Yeap, that's a draw

Over G fighers would be garbage for its backstory alone, if for no other reason. Fighting a war to force people to join a One World Government?! We (US) fought in two hot and one cold war to prevent just that! Maybe if one of the consoles would make flight sims with decent campaigns and semi-realistic, non politically correct backstories, I would give them a second thought. But for the moment, they are all second rate as far as real flight simming is concerned.

Well, Over G Fighters sounds a lot like Turn and Burn, to me. You really are not going to be able to release a sim for a console, ever. Maybe with a HOTAS and a keyboard, but then you've got a custom PC with a TV for a monitor. How do you throw all those switches and change the radar modes, all while flying, Hengist? My point is that anything for the console market will be Sim-Lite. Otherwise, with the necessary additions, it'll cease being a 'console'.

I completly agree with you chronoPilot!
And if for instance some flight sim developer for consoles decided to add a HOTAS and a keyboard to their game than this game would become much more expensive and therefore not feasable in economical terms -> flight sims audience is already smaller than other game genres such as FPS and if these flight sims become much more expensive than I guess you can imagine the results.

So a good story is more important than depicting a believable flight model?

So to be a real sim, it's got to have a campaign, or it's not a sim? What are we simulating here, a plane or a campaign?

So it just sounds like it does, does it? You've formed a very good opinion based on how it sounds. Have you ever thought of trying it first and then giving such an equally strong opinion? That I'd like to read.

Did you actually read this thread, in it's entirety, or did you just post without reading first, chronoPilot? My point is, that I've already stated the following... "Over G Fighters is the equivalent, in terms of complexity, of the Strike Fighters series on PC". What switches are there, exactly, that you can throw in Strike Fighters?

Hengist, don't get me wrong but these are my oppinions/answers to your questions:

In a Combat Flight Simulation a "story" (or a war/conflict/campaign) is at least as important as beliavable flight models (sometimes even more). The story is great part of the "immersiveness" in a combat flight sim and an excelent story can greatly help the player in order to put himself in the shoes of a real pilot. But of course that believable fligth models are also very important for this. So if the sim has a good story but bad FM than the player could probably reach the following conclusion "In this game, I don't fell like I'm flying a real aircraft". Or if the game has good FMs but a bad story the player could reach the conclusion that this game "Is boring and/or a crap".
Anyway, this is just to say that both the "story element" and the "FMs" are very important for a combat flight sim.


Well, basically the reply that I posted above applies here too.
Regarding to your question "What are we simulating here, a plane or a campaign?", IMO we should be trying to simulate the pilot (or pilots) itself. And a real pilot not only lives the "war" inside the cockpit but outside of it also and here's where the campaign factor comes in -> A good campaign allows the player to "live" or simulate the war outside the cockpit. Keep in mind that wars don't stop when pilots land their aircraft and get out of the cockpit.

Also IMO a good simulation of the pilot have more chances to bring more new player (thru the immersive factor) than a simulation that "only models the aircraft".


Hengist, I think you should look more closely to the Strike Fighters series control assignment menus. Here are a "very few" example of "switches" that the SF series have (and I'll exclude the X/Y/Rudder axis and Throttle):

-> Flaps up
-> Flaps down
-> Gear up/down
-> Change Radar mode
-> Radar On/Of
-> Change Radar range
-> Change Radar Target
-> Select Radar target
-> Next Air-to-Air Weapon
-> Previous Air-to-Air Weapon
-> Next Air-to-Ground Weapon
-> Previous Air-to-Ground Weapon
-> Next Weapon Ripple quantity
-> Previous " " "
-> Next Weapon Ripple distance
-> Previous " " "
-> Eject
-> Auto-pilot
-> Auto-pilot Wing Leveler
-> Select nearest visual enemy target
-> Select visual target in front of you
-> Cicle visual ground target
-> Time Acceleration
-> Time Skip

And these are only a very few example of the SF series commands which will depleat by a very large margin the controls available in any console gamepad.
SF series can have simplified radar/avionics modeling in how they operate but this doesn't mean that the number of controls in these sims are small.

Well, my 2 cents...

Would consoles not make it easier to make flight sims, as they have the same hardware components?? This could result in more sims being developed,and sims of better quality, as we'd all be flying with all the options maxed.

A defining moment for me occurred when I flew(OGF) through a plume of smoke, and there was no framerate hit. Sweet!!

Over G can be laughable at times, but to me it simulates flight very well.

