GH Review: IL-2 Sturmovik: 1946 (PC)

***Zardon*** · Jan 22, 2007, 05:55 AM

Read the review here
____________________

For the vast majority of people, the only aeronautical simulation known to them is Microsoft’s renowned Flight Simulator series. Personally, even though I have great respect for that franchise, I just never considered it that entertaining and usually found myself trying to crash the planes in the most amusing ways possible instead of just flying them. Fortunately, for other flight simulation aficionados like me, there are alternatives; better known as the Falcon, Lock On and IL-2 Sturmovik series. All of these games are utterly unforgiving and realistic, bringing combat flight simulation to the masses. Whereas the first two games that I mentioned are based on modern-day warfare, the latter is all about aviation during the Second World War. Although, like many people, I find that the market is saturated with games from the WW2 era, when it comes to flight combat, nothing beats good’ole dogfighting. And since another expansion for Oleg Maddox’s excellent flight simulation was recently released, called IL-2 Sturmovik: 1946, I just had to go out and try it!

Falstaff · Jan 22, 2007, 06:45 AM

I love this game Allan, been playing it for years, the fan web sites are pretty damn good too, the dialogue is in the native language of the pilot too. Its a load of fun. But dont play it too much, you will lose your vision, gain wieght and go crazy...LOL

cwick · Jan 22, 2007, 04:38 PM

Haven't tried it yet but I thinkI will. What was the music featured in the video ?

bstef9950 · Jan 22, 2007, 10:30 PM

no lie about losing your vision.That game is HARD on your eyes.Dam unforgiving like you say but fun.Im really trying to get flying but at the moment im crashing a lot.It's so realistic it gets you air sick

Im talking about IL-2 Sturmovik.

Sandok · Jan 23, 2007, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cwick

Haven't tried it yet but I thinkI will. What was the music featured in the video ?

The name of the song used in the clip is Epicon - Immediate Music...

Quote:

Originally Posted by bstef9950

no lie about losing your vision.That game is HARD on your eyes.Dam unforgiving like you say but fun.Im really trying to get flying but at the moment im crashing a lot.It's so realistic it gets you air sick

Im talking about IL-2 Sturmovik.

I know what you mean

It takes a while to graps the basics but once you do, trust me, you'll be hooked onto it

If ever, a PERFECT accessory for IL2 Sturmovik (among others) is the TrackIR...

You'll become an ace in notime

OldBuzzard · Jan 23, 2007, 03:19 AM

Near faultless Flight Models????? PULEEEEZZZZZZZZ

The Il2 FM is from one of Oleg's vodka soaked dreams.

Damned Russian Uber planes that can out-turn a Zero, and out run a P-38 in a full balls out dive. OH, not to mention that he 'hit box' of the La7 is the size of a BB. And even IF ya manage to hit one with a .50 Cal....the .50 Cals hit like 5mms.

Spit 25lb that will climb at 6k FPM damned near indefinately, and never overheat. You can make a headon pass at damned near ANY Spit, keep going straight to disenguage and the SOB will turn a quick 180 and then walk down on you like you are dragging an anchor.

US Navy fighters that shake like a dog crapping peachpits when you touch the trigger cause he has the guns firing on one side and then the other. R-2800 engnines that overheat in a heartbeat because he didn't model cooling for them with the cowl flaps open. If it's a Navy fighter...don't bothe to open the cowl flaps cause it does no good and only slows ya down.

F4U in a full boogie dive getting caught by Zeros for God's sake. Realism my patoot!

P-47 that has 8 ,count em 8, .50 cals needing damned near ALL of the ammo on board to shoot down one lousy 109 because the .50's hit like BB's, and no matter how set your convergence, just go everywhere like they were fired from a smooth bore. In reality, the 8 .50's on a P-47 were known to knock locomotives OFF of the tracks. Yep...sure is real in the game.

The only thing IL2 had going for it was that it had better online play than CFS3. If the #&%#@! bean counters at MS wouldn't have forced CFS3 to be released when it was only 3/4 finished, IL2 would have died the death it deserved to.

Yeah, I fly in IL2, but that's because it's the only game in town. Trust me, if MS would have given us FS2004 with weapons, and the 1% .air files from the AVHISTORY guys you'd see just how unrealistic IL2 is.

LeanWolf · Jan 23, 2007, 09:23 AM

looks very interesting. I also rememeber playing flight simulator and quickly getting bored and crashing the planes.. I'd give this a shot but I'll heed the warning about the time required to be able to play properly, I'm not willing to give it.

BWX · Jan 23, 2007, 10:08 AM

Quote:

But then, one has to ask, why the name IL-2 Sturmovik: 1946? Unfortunately, this is a mystery that shall never be answered and, at least to my eyes, makes absolutely no sense at all.

