Pity RoF didn't get a mention.

I think a huge oversight on the part of the SimHQ team, given the continued and ever expanding content of this great sim.

Of course I only play RoF, so I might just be an ency weensy bit bias.

Rise of Flight was released in 2009.

But it's still being developed into something more! ROF in 2009 is a far cry from ROF in 2011.

True, but it should be acknowledged that it is a constantly evolving product rather than a one shot, wham bham, thankyou mam, with a couple of patches, product.

Yes, it's a different way of selling a sim, that doesn't necessarily fit into the traditional sim development scenario, but it should be acknowledged, just like that of Benchmark sims V 4.32 that it continues to grow and add new content etc etc.

Simply saying it came out in 2009, I'm afraid, just doesn't do it justice.

Rise of Flight is one of the greatest flight sims of our time - hands down the best WWI flight simulation I've ever flown. Graphics, controls, textures, single- and multiplayer gameplay, quality of flight and damage models, etc. ... wow, what a game! However, the "Best Simulations of 2011" considers products that were released in 2011. Benchmark Sim's 4.32 update simply beat out all the Rise of Flight updates released this year.

Ya ok.

Jason

O-kaaaay?

Well, I beg to differ, but no sweat!

For next year's edition SimHQ should definitely have a "Best update of existing sim" category. RoF deserves a prize for the amazing work done on it: Truly ground-breaking, both simulation-wise and marketing-concept-wise.

I think SimHQ needs to change or modify its measuring parameters. Don't have a category for ROF, then create one.

Really...Benchmark 4.32's single update is better than the flood of updates and content we received in the entire year for Rise of Flight?

I mean, I could understand if it were singular updates but c'mon...RoF's catalog of updates could be considered one update. Especially if you're new to the game, it's an all in one package.

Shouldn't RoF at least get an honorable mention? While admittedly a number of us (myself included) are enamored with the product, we're enamored for a damn good series of reasons!

Guess I need to get out more but I haven't even heard of this thing called "Benchmark Sim's 4.32 update" much less the original game until I just read it in this thread. So I already know I'm biased towards RoF.

lol, I remember when SimHQ was being labeled by members and other sites as RoF fanboys... now were not doing enough... we just can't win with some of you.


BTW, I've had the game since release, bought every plane... and I just can't get into it... I try, I tell myself I should like this, everyone else does.... but I don't... flying in circles struggling with controls trying to get sights on target... only to spin out and crash. Of course I might not like it because I suck... but I suck at all games and still like some.

Glad so many people like it, the developer/publisher deserves loyal fans.

That category is covered. Consideration is given for any sim, new or old.

I fail to see how the RoF updates and new addon DLC (which are payware) compete with the Benchmark 4.32 which won the non-commercial category. By and large doesn't RoF compete with the commercial products?

As for "honorable mention" there is not a "second best" entry in the list for any category.

I'd take RoF over a FSX

Makes sense, especially since RoF is commericial updates, and 4.32 is freeware, but . . .

How did an FSX add-on I've never heard of beat the ROF Beta Career/Re.8/F2B/Spad.VII combo?

I would give Benchmark 4.32 1st prize in any category. RoF is fantastic, but give credit where it is due (good job SimHQ).

I'm amazed it didn't get a best add-on or something for the Brisfit or the Re-8, BF3 retuen to Karkand did and that isn't even a sim.

I can't believe Battlefield 3 got a review here and 2 awards, this site just lost all it's credibility.

lol... BF3 is a game, and the add-on is a game... they won for best land game... rightfully so.

I won't mention how I'm not hurt about our lost of credibility from a 25 post member... opps dammit, just did.

Why would you give a prize for an aircraft released with a known error in its climb rate, and a very uncommon armament?

The entry surprised me as well, as I don't even own FSX, but that doesn't diminish its amazingness.

As with any poll results or "Best of..." contest, there will always be differences of opinion, but I hope folks take the chance to actually look at products that were selected instead of their own personal favorite. They might just learn a bit about the rest of the whole wide simulation world out there.

Just amending that since you quoted me out of context. I'm not going to bother gracing it with an actual answer.

I was just trying a light hearted dig, don't get all serious.