CFS3 Announcement on front page

[Donmo 6]

I for one am looking forward to seeing CFS3. I am hoping we will be getting our first look at what FS2004 has in store for us. Can't wait to read the reviews on this from our Avsim reviewers. I just started playing around with CFS2 two weeks ago and have it loaded up with stuff like I have FS2002! Good thing neither one can take control of your mind! LOL! Christmas will be good! :)Donps: Because I live in the South, I am also obliged to buy the new Nascar 2003 game. I told my wife WE HAVE TO or they will make us move! LOL! DM

[Guest Coneman]

Yes, I am looking forward to this also, although there is going to be one big drawback that I can see. We won't be able to import CFS3 aircraft into FS because of the different game engines. But having said that it looks like it's going to be a lot of fun. The dynamic campaign sounds really good too. You can start reading reviews here:http://www.simviation.com/gryphon/CFS3_Rev...CFS3_review.htmhttp://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/previews/cfs3/But I don't think this is going to give us any idea about what FS2004 will be like. As I mentioned they decided to go with a brand new engine for this sim. So I would imagine that FS2004 will be built upon what they have already established. It could be that the clouds might give us some hint as to what is in store though.Cheers,Todd

[Donmo 6]

Some of what you see in CFS3 will probably (no guarantee) show up in FS2004. It will have the new engine, same as CFS3, only modified for another 6 months or so. We'll get a look at, but not match what FS2004 will be. I just hope they get the snow a bit better and when in overcast, the sun isn't shining!Don

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi, Thank God cfs3 is not fs2004, with CFS3 it is a different team from that of FS team, there are one, or two that merge over. I am not impressed from the graphics, blurry and dark terrains no improvement here, already bored from screenshots. Some cfs3 beta tester are disapointed. There was no Ah and WOW compare to IL-2 Sturmovic High Standard Graphics .Fs2004 should be 10x better than this!ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFshttp://fsw.simflight.com/fsw.jpg

[Donmo 6]

Cool buddy. So it is true some of the engine and parts will be carried over to FS2004. I was dissappointed in seeing the snow NOT on the runways in winter again. I wish they would give a dusted texture to it somehow. It doesn't have to move, just let it LOOK like there is something there and it's not a heated runway! LOL! With respect to the clouds I hear so much about, is there still sunshine in overcast? That ####### me off to no end! It will still be fun to play. I played with CFS1 the other day and what a difference between it and CFS2 and FS2002. Just another step. I didn't know it was a whole different crew doing it. Seems it should really be better then the FS sims. They only have 1 little piece of the globe to worry about. You would think they would REALLY get all the gadgets out and have plenty of time to make it detailed as they don't have to worry about the rest of the world. I guess once the programmers get ahold of the game, they will autopsy it and figure it out. All those gauges are, are programs. Someone will rewrite them. I still can't wait. Nothing says Christmas morning more then 8 50 caliber machineguns blazing! LOL! Don

[Chris Willis 8]

Don, To be honnest, I don't care About cfs series but disapointed for the graphics quality (worst than fs2k2 ground), it's not an Cv Flight Sim but an Bombing games, I prefers Cv Sim (fs2002) overs cfs series much more to enjoy, totaly differents and a Classic! The graphics in fs2004 will be much better than cfs3 specialy the terrains, added with some interactive scenery etc. Because of the frame rate hit, Ms have removed the 3d clouds and better terrain rendering in fs2k2 alpha, User was wanted good frame rate at the time, so they have deciced no 3d clouds and terrain rendering :)Those people will complain about frame rate, first thing they do, is to put all slider to full and complain about bad FPS or missed feature in this version :-lol. User will have to learn thats they will not have all great feature with no frame rate hit, Imagine, some complain about the clouds frame rate hit in fs2002 WOW!Solution: Slider quality, all depend on the Negative and Organised people. Fs2004 expect an good System to buy!ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFshttp://fsw.simflight.com/fsw.jpg

[wsieffert 0]

Wait a minute, MR. ALASKA BUSHTOURS, is that South Alaska your talking about!!!???:-lolIf it is, I would think you would get NASCAR's Snowmobile Stock 2003 first!!!:-lol

[Donmo 6]

Nope...Virginia! Too damned cold to really live / fly in Alaska! I get cold looking at Siberian Huskies! LOL!Don

[Guest]

The two gents from MS at the Conference told us that MSFS2004 will not be using the same graphics engine as CFS3 - and that they will not in the future. MSFS04 will be an "upgrade" of the graphics engine in 2002. Different needs were cited. The combat sim needed much better textures and detail below 2,500 feet, esp. with the historically accurate emphasis on ground attack during the last years of the war, than the commercial and GA flight sim. However, both sims will continue to share the same framework for airplane modeling, which may mean the ability to share planes between the programs.

