fpdesignco

My Feedback: (4)

Well I had a chance to use G3 at the Vegas show. All I can say is same thing. They added a lot sell features, but when it came down to flying I could not tell a single difference in better flying physics. There is just so many new features that you actually feel like the plane is flying better, but as soon as you try to 3D the planes, same exact thing as my old G2. I knew it was too good to be true

Sailor

My Feedback: (1)

I don't understand your post as it is in direct contradiction to BasinBum's post on another thread. So who am I to believe?

[link]http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2246208[/link]

Spacey

LOL...I've also heard a rumour that the physics are still very much the same as G2. Guess we'll have to wait a little while till all the die hard Realflight fans gets it and well then we'll have to wait for the honest one to tell the truth. I guess that is where it gets a little tricky

exeter_acres

My Feedback: (2)

Sailor...I do not discredit anyones opinion.... but the link you gave gives a Rave review.......of the graphics and pictures... it really doesn't talk about physics...
so the post above is not contradicting anything.... just pointing out something that I didn't see mentioned in your link...

I HAVE NOT seen G3..so I don't know... but it sounds like BOTH people "Could" be correct...

Great graphics, reflections, et al...but nothing new in the physics department


just the way I read the posts.....

fpdesignco

My Feedback: (4)

I'm not asking you to believe me or the other guy. I own AFP and G2. I've even used G2 longer then I've owned AFP. However it only took me a very short while to notice that G3 is no different in physics then G2 and far less then AFP physics. AFP was also there and other people at the show said the exact same thing. Once you use AFP then get back on G2 you notice instantly. As soon as you hit the elevator or try to harrier G3 just becomes like mush. No flat spins etc.

It seems like the 2 best selling flight simulators only know how to market towards features and not physics. Both Great Planes and MS Flight Simulator. Both are top of the class in selling you crap that you don't need. I mean it was cool, reflections on the planes, wind sock and all kind of other crap. But if I want all that crap I'll go to the field. I just want to learn how to fly the best I can. It almost sickens me that these companies do this. They have the money, it's like they like to spend it on trying to trap the customer in selling you these stupid hypnotizing features to suck you in.

Mudsurfer1234

you won't find any stock planes on G3. Take measurments of your Giant 3D plane and make the plane on G3 (or G2) the same as your's. I personlly don't have a giant 3d gasser yet, but i will soon, and i only made my extra to make it look like the real gassers that 3D, and so that it does what i want it to do.

No plane on G2 or G3 SHOULD do a flat spin without any editing. And they make it that way so you can edit the planes and make them your own. Im pretty sure your real plane isn't the EXACT same as what the instructions say (like CG, throws, maybe control surface size)

If there was a simulator that had planes that did rolling harriers, flat spins, harriers, and elevators without ANY editing, i wouldn't buy it, and would call it a sim for lazy people.

Ok, i said what i wanted to say, so im out,


Enjoy your sims guys,
Scott

Crapper

Quote:
"The G3 was still a Beta version and didn't have full funcionality but I can tell you the physics are every bit as good or better than AFP. The field I was flying on was huge and the graphics were excellent. You could see the background reflected off the Monocote of the plane up close and the flying was very realistic. It doesn't have the photograph background like Reflex but flew more realistically and the interface is excellent."


Well I guess I read the linked post a little differently. It seems clear to me that BasinBum made reference to the physics on more than one occasion whereas fpdesignco's review states that nothing in the physics department has changed. Thus I understand Sailor's statement questioning the apparent contradiction.

fpdesignco

My Feedback: (4)

Mudsurfer obviously you have never touched AFP or you just don't know how to do the moves you've just explained. It seems like you've fallen into the Great Planes marketing trap.

fpdesignco

My Feedback: (4)

know the G3 that I used in Vegas was "Beta". However they are releasing it in a month or two. Listen I use AFP a lot. G3 flew EXACTLY like G2. So if it's still a Beta like you say there is no way they would have displayed it at the Vegas show. Here try our sim ... this is the new sim ... only the real version is going to fly much better? Nobody does that. They are selling features, not function.

fpdesignco

My Feedback: (4)

ALSO Why do you think all of the expansion packs will work with G2 that work with G3? Because the physical properties are the same.

