHz / 6Gb DDR3 1600 CAS8 / EVGA GTX570 GPU 1.28Gb superclocked / Crucial 128Gb SSD SATA III 6Gb/s, 355Mb-215Mb Read-Write / 850W PSU Windows 7 64 bit Home Premium / Samsung 22" 226BW @ 1680 x 1050 / TrackIR4 with TrackIR5 software / Saitek X52 Pro & Rudders Last edited by klem; 09-14-2011 at 10:20 PM. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It should really be stressed that these aircraft from A2A take a year or more to make. I think they said that the B-17 took two or more to finish.
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I haven't bought any extra aircraft for FSX, but its quite likely the CEM is more complex in FSX, but its highly doubtfull the FM is better considering its using FSX code.
__________________
Intel core I7 950 @ 3.8 Asus PT6 Motherboard 6 gigs OCZ DDR3 1600 Asus GTX580 Direct CU II 60gigSSD with only Windows7 64bit, Hotas Peripherals, and COD running on it 500gig HD Dual Boot Samsung 32"LG 120hz MSFF2 Joystick Cougar Throttle Saitek Pro Rudder pedals Voice Activation Controls Track IR 5 ProClip |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
To me they're completely different animals.
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
The FM is A2A's.
__________________
EVGA X58 FTW3 motherboard Intel 980X CPU, not OC'd yet, 3.46 Mhz Crucial Tracer memory 8-8-8-24 12GB Crucial M4 256GB SSD, WD Raptor 600 GB hard disk EVGA GTX580 graphics card HP ZR24W Monitor 1900 X 1200 24" Thrustmaster Warthog joystick Saitek Combat rudder pedals TrackIr 5 |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
CEM aside - can FSX really simulate the flight model that great? I haven't been a fan of the civil flight sims and find them boring but the videos I usually see are... questionable. Most of them show flaws especially regarding complex FM e.g. stalls and spins.
So while the buttons and gauges are maybe working better - does the flightmodel really work better as well? E.g. can you do a few test runs and verify climb rate, turn rate etc? I agree with all who said it's apples and bananas though. A warbird without weapons? Not a warbird to me. I think the damage model is at least equally important. It's like comparing a model plane to an RC one - one may look shiny and have the details but it's not experiencing all aspects of flight / fighting. I'm not sure if CloD could ever reach that level of detail for individual - after all they don't just make plane models. Maybe they could buy rescources to make it easier but then again - it'd probably mean CloD would end up costing 400$. ![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|