Sorry to hear an AH pilot can't read

[Wilbus]

Well, go download the old DOS game Aces Over Europe and the physics there will be better. Now Rip, if you don't get your son away from FA3 I'll come to you and do it!

[Kratzer]

I'm not to impressed with the graphics engine... it looks... odd, I guess, and the models seem blockier than the AH ones (especially the later ones like the 262), and it just doesn't look 'clean'.

Anyhoo... I was tapped as a Beta tester for FA3, and played the first build they sent me months and months ago... wasn't overly impressed, seemed at that point to be FA2 with a new coat of paint... They sent me another CD at some point, and I tried it again, but it wouldn't paint textures on any of the models, so I uninstalled again...

The thing that was most annoying was that in the cockpit view, which you would use in the advanced model (which, by the way, they said they were basing on the arcade model, which they wanted to get right first, if that tells you anything), you had this itty bitty FOV that made using the cockpit a pain in the ass...

So did they ever listen to the complaints about that and fix it? Just curious.

[Superfly]

Originally posted by SmooMonster
Hmmm - first one looked so nice I thought it was actually an FA3 screenie until I noticed there was no texture mapping on the planes. Ah well.

The second one is bloody awful. What hell is that? It looks like a ship sinking (where's the steam, fire and smoke - you do HAVE steam fire and smoke and air bubbles and waves and ship wakes don't you?), but what is the ugly stuff in the foreground????

And the clouds in the third one are nice too - just like FA3s - but the plane is very boxy...and again no texture mapping.

SmooMonster, you obviously have no idea what texture mapping actually is.  Everything in the Aces High is texture mapped except for the sky.  The difference between FA3 and AH's graphics is that FA3 obviously uses higher polygon models, higher resolution texture maps and more texture maps in general on their planes than AH does.  We want AH to aslo be availble to the casual player, so we keep the system requirements on the low end.  Most people don't enjoy having to shell out hundreds or thousands of dollars just to play a game.

In reference to your "What the hell is that?" question.  That is the view from a manable twin 40mm turret on an aircraft carrier which is fighting a battle with an enemy fleet as the enemy carrier sinks into oblivion.  Naval battles are quite a sight to see.

[AoA_WindDancer]

Hiya Wilbus:

I would like to help you understand a few things about FAIII beta that I think you will like:

The game really looks much better in 1024 x 768 x 32 bit color mode or higher graphics.  You will need a Geforce3 card to enjoy FAIII and must have the latest Nvdia Detonator drivers installed properly to really see FAIII in the best light.  Actually there are 8 light sources which are adjustable.

Remember that the game is a beta and has not even been opened up for PUBLIC BETA Testing ..yet.  It still needs another three weeks of intense closed beta testing and the bugs are being fixed at a rapid fire rate.  Even the MK103 vs Mk 108 has already been fixed in Version 60 which is the current version that the developers are working on right now but has not been made available.  The worst thing about FAIII is the huge size of the game.  I wish that were not the case but that is truely a negative about the game.  260mb is huge and because of that we can't get a download with each new version with the new bug fixes.  

If you are taxing and you have set up a realistic flight model game and have chosen to limite the taxing speed limits then it's best to use the "B" key with the rudder to turn.  That way you will get differential braking and you won't have to depend on the rudder alone to turn your plane.  I think that in AH they use the spacebar for the brakes but it's been a while since I have tried AH so I could have the wrong key.  But if you are going say at 40% throttle and at a speed of less than 10mph then the rudder and the "B" key will turn your plane very easily.  

Those pop up message are for the developers so that they know what caused the bug be it video card driver or a particular version of DX that was used or any number of other things.  If you look at in the c:\program files\VR1 FAIII directory you will find two files called debug.htm and message.log.  Those are debug files that the debug software produces to help the developers find and fix bugs.  The debug software is there now but after the game is finished it will be removed and the game will run much faster and smoother too.  Just remember that it's not finished yet but that it's getting closer to FEB 15th the target date for going Gold if all goes well. That may not be a hard and firm date as I am sure that VR1 will not release the game until its ready and polished. Remember that unlike MS VR! will be doing updates on a timely basis.  That I like very much as MS failed to let VR1 do this when MS was running things.  