Again, have you tried OGF? Please don't take offence, but perhaps it's you who should be taking a 'closer look' before casting judgements? I've edited your list and removed the 'non-sim' elements that you've listed, and I've also edited your list to show you what OGF can also do. There's not much difference is there? Which goes to show what I previously said, "Over G Fighters is the equivalent, in terms of complexity, of the Strike Fighters series on PC". I'm not claiming it's a feature match for match, I wouldn't want to get hung-up on such insignificant, trivial, technicalities, but as you can see it is an equivalent. There was also a 6+ page thread in the Community Hall about this, where many SimHQ members, who had actually tried both titles, stated exactly the same thing that I have.

All I'm seeing here are a few rivet counters whom are resistant to change (no names mentioned ). I fly Sims on PC's mainly and have been flying sims for 24 years (probably a lot longer than many of the so called, self-styled, authorities/experts on flight simming that you see around these forums), but I'm also glad that I can keep an open mind and also fly a sim on my console. OGF isn't the greatest thing since ready sliced bread, as Bisher and others have said, the campaign is crap and I agree. However, I'm talking about how well the title simulates flight. To dismiss it based on misguided prejudice with no actual experience of the title, is just crazy. Try the thing first and then I may take your criticism slightly more seriously.

Hengist,

Errr, you shortlisted the list of commands of SF which I repeat it was already shortlist of commands in SF which means that most of the SF commands weren't included in that list. That list was only, lets say a glimpse of SF commands.
I also noticed that you "removed" the "Flaps up" and "Flaps down" commands from that list of mine, which I can suppose that OGF doesn't have those commands, is that right? Also, at least IMO (but not only I'm willing to bet) those commands aren't definitly "non-sim" as you claim to be. Other commands that definitly aren't "non-sim" (at least IMO) is the "Weapon Ripple quantity/distance".
I undestand that oppinions diverge from person to person but IMO all of those commands that I posted before are (again IMO) "sim" commands (and "non-sim" like you claim them to be).

Besides I have been flying sims for something like 22 years, so like you I played for longer than the "so called, self-styled, authorities/experts on flight simming that you see around these forums" and from my "22 years of experience" in order to have a flight sim with a good degree of accuracy you need to have at least a keyboard.
So regarding consoles, in a gamepad you simply can't have the same number of available commands that you have in a keyboard and I think it's safe to say that if a console flight sim doesn't have a keyboard it simply can't be as "complex" in terms of commands as a PC sim even if the "PC sim" is a SF series sim.

Finally, I'm not trying to compare SF with OGF in terms of FM itself since like you already said I never tried OGF but I'm comparing those titles in terms of commands which was exactly what you mentioned in your previous post and regarding this I simply have NO doubts that SF is more complex in terms of commands because first of the physical limitation that consoles have (limited number of commands in a gamepad) and then because of your last post which let me to conclude that OGF doesn't have basic commands such as Flaps up and Flaps down or other not so basic but nevertheless important commands such as Weapon Ripple quantity/distance.

You seem to have forgotten one thing in your 22 years of flight sim experience ricnunes - interactive cockpits.

Hi ricnunes,

The edited list is reflective of what OGF can do, so as well as removing, I've also added features. Apologies if I didn't make that totally clear. The non-sim things that I mentioned and removed, were things like 'time skip'. SFP1` is certainly not 'more' complex than OGF, it may have a few features that OGF doesn't and vice versa, OGF has features that SFP1 doesn't have, but it's no way near 'more' complex. It's as I originally stated... "Over G Fighters is the equivalent, in terms of complexity, of the Strike Fighters series on PC". Now don't you start splitting hairs and go all rivet counter on me as well, ricnunes

If I could sum up my point, I would say this. OGF is certainly not a turn 'n burn Ace Combat arcade flyer game, as some have dismissed it as. It is a simulation. It's certainly not Janes F/A-18E (although the Superbug flight model is OGF is far better), but it is most definitely a simulation.

Hi Bisher,

I have never understood what all the hype is regarding interactive cockpits? I have interactive buttons on my keyboard, which to me seems a more realistic way of simulating such things. After all, I've never seen pilots using a mouse to turn real buttons on or off, I have seen them use their fingers, just like I do when using the keyboard.

Hey Hengist!

My point is interactive cockpits eliminate the need for a large number of buttons.

I stand corrected Bisher, that would be very feasible on a console controller. Thanks for pointing that out, I hadn't considered that factor. Like a few here, I had my blinkers on and wasn't thinking outside the box. I was only thinking about PC's. It's good to be able to learn something new, and I'm not to proud to admit that I just did

With "interactive cockpits" I think you mean "clickable cockpits", right?
Well, I don't know if you already know this but the flight sims that existed 22 years ago didn't have ANY clickable cockpits , so basically what I meant with my last post was that the only thing (or controller) that was VITAL for sims 22 years ago as well as today is the Keyboard and this is the reason why I'm very suspictious of flight sims in consoles.