Didn't WWII end in '45? Maybe that's why they called it 46? I have no idea if the single player campaigns are all based on non factual events that might have happened if the war did not end when it did.. but this is just a guess. The name makes sense if that is the case I suppose.

edit- this review reminds me of a really good series of shows on the History Channel..

DOGFIGHTS: The Greatest Air Battles
We trace the birth of dogfighting in World War I.
Saturday February 3rd at 6pm

Dogfights: MiG Alley
We reveal how US pilots risked their lives flying sleek F-86 Sabres above 'Mig Alley' - the most dangerous piece of sky in the Korean War
Saturday February 3rd at 8pm

Dogfights: Air Ambush
We investigate 'Operation Bolo'. Launched during the Vietnam War, it was one of the most elaborate deceptions in military aviation history.
Sunday February 4th at 8pm

Dogfights: The Zero Killer
We return to the Pacific theatre of the Second World War, examining the infamous A6M Zero: the deadliest of all Japanese fighter plane.
Saturday February 10th at 8pm

Dogfights: Guadalcanal
We relive the August 1942 dogfight over the Guadalcanal in the Solomon Islands, in which US pilots battled Japanese flying aces.
Saturday February 10th at 8pm

Dogfights: Flying Tigers
Just two weeks after Pearl Harbor, a band of American mercenaries challenged the might of the Japanese Air Force. This is their story.
Sunday February 11th at 8pm

http://www.thehistorychannel.co.uk/s...text=Dogfights

I remember trying Sturmovik a long time ago, but a game pad never did the game justice.. completely accurate or not, it was fun, but seemed to need a real flight stick and pedal input to see it's potential.

I always thought a Matrox triple head connected to 3 big monitors combined with a Track IR would be a great way to play this sim.. or any flight sim for that matter.

Sandok · Jan 25, 2007, 02:52 AM

Three 30" Dell Moniters, along with a TrackIR and Saitek X52 joystick... Ohhhhhh boy that would be heaven

OldBuzzard · Jan 25, 2007, 10:06 AM

I'm wondering why VR hasn't taken off...now THAT would be the cat's ass for a flight sim. Even with Track IR you don't have the situational awareness that you have in RL. As long as we are trying to do a 3d sim on a 2d screen it's just not gonna be 'real'. It's not that bad with the FPS games cause you are only moving in 2d's anyway. But wiith a flight sim you are moving in all 3.

Our current systems have MORE than enough power to do it, and the hardware is available. Right now the HMDs are mucho $$$, but I'd bet that with more demand they would come down in price pretty quick. I guess that we will just have to wait untill some developer grows enough cajones to risk it.

BWX · Jan 25, 2007, 12:56 PM

About VR, I think the reason why it isn't more popular is because you are completely cut off from the real world. You can't even see to push buttons on your keyboard, etc. Just by design it creates some problems that seem like it would be hard to work around.

I'd love to play some games that way though - just to see what it's like.

OldBuzzard · Jan 25, 2007, 03:13 PM

Yeah, that 'could' be a problem, but I use a Saitek X52 with a LOT of programming options, and also use VAC (Voice Activated Commands) so I never use the KB anyway

VAC is cheap too...10.00 and works great. I use it in HL2, and RTCW also.

INSTG8R · Jan 27, 2007, 03:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BWX

Didn't WWII end in '45? Maybe that's why they called it 46? I have no idea if the single player campaigns are all based on non factual events that might have happened if the war did not end when it did.. but this is just a guess. The name makes sense if that is the case I suppose.

46 Is adding a fictional element to the game with AC that some only appeared as blueprints etc. and a scenario where the Russians invade Germany. Some dont like the idea of "UFO's" and more jets added to the game but it does make for some fresh scenarios like a fun mission I made using Burma as Korea and Yak-15's and YP-80's as Mig's and F-86's(There is a Mig-9 in the 46 addon but it too powerful in comparison to the YP-80 so the Yak does the job)
After playing this game for over 3yrs now it definitely adds alot of great new things and the promise of the last "Big Patch" 4.08 should contain alot of new maps like Norway,Slovakia the possibility of a New Africa map, Italy and some others that I just cant think of.
Besides there has never been a better package than this to get it all in one . I bought it purely to replace my 5 cds and numerous patches that made installs a long tedious dance with Oleg.
The only issue may be finding it in US stores but it can easily be ordered thru the great people over a www.gogamer.com who have been an asset to the US IL-2 community in making the earlier expansions and hard to find items available(I personally dont use them as I live in Europe but I hear nothing but great things in peoples dealings with them)