I am not sure about the spin modeling right now as that is still not entirely finished.  But I have not ever flown a Bf 109K4 and would not know how it behaves in a stall. I know that most of the guys that did fly this plane are either dead now or in their 80's by now.  Not many of them left to tell us how the plane actually should fly in RL.  I don't count flying a cessna or any other present day modem planes anywhere near like flying a old WWII tail dragger.  Now if you have actually flown the BF109K4 then I will listen more closely to what you have to say. Right now all I know about WWII planes and how they are suppose to fly is from playing WBIII, AH and FA for the last four years and before that all the other boxed flight sim games from various company's. That does not make me any better and knowing what a flight model should do.  I just know what I am USED to and speak from that vantage point only.

The 3Dcockpit view can be adjusted using the page up, page down,  home, insert, end and the delete keys by default.  Of course you can assigne any ohter key to do those functions. Also the 3 and 4 key will zoom the pilots head in closer to the cockpit gauges or zoom out away from the cockpit gauges.    You can also use the Ctrl F4 view with the mouse and see more of the wings when you look to the side.  I found that the hat view to the left looked sort of funky also as the wing looked too short when viewed that way. So I see what you are talking about.  I also don't like any Linda Blair like head movments and I have been told by Shad@VR1 that they can restrict the head movements at the server level now.  A welcome change.  I want the padlock views switched back to the way that PL view worked in FA 2 which restricted the head movements.  Also pl planes can be adjusted to less than 2000ft so that it's impossible to padlock an enemey plane that is farther away.  That way you are force to use the hat to look around. And even in the F4 or Ctrl F4 views you can press the left ctrl button down and then use the hat to see the 45 Deg up views for each hat view.  A real nice feature.

Wait until the game is finished in a few week and then if you are wanting something different then give it another look see.  I bet that in a few more months the game will have a few more features added.  They do plan to add human gunners to the bombers someday. I saw that WB  had human gunners and that they had the salvo and delay commands for the bombers and I asked for both features to be added to FAIII.  They didn't have time to add the human gunner positions on the bombers but they did add the salvo and delay command to the game. So VR1 listens and does what it can to improve the game.  

I also intend to fly in AH as my squad flies there a lot of the time.  I don't fly there much since I have had trouble getting my joystick setup with the hat views correct.  I have trouble with the up and right hat view not programming right in the stick mapper. I think I did a bug report on this news group somewere a few week ago and I hope that they will take a look at my bug report and tell me a workaround or get the stick mapper to work right.  I program the hat to the up right view and the stick mapper shows the UP view instead of the UR thing.  

Have a good day mate and may the wind be at your back

AoA_WindDancer AKS Moose1am
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Wilbus
I just tried FA3, downloaded latest version and played it.

I

[SmooMonster]

Originally posted by Wilbus
I just tried FA3, downloaded latest version and played it.

I LOVE IT!!.............. NOOOOOOT!

Seriously, first time, openened a little game by my self, offline mode, realism on 100% on everything, graphics 800x600 32bit mode etc etc. Took a P51, taxied out on runway with throttle opened up at 30%, rudder hardly gave any input to turn with. Fired my guns just to try it and a little nice window popped up with a little nice bug in it. Ok, tried to restrt, didn't work, had to reinstall (wich takes some time), same thing, did this some more and after the third reinstall i succeeded to get it to work. Started trying out different planes starting in the air.

>>The joy of beta testing, huh?

Dora, 109 K4, A20, Do219 and so on.

>>2 models of Do217, I think you'll find, no Do219.

First one up was the K4, wich btw, never flew with the MK103, it was the MK108. No 109 was equiped with a hub mounted Mk103, much due to its size, (bout 145kg) compared to about 50kg with the Mk108.

>> Typos in the plane description which have since been fixed (but not in the public version). If you do a ROF test, you will see it is actually 108s that are installed.

