[boanerge]

I am looking for a couple good flight sims, esp. WWII combat stuff. a brief walk down the aisles of CompUSA leads me to conclude that all the good games are Wintel and not Mac.
Questions: 1. Recommends on good Mac flight sims.
2. Can one play Wintel flight sims on a Mac G3 running Virtual PC?

[Brazuca]

I don't have much experience with WWII sims, but if you are willing to try some other stuff, F/A 18 Hornet (Korea) is superb. My choice, however, is Falcon 4 because of its realism. Even though its buggy, its by far the most intricate sim I have ever heard of.

The most recent WWII flight sim to be released for the Mac is called Skyfighters 1945. You can order it on CD-ROM from http://www.dogfightcity.com. You can also download a demo from http://www.macgamefiles.com.

But beware that the SF 1945 demo doesn't do the game justice; in the demo, you are restricted to one theater of operations and one rather lame mission. You can shoot other planes down, but they won't fight back.

None of this applies to the full-fledged SF 1945 game.

SF 1945 is not nearly so sophisticated graphically as Falcon 4.0, but it is stable, and a hell of a lot of fun to play. Even if you dogfight against computer-generated opponents, you'll get into some mean fights. It's really cool. SF 1945 is fully GameSprockets compliant, and it has an internet option.

I also have F/A-18 Korea, which I think is an outstanding value for a combat flight sim. Though, of course, this isn't a WWII-era sim, it is a really cool game.

Tristan

[blingblingin68]

That game is utterly HORRIBLE. I would rather lose a finger than ever play that game again. It had 5 year old graphics, a horrible physics engine, and stupid sounds. Whoever made that game should be ashamed for producing something so pathetic.

Ca$h

PS: microsoft said that all their titles are being ported to the mac, so you could just wait and get the Microsoft Combat simulator. Thats what I'm going to do. It looks pretty nice too.

Ca$h, when you say that such-and-such a game is "utterly horrible," which game are you talking about? I couldn't tell from your post.

Tristan.

[jholmes]

I too want a good warbird sim but until Micro$oft gets off the dime and ports theirs to the Mac, I'm playing Hornet/Korea. Wow. Really well done. But there's a reason the squids and jarheads who fly these things have college degrees and spend four years learning to fly. It's got an impressive learning curve. But it also has an good flight instruction module that walks you through the basics of getting in the air, landing, navigation, and weapons delivery systems.
If you wanna fly jets, it's a great game.

I feel as if I should add a few details about SF 1945 to people who might be wondering about the specifics of the game. I should say that the *physics* of SF 1945 is actually the key selling point of the game. People have different views about the graphics, which is understandable.

Here are my experiences with SF 1945 after noodling around with the game for about a month (bear in mind that I am not a pilot):

1.) The planes can be stalled and snap-rolled.

2.) Engine performance varies with altitude, improving noticeably over 20,000 feet for all the planes in the game.

3.) Fuel-injected engines perform better in sudden G-pulls than engines equipped with carburetors, which explains why I can get better acceleration out of the Me 109 in dives and climbs than I can get from the Spitfire.

This is consistent with historical accounts of the Battle of Britain, btw.

4.) Combat damage to the aircraft affects performance either gradually or suddenly, mildly or catastrophically, depending on the caliber of the ammunition used and where the plane is hit.

Sometimes I can limp home with a damaged aircraft with partial control, and sometimes I am blown right out of the sky. It depends on the skill of my opponent, and how much firepower he is packing.

5.) So far as comparisons between specific planes go, I can say that, after messing around with the Me 109 and the Spitfire for a month, overall performance of the aircraft is consistent with historical accounts.

The Spitfire is more stable in level flight than the Me 109, and more maneuverable, but the Me 109 packs more punch because of its heavier guns. The Me 109's engine can also give the Me 109 a height advantage over the Spitfire during combat.

The Spitfire, which, in real life, had a tendency to spin if the pilot wasn't careful, also has that tendency in the SF 1945 game.

I am still discovering new things about SF 1945 each day. It is clear to me that, so far as physics go, the game developer put a lot of thought into this WWII combat sim.

Tristan.