Author Topic: Anyone coming from Warbirds 2.77r3 ? (Read 805 times)

F16_Steinhoff · « **on:** July 26, 2004, 04:46:59 AM »

Hi all!

I had a look back att WB 2.77 direct3D and really enjoy the flighmodels and so on. In many ways I like the "feel" of this sim more than IL-2. Simple and hardcore. Although dated graphicswise everything looks very pretty including the cockpits.

I understand that there was some "clash" with the developers and that some of them went on to create AH. I´ve tried WB3/2004 and to me it was a shock! The cockpits look like hell, the terrain is uninspiring and the "realistic" flightmodels feels like a railride. Get the impression that nothing is in balance with each other. It´s just the name that bear resamblance to 2.77 right?

What about AH, is it more in the heritage of WB2.x? I saw some screens, and while it looks quite good in outside views I think the cockpits look rather ugly.

How´s the offline play? Can you land on carriers and try different "games" there (bomberambush, airattack, surface assault etc.) just like in WB?

Thanks!

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #1 on:** July 26, 2004, 05:41:14 AM »

Best thing to do is try the free two week trial.

ack-ack

XtrmeJ · « **Reply #2 on:** July 26, 2004, 05:43:15 AM »

I hated WB.. It sucks IMO.

F16_Steinhoff · « **Reply #3 on:** July 26, 2004, 05:58:11 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Best thing to do is try the free two week trial.

ack-ack

I already know I can download it, but I´m asking here to get some personal views - and motivated reasons - for the (?), my views and yours.

Xargos · « **Reply #4 on:** July 26, 2004, 06:28:47 AM »

HT wanted to make sure most of the old players would be able to play AH2, that's why the graphics may not seem up to par with some other games. Most of us prefer a good flight model over "eye candy". I've been playing for 2 years & have tried some other games but this is the only one I play now. There are many things to learn in AH2, you can't just jump in & be a top player. Mainly I like the people in here & would not trade that for anything else.

Ghosth · « **Reply #5 on:** July 26, 2004, 07:01:08 AM »

AH 2 is light years ahead of WB 2.7 in many respects. However the gameplay is VERY similar.

With 2 weeks to see for yourself, how can you lose?

Feel free to stop by the Training arena if you have any questions, or email me at

billj69@btinet.net

F16_Steinhoff · « **Reply #6 on:** July 26, 2004, 07:32:52 AM »

Ok, thanks, I´m downloading now.

I agree about the eyecandy not being nr1, rather the realism stuff "must haves".

However, one thing that struck me in WB2.77 was that some details in some cockpits are almost on par with what we have in FB now.

Troy had som nice gunsights for that one too.

Jasta · « **Reply #7 on:** July 26, 2004, 07:48:42 AM »

personally I liked WB when I played it. I played it before I ever tried Aces High though. I remember then checking out AH and liking it more just because it seemed like I wouldn't have to sign on one night and find no one in the arena.

WB = 50 players
AH = 700? players

Maniac · « **Reply #8 on:** July 26, 2004, 08:09:35 AM »

Quote

However, one thing that struck me in WB2.77 was that some details in some cockpits are almost on par with what we have in FB now.

2D vs 3D cockpits... different ballgame..

Kweassa · « **Reply #9 on:** July 26, 2004, 08:31:27 AM »

FB cockpits aren't in 3D. That's why they can't allow people to move head positions. It's a pseudo-3D by clever use of multiple 2D layers.

Think of movie set facades.

ps) AH cockpits are full 3D virutal cockpits... despite its lower visual quality and lack of historic detail..

F16_Steinhoff · « **Reply #10 on:** July 26, 2004, 08:52:00 AM »

Ok, I´ve always been thinking of the FB pits as 3D, because you get a sense of depth and can look around in them at every direction...

but I dont think I fully understand how 2D differs from 3D? Its apparently more difficult to build such detail in 3D...

3D Advantages? - you mentioned moving head positions, guess that means you can see "through" the cockpit framework or "bars" at different angles, not just one single view as in FB, and thus getting around that thicknessproblem of the Fw190 bars, right?

Grendel · « **Reply #11 on:** July 26, 2004, 08:56:43 AM »

Aces High (I) was very close to WarBirds 2. Practically it was WarBirds 2.8, a continued development.

I haven't yet tried AH2 so cannot say about it, but I suspect it feels soon quite familiar, though there are irks and differences.

Roscoroo · « **Reply #12 on:** July 26, 2004, 09:09:36 AM »

you can use the number pad for the view direction , then the arrow keys to move your head around , and then the page-up /down keys to fine tune that around alot of the cage , hit f-10 and it saves that view . repeat in each model of plane .

we also have mouse view to shift m toggles it on or off and its perma on/ off is in clipboard .

we still have some bugs and performance issues in ah2, but its just out of beta and the HTC gang is in the arena alot getting input and making improvments .

Cooley · « **Reply #13 on:** July 26, 2004, 10:26:13 AM »

367th is made up of about 70% ex WB2.77 guys and gal,
look us up when you get set up Steinhoff

Flyboy · « **Reply #14 on:** July 26, 2004, 11:53:57 AM »

pffft you dont want to be with cooley in the same squad, hes a dweeb

J\K if you a Ex WB player thoes guys at the 367th will get you on the saddle in no time. enjoy

what was your WB game ID?