Tried stall etc, plane started shaking when the stall ocured, wich would have been a nice feuture had it been realistic looking and feeling, I fly in R/L So I know what a stall and spin should feel like and that was nowhere near it.

>> You SURE you were in full real mode? You have to actually change the physics in the drop down box, even after you've checked all the boxes...

Overall FM in there was VERY BAD and the Dammage Percentege is still there wich is allso VERY BAD.

>>See earlier comments re damage modelling. I agree with you on the damage indicator, incidentally. Specifics please on the FM - which aspects are you talking about? Performance modelling? Plane handling modelling? Relative to AH or relative to RL?

The Cockpits, although hi res looked like something from and old 1990's game with (only with HI RES) and it only gave me an impression of playing an arcadish game. The Graphics on the wings and everything else when looking from the cockpit looked really childish nad much too "short".

>>That's probably because you guys are used to an unnatural wide-angle lens view which increases the length of everything. Ours is a more accurate recreation of the human FOV. Just because your car windscreen extends over the passenger side doesn't mean you see out of it when you're driving normally now, does it? Have you guys still got your Z for zoom key BTW? Where did the pilots keep their telescope in the cockpit then? I must have missed the eyepiece holder in those cockpit pics I've seen...

The planes from outside view looked pretty damn nice though, specially the reflections in the hud.

>>This is why I suspect you weren't flying full real mode. Unless you're on the ground, you can't see any external views in FA full-real apart from the cockpit-only and hat views.

Something that almost made me laugh my guts out however, was the size of the 109K4 cockpit. Sorry to say, but even a pilot who know very little about 109's know that the 109 had one of the most cramped cockpits of all planes during the war. Here it is HUGE, bout 3 times as big as the one in the Dora. The pilot in it could litteraly lay down without trouble (was it a very short midget pilot?).

>>Hadn't noticed that, but will look. I thought they were always talking about the WIDTH of the cockpit, rather than its length?

One nice thing was that when going straight up, shutting down engine, you could make nice tail slides/glides and fall on your back.

>>Try some others - hammerheads, snap rolls, barrel rolls. Try the snap rolls with the prop rotation then again against it...nice, huh? To me, that's just one sign of a good physics model...

My overall score of this Arcade game (just nothing but an arcade game) would be about  out of 10.

>>I'm guessing that must be a zero then??? And what's the deal with the constant "arcade" stuff? Are you sure you were flying full-real? Did you ever manage to spin it? Any accelerated stalls? I don't see any mention of your view on the spin recovery or indeed anything about spin behaviour at all apart from saying you didn't like the buffeting which really makes me wonder...

I don't see how anyone, in any way could actually compare it to products such as Aces High or IL2 Sturmovik.

Sure, there are 80 planes in there, but what fun is that when all physics is SOO BAD???

>>Hmmm, you can do all the real-life moves and no fantasy moves, the flight models are performing to historical specs, planes stall and spin appropriately, spin recovery is as expected and you still insist the physics are bad. Ah well. Is that AH shorthand for "it's different from what I'm playing at the moment and I might have to relearn stuff so therefore it's wrong"?

Kratzer - I can only imagine your videocard isn't up to spec, especially if you were missing textures in earlier builds. I have never heard anyone describe FA3's graphics as blocky.

I've been in closed beta since August and I don't recall ever seeing a post by you in the beta ng regarding your complaints and/or suggestions. I can't imagine why you would want an unrealistic FOV other than the fact that it is easier, but it's a shame you didn't voice your opinions in the ng when you had the opportunity.

Ripsnort - last June must have been FA2 unless you got a REALLY early build of FA3 beta. Does he play arcade, intermediate or advanced? Putting a 6 year old in advanced would be an interesting learning curve for him...

[Udie at Work]

Hangtime,

 What was that you said that time about your cat's breath smelling like cat toejame?

[Thrawn]

Can you FA guys please go find your own board?  I find posting ads on the competitions BBS to be really fediddleing rude.  And you certainly aren't doing the product you like any service by pissing off the people here.

