From: tblackma@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Marauder)
Subject: Re: Falcon MC Demo (at last)
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 22:23:00 GMT

In article <1em7u6INNfom@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> ch166@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Louis Moreau) writes:
>
>>1-  Views out the cockpit absolutely suck.  Sure there are great
>>    still shots of detail inside the cockpit, but you can't see anything
>>   outside.
>>3-  forward cockpit is way to crowded.  To much info and not enough outside
>>    space shown.
> 
>I've been in a F-18 cockpit: You see a lot and a lot and a lot of cockpit
>and very little of the world outside. It IS crowded. I wonder how pilots
>can manage it.
>
I understand that, but on Falcon the cockpit takes up sooooooo much space 
that you can't see out of the plane.
 
>>2-  Only supports a small box on the screen and its still to slow to enjoy,
>>    even on my si.
> 
>   Jet fighters are fast but don't hit the speed of light :) OK, I was hoping
>a faster simulation, but according to the closure rate given by the radar
>the speed seems to be fine (but I'll need to re-check that).
>

When I mean fast I mean a NICE smooth animation.  Falcon is soooo
jerky that you need at least a ci to play it correctly.  Falcon 
reminds me of the game Jet for the apple IIe.  Slow as a dog.
By comparison, hellcats works great on every machine I have played
it on (even lowly classic IIs)
 
>>4-  Controls are still bad.  Unless you have a mouse stick, forget it.
> 
>   Try adjusting the sensibility. According to certain persons (e.g. H. Bornstein)
>the keyboard is better than the mouse or the joystick. I don't know, I
>only use the keyboard.
>   Yes there is still control problems. When banking, you should pull back the
>stick to turn. The software does it for you...  Weird, because on Falcon 3.0 for
>the PC, it doesn't.

I use the mouse on hellcats and the implementation is sooooo much better.  
You can actually fly the plane, not try to keep it in control when the screen
jumps doing a redraw (that speed thing again!).

I have flown Faclon 3.0 for the PC and I still am not impressed.  It is almost
as slow as Falcon MC for the mac, ON A 486!!!!!!!!

> 
>  I've tried Hellcat (but just a little, I confess) and didn't like it. I've seen

Why didn't you like it.  It is SOOOO accurate and SOOOO realistic with its 
animation and flight performance that it makes EVERYTHING ELSE look cheap
(IMHO)

>F-18 on the Amiga: it looks nice. Hope to see it soon for the Mac. But a good
>flight sim is not necessarily a good game and vice-versa.
>-- 

People must realize that Graphic Simulations made there first product for the 
Mac less than a year ago, and already its has been said by many on this group
(Myself included) as the best flight simulator for any PC platform.  In this 
time they have made a game/simulator that can be the best it can be.  I am
still waiting for multiple monitor support and better outside views from
Spectrum.  Graphic Sims did the oustide view in the begging and now with
multiple monitors, its absolutely phenonminal.  Well Spectrum, how long 
have you had to do this?  TWO YEARS for ONE upgrade!!!!!!!!!!!. When i talk
about Graphics Sims F-18, I hope it is done the way hellcats was 
and NOT the same as one for the amiga.  

Tom.
P.S. When I say flight simulator, I mean actual Flight performance, not 
accuracy to the real thing.  Falcon is not a flight simulator, its is an
aircraft simulator. (Spectrum Holobyte says this, read the demo text.)
-- 
tblackma@gn.ecn.purdue.edu--------------------------Thomas Blackman
Paint em all, let the judges sort em out.          Go team Tippmann
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.games