Crapper

This is not necessarily true. The physical properties (dimensions, weights, engines etc.) of the planes/helis may be the same, however, it is quite possible their interaction with the environment (G2 vs G3 flight physics) can be made different.

exeter_acres

My Feedback: (2)

Crapper....(nice name!) I am not saying anyone is wrong or right as I have not seen G3, just a different way to look at things....

Fine... but the thread was comparing g2 to any/no improvements in G3, NOT a different product


I see this as a nice comment...but with no comparison...realistic? better? worse?


I read that as a comparison to Reflex....NOT a G2 to G3 comparison....



Again... All I am saying is I read it differently...and it is all a mute point until the product is released anyones.....don't we agree?

Geistware

My Feedback: (16)

What are the advertised improvements from G2 to G3?

Crapper

That's all I was saying.

Yup.

Crapper

RCadmin posted the following thread:

[link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/RealFlight_G3_due_out_mid%2Dnovember%25%25/m_2163272/tm.htm]RealFlight G3 due out mid-november[/link]

exeter_acres

My Feedback: (2)

cfossa

My Feedback: (5)

Hi Guys,

I think the fact that G3 does NOT support helis strongly suggests that it has a new flight engine ... if it was the same and only a graphics/bells & whistles upgrade I think the helis would be working.

The product description on Tower Hobbies says
"New RealPhysics 3D for more realistic flying than ever before
especially in high alpha (3D) flight, harriers, waterfalls and
many more aerobatic manuevers are possible."

Great Planes has recently started selling 3D models like the U-Can-Do .46 and .60. I personally would be very surprised if G3 does not have 3D capabilities that rival AFP (I own both G2 and AFP).

Personally, I will wait until they have a version that supports helis out of the box. The "no-heli" release makes it sound like they are rushing to market to beat the Christmas order deadline. I'll keep flying G2 and AFP for now.

Anyway ... I thing the AFP vs. G2 vs. Reflex debates may be helping us all. We are very fortunate in such a niche market to have multiple, quality R/C flight sims and some type of competition between them. As long as that is the case we will keep getting better sims!

That's all that really counts anyways right??

Happy landings,

Carl

depfife

My Feedback: (14)

Great post Carl!

Like you I am happy to see competition in the sim market. Discussions about the differences between the simulators is interesting, but it is funny (and a little sad) to see how some get so worked up when everyone does not agree with them.

Eric

Aerohead

My Feedback: (37)

What I really want to see is an upgraded AFP. If Ikarus would take a clue from G2, and get away from the cartoonish graphics, now that would be a great sim. I own both G2 and AFP, and there is no doubt that AFP has by far the better physics, especially for high alpha stuff, but G2 definitely has much better, more realistic graphics.

BasinBum

My Feedback: (2)

I see I've been quoted in this thread so maybe I should speak up. I specifically flew G3 with the intent of determining if the ailerons worked in stall and were affected by propwash, they were. I don't understand how fpdesignco could say the two sims are the same if he tried any 3D manuvers with G3. I was able to do slow harriers up and down the runway and see the effect of the ailerons unlike G2 and I was able to blender into a flat spin. I could also torque roll and feel the effects of the ailerons.

I compared the graphics to Reflex because Reflex is pretty and I compared physics to AFP because AFP has better physics than G2. They are all good sims but G3 will continue to have more features than the others with comparable physics and some advanced graphics that you may or may not like better than Reflex.

Is that clear enough?

Sailor

My Feedback: (1)

Yep!

Mudsurfer1234

so would it be possible to do a reverse torque roll? i did one today with my .40 size Great Planes Extra 300S, and was hopin that G3 will let me do slower, higher alpha rolling harriers and torque rolls that i can control the spin rate.

Thanks,
Scott