Author Topic: Aces High vs Pacific Fighters? (Read 1857 times)

stantond · « **Reply #30 on:** October 18, 2005, 10:25:58 PM »

The F4U flight model is not very good in PF, and I am a big fan of that aircraft. The aircraft detail was a bit disappointing, not the graphics, but the characteristics and function. It's definately a boxed game.

Regards,

Malta

fartwinkle · « **Reply #31 on:** October 18, 2005, 11:07:08 PM »

Game verses Sim.
Its really kinda hard to beat 500+ players in one arena thats for sure.

Karnak · « **Reply #32 on:** October 19, 2005, 12:40:15 AM »

Stream,

To me the best looking of those cockpits is the AH2 one and the worst is the Lock On cockpit. The Lock On one is so bad is looks like one of the old 2D cockpits from the days of AOE, PAW, EAW and so on. It is higher rez, but is still looks crappy.

eilif · « **Reply #33 on:** October 19, 2005, 12:50:38 AM »

Origionaly posted by rt sigma

Quote

Personally, I wish I could get Aces of the Pacific working on my computer. Now THAT was immersive.

get dosbox, i have been playing aces of the pacific again, as well as red baron , great games! great memories!

go to underdogs.com to get the old games.

tho i have the origional floppys for aop and red baron, aop had a 200 page manuel with a really detailed summary of the air war and lots of great photoes. Imho i havent seen a campeign system that has beat it yet, or done anything but copy it.

EdXCal · « **Reply #34 on:** October 19, 2005, 04:00:40 AM »

I fly both, PF from what I hear has a very realistic flight model, now AH is more action like, more for everyone rather then the realistic freaks. I fly PF for realistics and I play AH for the fun. I've flown since I was 12 (I'm 21 now) and I'll tell ya, I've never flown in a plane that stalled as much or zoomed as well as AH planes! Thats also been said alot in many forums, but it's easier to get a hang out them most other sims and thats why I like it.

Edward

Karnak · « **Reply #35 on:** October 19, 2005, 04:25:11 AM »

EdXCal,

How many planes have you flown that had 2000+hp engines, weighed 8,000-20,000lbs and had wing loadings of 35-55lbs/sq.ft?

Swarmed · « **Reply #36 on:** October 19, 2005, 07:48:19 AM »

eilif,

underdogs.com is some educational video website. You got the right link up?

Bronk · « **Reply #37 on:** October 19, 2005, 08:35:44 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
EdXCal,

How many planes have you flown that had 2000+hp engines, weighed 8,000-20,000lbs and had wing loadings of 35-55lbs/sq.ft?

Karnak remember back to when you were 21. I can remember my late teens early 20s, I knew it all also.

Bronk

Westy · « **Reply #38 on:** October 19, 2005, 08:42:19 AM »

"I've flown since I was 12 (I'm 21 now) and I'll tell ya.... "

Yo! Welcome back Straiga.

"I've never flown in a plane that stalled as much or zoomed as well as AH planes! "

Course not. Unless you'll try to claim you singularly piloted your dad's P-51 ... several times.

Truthfully? I have to "lol" at those who compare thier (claimed) RL experience in essentially light weight civilian craft to WWII fighters which weigh a hellovalot more and are have seom serious horspower hanging out front. Reminds me of a guy from WB's who would always brag about WB's flight model cause the planes thier handled just like a Pitts Special..... Sorry to pop that delusional bubble dood. These aren't Cessnas nor Pitts being modelled in these game/sims.

Hmmm. Maybe I should wander to the Grand Prix Legends forum and claim I know what racing a 1967 Formula 1 should be like cause I drove a V8 equpped Ford Crown Victoria really fast a bunch of times.

mechanic · « **Reply #39 on:** October 19, 2005, 10:45:31 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Westy

Hmmm. Maybe I should wander to the Grand Prix Legends forum and claim I know what racing a 1967 Formula 1 should be like cause I drove a V8 equpped Ford Crown Victoria really fast a bunch of times.

man.....it must be cool to know what it feels like to drive a 1967 formula 1 car, i envy you!

mechanic · « **Reply #40 on:** October 19, 2005, 10:48:11 AM »

oh and all IL2 games are rubbish in comparison to aceshigh in every single aspect.

the terrain looks better for AH, and remember, it is fully modeled to take a ground war not just look good from 10k.

the rgraphics on IL2 are too soft and blurry.

AH is clear, crisp and it feel to me that its pretty geometrically acurate.

someone mentioned that the dots of far planes turn into shapes soon in IL2, but have you never noticed how when it gets to 1000yrds its morphs down a size in pixels to get back scale?

Westy · « **Reply #41 on:** October 19, 2005, 11:23:26 AM »

"i envy you!"

Naturally.

Alky · « **Reply #42 on:** October 19, 2005, 11:26:05 AM »

Even though I have both the IL2 and PF series, I lost interest in it almost right away because from what I gather, their idea of online play is something like 30 or 32 players or something. I don't even have them on my hard drive anymore

Nomak · « **Reply #43 on:** October 19, 2005, 11:26:18 AM »

No need to pick one over the other. They are both great sims. I fly them both.

Dave

SKJohn · « **Reply #44 on:** October 19, 2005, 01:37:13 PM »

You guys llike Nomak and the others that fly them both:

How did you set up your views? Do you use trackir? It seems like you really need it to make the most of PF. I just can't get the view hats to work for me in PF - have taken to using the small mouse on my throttle (x45) as the mouse for views so I can look around while flying. It is still a PITA and no where near as smoth as using the view hats in AH.
IF you have any clues or suggestions, I'd really appreciate it.