Quote:
Originally Posted by VO101_Tom
Do you decide how authentic an original report is based on the programming of a game? Should happen reverse for this in a normal case??? I do not dare to ask it, which simulators you thought of...  |
Lol, I know what your trying to say but your miles away from what I mean..
You've just stated it yourself, we can only go by what we read, the Devs can only go by what Data they have as every bit of info wrote by pilots is like you've said a bit biased..
Every ww2 Sim I have played, cfs3,ww2ol,il2 and now this have a 109 & spit...now every developer has modelled the spit to turn better and retain 'E' better.. the 109 to dive better and climb better etc etc
That is my point, regardless on what we think, it's been like this since ww2 sims have graced us with their presence yes?
I don't know what's right, who's right, what's accurate and what's false... I go by what I see have read myself and what sim developers have implemented into the games I've played..those basic strengths and weaknesses have always been the same..
So if for some reason now were saying the spit was a better in the dive, the climb and the turn...oh and top speed too then all those diff Devs had it wrong then?
That was all I meant by my comment, thought that was obvious too