[SmooMonster]

Originally posted by SUPERFLY


SmooMonster, you obviously have no idea what texture mapping actually is.  Everything in the Aces High is texture mapped except for the sky.  The difference between FA3 and AH's graphics is that FA3 obviously uses higher polygon models, higher resolution texture maps and more texture maps in general on their planes than AH does.


>>Oops - my bad, I think I probably meant bump mapping...that thing that maps texture to textures, ahhh you know what I mean

FA3 has all of the above plus the option to turn down the eye candy for those whose haven't shelled out thousands.

I could be wrong, but I think you conceded FA's graphics are better?

BTW We've got sea battles in FA3 now too - I just don't have any s/s's to hand (and I'd probably get my wrists slapped for posting them again anyway, hehe).

[Wilbus]

Don't know where to start, first of all, thank you for your nice, polite answer Winddancer, no flamming at all

To taxi in a plane, you don't need to use the brakes all thar much, if you have a 3 meter in diameter prop it will generate enough wind to  make your rudder effective, of course, a defferental brake will help. I checked realism to 100% of course, and noticecd there were alot, sorry to say, but plain stupid things there.

For example, you can set the maximum decent rate that counts as landing, was set at 1900 feet/min so I kept it there. Now this is set for all planes, wich makes i tunrealistic, the 190 was developed to handle a drop of 4500 feet/min at landing, and the gears would take it, the later version got alot heavier and thus they couldn't land with such a decent rate.

Allso, a maximum taxing speed, why? If I wanna taxi my Cessna (don't fly cessna but anyway) I can do that in 10Mph or 70Mph (although in that speed I'd be airborne).

Maximum alt with/without oxygen, this too depends on plane, what if you add a plane with a pressurised cabin?

I have never flown a K4 either, unfortunatly, but the feel of stall is quite similair in most planes, starts (unless it's very quick snap spin) with a shaking plane, like it modelled in FA and then it goes into spin (if you keep the manuver up). However, a nice feuture but poorly executed and the planes didn't in anyway shake like they should.

3D cockpits, although more or less historical looking, look cartoonish and not very nice at all. Tracers not very nice either.



Smoomonster, the planes does not spin like they should IMO, they do not in any way feel very realistic at all. Relearn stuff? FA3 is SOOO much easier and all physics there seems arcadish compared to AH and IL2.

Give AH to an FA3 player and he'll get wacked ALOT of times before he actually gets a kill, give FA to an AH player and he'll be up wacking the first sortie.

Putting a 6 year old infront of FA3 will be alot easier then putting him infront of AH.

Allso, graphics, (I still laugh some because of the Jumbo Jet 109 K4 cockpit), the ground wasn't nice at all, no trees, no clutter what so ever, the runway had an ugly neon light all around it wich wasn't nice at all to see. Now, didn't see if you could turn this off, maybe you could, but it was ugly no matter what.


Superfly, was that a picture from the First day with the navy? remember seeing the same one right after the Navy version was released

[Ripsnort]

Smoo, my son has been flying virtually since 3 yrs old. He's been flying for 3 years now. He flys every flight sim on full realism.  

I do believe your right, FA2 was it.  No way in hell would we even begin to attempt a 260 meg download (56k modem, no DSL out here in the sticks)

[Kratzer]

Originally posted by SmooMonster


Kratzer - I can only imagine your videocard isn't up to spec, especially if you were missing textures in earlier builds. I have never heard anyone describe FA3's graphics as blocky.

I've been in closed beta since August and I don't recall ever seeing a post by you in the beta ng regarding your complaints and/or suggestions. I can't imagine why you would want an unrealistic FOV other than the fact that it is easier, but it's a shame you didn't voice your opinions in the ng when you had the opportunity.
 

Dude, coming from FA to AH and lecturing on realism is going to get you taken about as seriously as a Backstreet Boy at a Motorhead concert.

Tell me... how wide is the field of view or your actual eyes?  Is it greater than 30 - 45 degrees?

That's what I thought...

Now tell me this... how's that FA no-instrument superman view stand up on realism?

That's what I thought...