Regarding clickable cockpits, I'm all in favour of that feature and I think that all sims should have clickable cockpits BUT as well as having controls thru clickable cockpits those same controls should be also modeled thru keyboard and/or a joystick system. Resuming I think that ALL the commands in a sim must be modeled in or thru the keyboard because like Hengist already said there are commands that take much longer to execute by clicking the cockpit than by pressing a key (or a combination of keys) and sometimes that diference of time may be the diference between a virtual live and death

I hope to have explained myself better this time

Hi Hengist,

Sorry if I misundestood you post but could you answer me the following questions:
Does OGF has:
- "Flaps Up" command?
- "Flaps Down" command?
- "Weapon Ripple quantity" selection?
- "Weapon Ripple distance" selection?
- Any sort of Autopilot?

Again, please notice that I'm not comparing FMs, I'm comparing the number of available commands and IMHO a sim must have in order to be "realistic sim" which again IMO is quite extensive. Of course that FMs are an important part for a flight sim but so is also the number of available commands and if a sim doesn't deliver one of them it will NOT be a "realistic" sim, at least and again IMO.

Finally, I still doubt that you can model the "enough" number of commands for a "realistic" sim on a gamepad, hence my oppinion about sims on consoles.

This is my point Hengist. The comparison of key commands in Strike Fighters vs. that in OGF has been done and whether or not it's 'comparable' to Strike Fighters is a moot point, as is whether or not OGF is or is not a sim. Those are subjective points and I don't want to go back and forth on them.

My point is that Strike Fighters could be released tomorrow with Falcon-like complexity on the PC. It won't be and that's because it's not aimed at the Falcon/Jane's market. OGF could never be released with that kind of complexity because the control mechanisms are not available. A HOTAS would be a good step, but you really need a keyboard or a simpit. That'll never happen, though, because if you're buying something to play on a console, it means you're not looking for something like Falcon- or Jane's-type sims. I think restating myself is inline here:

So you're saying you DON'T have to throw all those switches? It's like Strike Fighters? Great - that's Sim-Lite. Unlike the PC, though, Sim-Lite is a necessity in the console market, because of the hardware vs. price limitations and the nature of the people you're selling to. Strike Fighters represents a marketing decision on the PC. OGF represents the limitations of a sim on a console.

The original point of this discussion was what a release of Jet Thunder on the X360 would look like. Without a HOTAS and a keyboard or simpit, it's going to look like Sim-Lite. If it didn't look like Sim-Lite, it wouldn't sell in the console market.

All of that being said, Sim-Lite on the console could certainly help develop the next generation of hardcore flight simmers. I mention Turn and Burn because, in addition to F-19 on my dad's monochrome laptop, it's what brought me to Fleet Defender, Falcon 3.0, and the Jane's enterprise.

I'd certainly like to see Jet Thunder - Lite for the X360. It'd serve as a great way to bring players from the X360 to the PC to play Jet Thunder there, where they'll get better avionics, a better campaign, flight model, AI, etc.

Why do I feel like I've just received a lecture??

Yes that's exactly what I've been saying all along. I'm glad that you finally acknowledge my point. However, I still don't understand what your point is, and more importantly, what it has to do in relation to the point that I've stated? OGF, SFP1, Janes F/A-18E, Falcon 4, are all sims, they may all simulate differing aspects, some more than the others, but they are still all sims. You may think that certain sims are what some call 'Hardcore', a real fighter pilot would laugh at that. We are all just playing games and playing at being Pilot. My belief is that there is no such thing as a 'Hardcore' flight sim on a PC. Now if you went down to RAF Brize Norton in Britain, and climbed into one of the simulator pods down there, then I would most certainly call that a 'Hardcore' sim, but let's be realistic here, you can't state the same for a game on a PC, no matter how much you want it to be real. It's just a game and that's all it is. People who don't believe that, are in danger of loosing a grip on reality.

No it wasn't, the original point was me asking the following... "Dante - Any news on the X360 version? I know it was mentioned earlier for consideration, has a decision, yay or nay, been made with regards to it?"

Hi ricnunes,

No disrespect intended, but I'm starting to get a little tired of this thread. It was started as a simple question to the developers, and surprise, surprise, the rivet counters jumped in and turned it to their own devices. May I refer you to my previous post, where I stated the following?..
I enjoy a good discussion about games, but I don't enjoy playing silly games like this.

Hengist, no disrespect either but I just made 5 simple question about OGF in order to satisfy my personal curiousity about the OGF capabilities (even because like I previosuly said, I never played it), is this wrong? Or is this forbidden here?
Anyway the objective of those questions were to get 5 simple Yes or No answers.


Again, I simply don't undestand how a simple question (or 5 simple questions to be more precise) can be "silly games"? :rolleyes:

Maybe this was because of my "bad" English? Or maybe I expressed myself wrong? Who knows, if this was the case than I appologize.