O/T Whats all the fuss about?

[Pat Pattle]

Don't know why but I sent a bit of time installing IL2FB/Aces/PF, for old times sake I suppose and patched it up to 4.11.

It's an excellent piece of software with some great features that I really, really wish CFS3 had but, personally, I just cannot see what all the years of raving over it have been about.
IMO from a point of view of authenticity of scenery, aircraft and effects etc.etc. the ETO install stands head and shoulders above it.

but that's just my opinion.....

(I uninstalled it again btw)

 

[Naismith]

Clearly a matter of personal taste, for balance, I must defend the IL2 series. Graphically for me it stands head and shoulders (should that be cockpit and wing root? lol) above CFS3 which to my eyes looks comical and I never got comfortable with it. Who recalls the preview pics of CFS4 which sadly never came to fruition. Now that could have been a game changer. The times I have installed CFS3 only to remove it. At the moment it lies redundant on my F drive. I really want to like it but it for some reason.......
I'll give it another go this p.m.

 

[ndicki]

IL-2 does have its plus points, especially now it's been opened up a bit to make it possible to add new aircraft, but it never did it for me. I especially dislike the graphics - apologies to Naismith! - and the engine sounds which just don't give me the feeling of a real aircraft. (C)FS sounds do, and if they don't, you change them. The good bits are being able to shoot your own tail off, and the AIs which can be horribly vicious - a pity CFS3 doesn't have such well-managed AI enemies.

But I'm not going to get into a fight - fly withever one you like, but fly something!

What about SF2?

 

[Pat Pattle]

Clearly a matter of personal taste, for balance, I must defend the IL2 series. Graphically for me it stands head and shoulders (should that be cockpit and wing root? lol) above CFS3 which to my eyes looks comical and I never got comfortable with it. Who recalls the preview pics of CFS4 which sadly never came to fruition. Now that could have been a game changer. The times I have installed CFS3 only to remove it. At the moment it lies redundant on my F drive. I really want to like it but it for some reason.......
I'll give it another go this p.m.

A good balance Naismith and you're clearly in the majority, which is why there are only a handful of us here, lol.

What I was trying to get in my post is the 'feel' of the ETO, I'm probably in a minority but the geography and scenery, the placements of towns and cities, the airfields etc. are as important to me as the aircraft in a flight sim, and these areas are simply more authentic in the ETO install and no matter what folks think of it in other areas, I don't personally think IL2 can match it in these.

Actually this all started when I had been looking around for some decent looking UK/European scenery for IL2, do you know of any? I'm willing to be converted!

 

[Tailwind]

Mission Building

I like the water effects, very nice. And the carriers. Wish CFS3 and add ons could match this. Also. I like the fact that you can, in mission builder, create a repair facility so that if you are damaged or run out of ammo or get low on fuel, you can return to base and repair and reload your air craft then take off again. Very nice

Now as for the rest. I prefer CFS3 flight models and engine sounds by far. IL2 still has an arcade feel about the flight models

Cheers

TW

 

[Naismith]

I really must try this ETO add on. I am reticent only because some long time ago I attempted to get that WW1 addon installed when it was freeware and could never get it to run and got very frustrated with having to take CFS3 off and reinstall several times. I cannot remember the name of it, but I am pretty sure it went sort of donationware or similar.

 

[Eraser]

That was OFF (Over Flander Fields) and did go full payware.

I like both CFS3 and the IL2s. I do find CFS3 more realistic in FMs, it just feels more like flight. Still a feeling that even the more updated SF2 series doesn't quite match. IL2 definitely has alot more polish to it that CFS3 sorely lacks.

 

[Cuttles]

Thanks for the evaluation Clive: ill take yoyr advice and stay away from IL2. There's only so much you can fly and fiddle with at once! Reckon all of CFS3 and all addons are great: getting so used to it can't be bothered with anything else.

Is impressive all the stuff folks are making for it: think you would never run out of things to fly or do. BoB WOV has some nice graphics/water etc in it but still learning how to drive it. Think that it would be enough extras. Your BoB is better for the chat, aircraft and all the ground stuff: you can get a picture of what is was like with all the fields, etc. Great.