As for voicing my opinions... I got the beta at the beginning of April, 2001.  I made a lot of constructive suggestions, and they were alternately ignored by the developers, or decried by the players because they would ruin the "fun" level.  The favorite way to discredit anything I said was to point out that I was an Aces High player.  With that kind of reception, I was bored and long, long gone before August.

Vid card at the time was a GeForce2, and ran the first build fine.

So you are saying that they didn't increase the FOV? Not surprised.

[Wotan]

anyone here who wants to waste their time with that big download will quickly find that FA3 graphics suk.

imho the the cockipit view is so bad it makes you wanna fly in "wonder women" mode. Thats all I care about is the view from the cockpit.

Real toejamty FOV from the cockpit.

I can see where you would come out of fa2 to see fa3 graphics and be all "wow'd" but even wwiiol cockpits are more pleasent.

You fa3 guys aren't going to find many here that are resceptive to your "odd" sales pitch.

Your basically arguing with yourself and are taking time away from the free closed beta which you could be enjoying instead of wasting your breath here.

Folks here fly and play AH because they like it. Most have cycled through every other flight game out there. We are here you are there for a reason. We each have decided what we like.

Run along,  the arcade game quake war room could use 3 more wonder woman.........

ps the full real room over there will most likely be like fa2 full real.... 15 or so folks in there.

also the tracers look like crap are they gonna fix those.......?

and the ground/water hit sprits suk too. The terrain is ok but I like ah then wb3 then wwiiol then i guess by default fa3 is next. A bit cartoonish even eaw had a better lookin terrain. Most us here fly at hi res x32 so quit using that as an excuse why fa3 looks like toejam.

These are my honest opinions of fa3. Now you will ensure us a 100 posts in this thread by telling me how wrong me and the rest of the folks here are but even the 1 or 2 folks that buy into your arguement and waste their time downloading it to be dissappointed.

How about saving our bandwidth and go tell you fa3 news group AH guys actual like AH.

Its ok to be a "fanboy" just do it over at your forums.

[Superfly]

I concede nothing.    I am only stating that higher polygon counts and higher resolution textures will usually appear nicer.  It's like comparing the orginal Quake to Quake III.  That may be an extreme comparison, but both had great art.  The main difference between the two is the higher resolution graphics.
In regards to bump mapping, we have been considering adding that feature for a while, but more important aspects of the game usually get in the way of graphics upgrades.

[Wilbus]

Wotan, yes it is more or less a waste of time downloading it, why I did it was to be able to actually counter the things the FA dudes said, I played FA2 a few years ago during 3 day trails, and I must say, not much has changed IMO.

Realism still not there. The No cockpit view is really a bad thing etc.

SUPERFLY is that a picture from the first navy day??? I WANNA KNOW!!

[Wotan]

let me change my mind on a couple of things after a good 2 hours or so screwing with it

The terrain is damn good ....

the 1 st map i flew on I dunno why didn't look as good as the bob terrain.

In full real, trim ,cockpit view only it was fun its a competent fm and compares well with most other modern games.

I was impressed with how u needed to keep on trim to keep it flying clean. I don't no how "real" this" is and I'm not a pilot or have I flown a real ww2 bird. The planes have a tendency to yaw (109s any way).

The tracers, and cockpits fov are bad imho is there any talk of changing these?

I would be only interested in a "full real room" and suspect it would be a lonely place. The biggest draw to fa as I have seen in the past is the arcade arenas which theres nothing wrong with that if you prefer it. In ah we have nearly a 400 folks in 1 arena and all though there are arguable some arcadish things (this is true about all computer flight games) I'd rather fighter a 109 in my 190 they cruise around like wonder woman.

I prefer the external look of ah planes over fa's they look "cartoonish" thats not a knock on fa so does il2 to a degree.

However its a real improvement over fa2 and I can see where you guys would be happy.

I fly ah and wb3 and il2 and prefer ah overall. However arena play has me burned out bigtime and a arcade room has no appeal to me at all.

Enjoy your game. I prefer vanilla ice cream,  you like chocolate and neither of us are wrong.