14 replies to this topic

[liquid_sky]

This has been an addiction of mine for quite some time.. anyone else enjoy these games as much as me? My favorite plane to fly is the Leerjet 45 (very easy instrument panel layout, handles stalls somewhat clunky though). I loathe the Bell helicopters, Ive had this game forever and still cant maintain a proper heading and climb to 1000 feet without doing an endo and crashing.

I am still using Flight Simulator 98, if anyone out there has 2002, is it worth the purchase?

[Starscream]

Nintendo

[liquid_sky]

i dont even think trying to talk about nintendo will help this topic.. i guess im a boring person but damnit the game is interesting

[Jasoco]

Meh.

I've played many versions up to 1998. It's fun and all, but there's just so many times you can crash into a building before it becomes boring.

[liquid_sky]

maybe if you were interested in aviation it would be more fun to you, but instead you think its a game about flying jets into various landmarks, of course ittl get boring. thats like saying "well halo is boring because i got tired of driving the warthog"

the realism in the games is so good they actually use flight simulator as a pre plane test at many flight schools.

[Jasoco]

Well, duh. But flying isn't the fun part. Crashing is. But it needs more realistic crashes.

[liquid_sky]

i THINK the new ones actually have crashes not just a freeze frame with the words CRASH. I know in 98 you can land in the fuckin water gear down and all and stop.. thats a BIG bug

[Jasoco]

In 98 when you crashed into a building you'd very unrealistically and crappilly fall to the ground in pieces rotating and rotating then they'd hit the ground and stop.

WTF?

If they wanted to try, they should have stuck to the cracked glass and "Crash!" instead of that animation monstrosity.

[liquid_sky]

either way, im gonna try to find a demo or somethin of the new ones to see how the crashes are.. i bet they are still lame, but you never know till you try. Plus, landing on water in a 737 is always good for a laugh i feel like jesus!

[Ushabin]

I was pretty addicted to FS back a few years ago.

Joining a Virtual Airline adds some realism to FS. I was a "Pilot" for Tradewind Virtual Airline. There are quite a few VAs around, but I like Tradewind because they weren't as strict on what lines you had to fly each month. They also have their own "Aircraft" that are painted in the Tradewind Livery. You can D/L any of their planes for free and take them for a spin. They have quite a few interesting planes.

FS 98 had all the real world Nav Aids in it, so I had purchased a set of High and Low Alt charts from Jeppesen as well as some approach charts from most of the North American airports. These can be used in FS to chart your own paths between airports.

I've got FS 2002 Pro, but I could never get it to work correctly on my PC. It adds many features above FS98 and FS2000 such as Air Traffic Control and a very good Flight Mgmt System. FMS is cool because it will let you put in a set of waypoints and let the auto pilot fly to them. So basically all you have to do is take off and land.

Marty

[kisrael]

I think for political reasons, they're not too likely to ramp up the realism of the crashes.

Hell, I'm still mad "Propeller Arena" for DC got canned.

[Jasoco]

If they won't make them more realistic, just get rid of the shitty they have now.

[Mustangarrett]

X-plane is better

[Jasoco]

Hehehe.. I forgot a word in my post. I meant to say "shitty crashes they have now."

[video game addict]

Umm....

http://members.chello.nl/~s.ferris/

&

http://www.wideview.it/my_cockpit.htm