[LAdamson 240]

>There was no Ah and WOW compare to IL-2 Sturmovic High >Standard Graphics . >>From all the screenshot's and writings over the past year regarding FS2002, graphics, and the "blurs", I'm convinced that many of us are "seeing" a different sim on our CPU's!I keep seeing the reference to "IL-2 Sturmovic High Standard Graphics . "......... but having used both sims I've found FS2002 graphics that beat those of IL-2 and visa-versa.I'm one of those who doesn't have constant gripes about FS2002 blurriness, because it's gotten awful obvious, that I don't experience them to the extent of some others.Like I've already said------------------- we are seeing a different FS2002 simulation, depending on our CPU's abilities! Mine is getting close to a year old now, but has done well!!L.AdamsonAthlon 1900XPGeforce3Ti500512DDRram22" monitor, 1600*1200*32 res.

[cat 2]

cwr707,Excellent, insightful closing comment cwr707.Wish everyone had your intellect.Peter Sydney Australia

[Donmo 6]

Good deal then! I see what you're saying on textures in CFS3. That makes sense. Either way, I know CFS will still be a step up from CFS2. As with all the "new" things in any sim, it's only a matter of time until someone cracks the shell and gets into the nut and figures out how she ticks. THEN the goodies come forward. Same will happen with CFS3 and FS2004, no matter WHAT kind of engine/parts they use to run it. MS doesn't have the ONLY programmers out there. I just hope in FS2004, they make the weather more realistic and make water freeze in winter. Alaska just isn't right with blue lakes in winter and sunshine during overcast! LOL!Don

[Guest Paul_W]

I agree with Chris. I've been following the development and the news about CFS3 day-by-day for months now: they've made big strides in adding realism to the atmosphere, and I think the VCs and the exteriors of the planes will be improved. However it's really disappointing to see no improvements to ground textures, autogen buildings and water one year after FS 2002, especially when comparing those elements to the development screenshots coming in from LOMAC. Notwithstanding all the detailed improvements being requested for 2004, I just really hope these very basic elements are given a huge overhaul.

[Guest sidewinder]

The terrain textures in CFS dont seem smooth to me. Also they are very blury and unclear. The effects are awesome, clouds are awesome, Fire looks reaal.Textures in FS2k2 are much smoother and clear. Have they disabled antialising or something for better performance, thats what it seems to me.

[Guest JonP01]

As someone who plays CFS2 and FS2002 in equal proportions, I can't help feeling that perhaps MS should have packaged high quality full 16 bit uncompressed terrain textures in their current sims. I have never had any issues whatsoever with the terrain texture quality in CFS2 and I feel a lot of the reason for this is that CFS2 still used uncompressed 86K terrain bitmaps as opposed to compressed 43K terrain bitmaps in FS2002 (and presumably CFS3 as well).Not only do compressed bitmaps exaccerbate the "blurries", but the 43K bitmaps can induce a slightly grainy image compared to the full 86K bitmaps.It seems a pity that MS obviously has the uncompressed bitmaps somewhere, otherwise they wouldn't have been able to produce the compressed versions. It would just be nice to have the uncompressed bitmaps included on the CD. The user could then check a checkbox during the initial installation to determine what size textures are installed. In these days of much faster video cards approaching 256MB memory and beyond, it is quite possible using uncompressed textures would cause negligle performance loss as well.Neverthless I am looking very much forward to release, especially flying the early axis and allied jets. I expect I will end up with a nice rounded package of CFS2 for warbird prop flying, FS2002 for GA flying and CFS3 for early warbird jet flying. I'm very much looking forward to seeing how MS handles the early jet flight models and experiencing many of the graphics enhancements since the CFS2 release.Its alos nice to know that the sim appears to be video card bound (once you have a late model CPU), as I expect to upgrade my card early next year.