I think it has more to do with how pilots really flew in WWII v. how they fly here. Every WWII aircraft sim makes the FW 190 out to be a dog of a dogfighter. Every personal account I've ever read, written by an Allied fighter pilot, says that the FW was a dancer. I have assumed from this that real people weren't willing to slow down and use flaps the way we do in here.
That's my opinion as well.
Judging from what is described by many anecdotes - not just those coming from the best of pilots - it seems many of the real life factors (which cannot be adequately simulated within the boundaries of a mere game) acted out as quite a bit of hinderance which might have kept the pilots from achieving the theoretical maximum performance of their aircraft.
Some autobiographies coming from the expert pilots describe pulling so close to the edge of stall that their aircraft shivered and shook, whilst at the same time, other anecdotes originating from the average pilots seem to describe a general disdain towards having to push their aircraft towards dangerous grounds, or having to enter such a situation which warrants it in the first place.
Stories of some elite squadrons portray a cocky band of well trained aces who'd gladly chop throttle, slow their aircraft, and flicker the flap levers and switches to enter a knife fight, whilst other stories emphasize they trained their pilots to play it safe, and keep things simple during dogfights.
Some anecdotes even seem to suggest that most pilots rarely even adjusted their throttle lever during combat - leave the throttle setting at max. combat power, and then both hands on the control column.
The guncam footages also show some interesting moments. Taking into consideration that most of the footage is in 1/3rd speed, even when played at a normal real-life speed the evasive maneuvers of the target plane in the films are very simple to the simpilot's eyes. One can only imagine what's going through the pilot's mind in his last moments of the flight, but considering grave circumstances, the type of evasives shown rarely extend further than the simplest of left-right scissoring. It's actually quite difficult to see any kind of attempts at fancy evasives at all.
Another point might be the difficulty of handling due to aerodynamic forces and physical/psychological factors.
Some people have posted that it isn't all that difficult to move your head and body around during high G maneuvers, and a loose strap would be all you'd need to have a reasonable six view. However, there seems to be some disparity between looking around at high Gs during a leisure flight, and during combat maneuvering under high mental stress. For whatever reasons, apparently checking 6 wasn't an easy task, which in time came to the development of wingman coverage tactics during the course of the war.
Also, some people say stronger people can exert forces well over 50lbs on the control column, but it's quite difficult to imagine every pilot in the squadron would be able to continuously pull, push, pull, push, pull, push with maximal force during high speed flight in a single combat. Sure, I might be able to lift up heavy weights, but I'm not sure if I could continuously exert enough force to pick it up, down, up, down, up, down as long as I want. Especially during the excitement of combat with my breath running scant, sweat tickling into my eyes, forehead itching and etc etc..
According to guncam footages, the most common thing to expect seems to be you latching onto an enemy plane, your initial attack fails, the enemy plane turns left, you turn harder to gain a leadshot angle, the enemy tries a scissor to the right you change directions to follow him, nail a few shots, the target smokes, and the plane either goes down or the pilot bails.
I'm not sure if any real pilot would really glady try do what we'd do in AH... in which we'd see an enemy while flying at 400mph, enter a steep combat turn, chop throttle, put down flaps, pull a 3~4G turn while tunnel vision sets in and allows only a tiny circle of visibility, the enemy plane scissors to right, you change directions accordingly and pull another 3~4G turn, and your vision would come back briefly and then tunnel again, and then enter a rolling scissors fight with the outside view of the world going round and round and round, your plane shaking and gasping at the edge of the stall as you try to barrely roll again and again, as slowly as possible, trying to go slower and barrely around at a larger radius than the enemy, at which point the combat altitude would drop down and your wingtips might be scratching the dirt.
Heck, the preferred practice of dive bombing was to fly over the target at a slow speed, invert and split-S downwards to the target and drop, because this method was known to be more accurate, as well as it would relieve the pilot from the dreadful -Gs if he had to push forward the controls to just duck down and enter -G dive.
...
If one takes all of what's mentioned above into consideration, the conclusion seem to support the theory that the aerial combat of WW2 planes rarely involved the 'extremes' of flight.
I think the FW190s are depicted as reasonable turners in anecdotes, because neither the 190s nor their enemy Spitfires would really get into a serious turn contest during combat. If RAF testings confirm the Spits outturn 190s quite easily, but combat reports say otherwise, then I think the only explanation is that combat pilots don't fly like test pilots.