They are still madly writing for CFS2 and even CFS1 too. There's a new WW1 add on/airfcraft available for CFS1, not forgetting OFF for CFS3 (of course). Got
CFS 2 &1 as well: so might keep one going for just a little while. You can guess I'm a mad keen CFS3 convert. May it fly forever!:salute:


Ps: not forward, but I reckon your Dragon might be nice in RAF colours (transport or twin training) for your Grand Tour or similar/maybe night mission in ETO. Did they ever do practice bombs with 'em? But no idea how impossible that is to do.

 

[wsmwsm]

Altough I feel oddly disloyal in admitting this, since I find CFS3 and all its offshoots wonderful, I have become an adherent to Il-2. I had purchased Forgotten Battles years ago, tried it, put it aside and forgot about it. On a whim, I took it out again, and was turned around. I find the graphics rather a step up from CFS3, and depending on the map, sometimes almost photogenic, while a lot more frame freindly. The effects are quite good, especially damage effects - bullet holes in the cockpit glass, oil blocking your vision, a broken gunsight, a spattering of blood (ooh, can't believe I said that). The ai are much smarter and think more logically. I like the notion of commanding my wingmen to return to base and seeing them land - even on a carrier deck.

I agree that the engine sounds aren't quite as impressive or varied as CFS3 and the weather and sky conditions a bit more limited. CFS3 has a better interface and loads almost instataneously compared to Il-2. I also like the notion in CFS3 (and MAW, ETO, PTO, etc.) that the entire theater is available, rather than individual maps. On the other hand, the Il-2s maps are quiet good and with a little experience mission building, everything comes alive. In one install you can have scenarios from the Spanish Civil War, to the Eastern Front, to Norway, to Korea.

Try Il-2 1946 and the multiple modifications (for example, Ultrapack and , Dark Blue World). Without them, Il-2 is indeed restrictive. But the folks who created the add-ons did some oustanding work and I admire that work as much as the great stuff done by the folks here with CFS3.

 

[Pat Pattle]

Try Il-2 1946 and the multiple modifications (for example, Ultrapack and , Dark Blue World). Without them, Il-2 is indeed restrictive. But the folks who created the add-ons did some oustanding work and I admire that work as much as the great stuff done by the folks here with CFS3.

Thanks for the tip, I'll look into the Clash of Eagles BoB mod: http://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php?topic=17630.0 Some very impressive work going on here.

I like the idea that with Dark Blue World they've ditched the online aspect in favour of better mods,

 

[ndicki]

Reinstalled IL-2, patched and set up... And no, I still much prefer CFS3, for all the reasons given about. Not to mention the rather excessive gunfire visuals - tracers etc.

 

[italflyer]

I have about 15 different CFS3-installs (ETO, BOB, MAW, OFF, RS etc). After a HD-replacement at the end of 2011, all of them are already on the new one and ready to fly.

I had one install of IL2 with the ultrapack addons. Didn't care to copy it on the new disc yet. Not that I really disliked it, but CFS3 just "feels" better for me. Maybe I'm just more used to it....

 

[eddie]

Reinstalled IL-2, patched and set up... And no, I still much prefer CFS3, for all the reasons given about. Not to mention the rather excessive gunfire visuals - tracers etc.

Everyone uses the sim they enjoy the most, no problem with that at all. But what you have described concerning the gunfire visuals sounds like you are using the original IL2 series. Most folks have moved on from that, they use IL46 instead, which is the main sim that is used for all the mods. It can be bought just about anywhere for under $10.00 now. All those visuals have been fixed a long time ago.

 

[wsmwsm]

Everyone uses the sim they enjoy the most, no problem with that at all. But what you have described concerning the gunfire visuals sounds like you are using the original IL2 series. Most folks have moved on from that, they use IL46 instead, which is the main sim that is used for all the mods. It can be bought just about anywhere for under $10.00 now. All those visuals have been fixed a long time ago.

Same here. Jumping from Il-2 FB to Il-2 1946 - then to the mods - made the difference in many ways. Must admit though that the CFS3 tracers are still a bit better as are the view options.

 

[ndicki]

Everyone uses the sim they enjoy the most, no problem with that at all. But what you have described concerning the gunfire visuals sounds like you are using the original IL2 series. Most folks have moved on from that, they use IL46 instead, which is the main sim that is used for all the mods. It can be bought just about anywhere for under $10.00 now. All those visuals have been fixed a long time ago.

1946 v4.11m.........