^^If Bf2 was a flight sim, you would actually have a big advantage if you had a stick. But since flight physics in Bf2 are retarded, you do not need a stick, you just need practice
-
-
After 2 years of Microsoft Flight Sim (2002) games, no, you dont need a stick in a sim any more than you do in BF2. As a matter of fact, youd need a stick more in BF2 because of the intensity of the flight. Its all about the "functions" in a flight sim, and MSFS is a fairly "slow" game and you can perform all tasks with a mouse.
The funny thing when people compare BF2 to flight sims is, flight sims are extremely limited while BF2 is not limited so the intensity level that comes with controlling the aircrafts motion is so much higher in BF2.Comment
-
Well, Chris's argument makes perfect sense, which means Waah will now be able to shout out some incoherent, unlogical crap as usual
Practice all you want, you'll get good, eventually.
I could practice flying with my feet, and I'd get good, eventually..Comment
-
QFT? The control over the aircraft is higher in BF2? Surely you are joking.
Listen, there is more to avionics than elevation, rudders, ailerons, and thrust - you can't pull high G maneuvers in BF2, you can't change flaps to alter your stability, leaving it actually fairly limited.
I've flown in genuine military aircraft simulators, I believe I have an understanding of what I'm talking about - No Chris, not Flight Sim, the real deal. I also use joysticks in other games, meaning I'm not some anti-joystick fanatic - I just understand the limitations of a game like Battlefield 2.
Stalls: Not possible: Skyboxing is NOT a stall
Flatspins: Not possible due to lack of realism
Pugachevs Cobra: Not possible in BF2 due to the lack of flight mechanics.
(For those who don't know: http://youtube.com/watch?v=daOPK07baBw - Yet, this is possible in other simulators/real life with certain aircraft)
High G turns: Not possible in BF2 due to poor avionics.
Afterburners: Are a level of thrust, not a button.
Flaps: There are none in BF2, so you can't control stability/speed as much.
Airbrakes: There are none in BF2, allowing less control over aircraft speed
Damage: It's hitpoints, not loss of mechanics/systems to alter flight functions.
I mean, for the love of God, you can't even free look while flying - you have to hold a separate button to look around, meaning you can't use your weapon systems!
For 90% of those listed above, it would help to have a joystick to fine-tune your controls, and make precise movements. While there may be certain situations in BF2 that require the precision of a joystick - it is not needed nearly as much when compared to a realistic simulator.
You get the SAME effect pushing on the arrow keys (in BF2) as you do with a joystick. It's common sense people!
You say that 99% of better pilots use joysticks, well, that may be true. But, the 1% of people who are JUST as good with a keyboard/mouse PROVE that they are infact equal with the right practice! This would never be true in a more realistic setting.
You can argue this all you want guys - but the truth is, BF2 just does not properly represent realistic avionics. Cry Flight Sim all you want, it's futile.Comment
-
Stop with all the flight simulator crap, it's deviating from the real argumentComment
-
wow guys. no way. It is sick to even hear that you guys think BF2 flights are more controlled and realistic than games such as FSX or Lock On. Don't even think about arguing about it. Read k0dak's post...
The joystick is just so much more accurate AND realistic when it comes to flying. BF2 is extremely limited when it comes to controls. All you have in BF2 is thrust, ailerons, and rudders... In a flight sim, your controls get as detailed as lights, radio controls, and navigation. There isn't even a key in BF2 to put your landing gear down, or turn your engines on or off!!
It's just so UNrealistic. Oh yea, and 2 missles to kill a plane? Wow no. Try one AIM-9 in Lock On. If you hit them with that, there is a pretty good chance they are going to have to eject. Also in BF2, when you are hit, the damage doesn't affect the plane's ability to fly. For example, you shoot at the wing of an F-35 in BF2, the wing doesn't come off. The pilot will most likely to a roll and fly away safely, land, and get repaired. In a game like Lock On, you get your wing shot off and it actually comes off, therefore making it impossible to fly...
But anyway, this isn't what this thread is about. So, you don't need a joystick for BF2. In a game like BF2, there is no difference between using the "W" key for thrust than using something like a Saitek x52 flight system throttle. In a game like Lock On or FSX, the throttle is no doubt needed, as it would be quite hard to fly with just a keyboard. Practice to use a keyboard in BF2 is all you need, don't bother with a joystick unless you play other flights sims and you're used to it. For example, I can't fly for crap without a joystick. I use a keyboard and I go BOOOOOOM as soon as i take off.Comment
-
Amusing, but you two are so in to expressing your slight sim knowledge, that you completely misuderstood my argument and continued in bombarding me which in coincidence actually proves my point.
Get closer to your screen.
Closer.
Flight sims are more limited, than BF2 arcade flight, which offers FREEDOM.
All this crap about landing lights, landing gear, radio comms, approach procedures, ILS, high G turns, air breaks, et cetera, et cetera and followed by another bunch of stupid mess.
These things actually RESTRICT you, they do not offer you FREEDOM.
In BF2, you just hit W, and perform unlimited acrobatic turns, twists and maneuvers without any limitation from G forces, air density, altitude, stall speeds, weight or fuel. BF2 has put 1000X1000 functions into 15 functions. All this extra junk youre babbling about actually restricts your flight.
Consider this, BF2 dogfighting is done using only 3 axis and 4 keys. LOMAC dogfighting is done with... holy sh!t insert ammount of keys, ammount of keys.
All while the control over the aircraft in BF2 is unlimited, sharp, fast and maneuvers themselves take so little time to complete, than the stress on the controls, even those puny 3 axis and 4 keys is so huge and demanding, that the 15 APM you shoot on MSFS Cessna 172 night landing on realistic settings is absolutely nothing.
Take it from a guy who jumped into a chopper simulator booth and aced his first Jet Ranger flight better than flight school graduates. I also played MSFS extensively throughout years 2002 to 2004/05.
BF2- unrestricted, free arcade flight somethingsomething
MSFS/LOMAC/LOCK-ON- very restricted, multifunctional and limited by RL physics and "works" flight simulations
The mere fact that the second you jump into a F35B and can take off using ONE KEY only, with the same result as going through a whole checklist for MSFS with the EXACT same result, attests to that fact.
Yes, I know you boys like to play sims, I did too. But use your heads for a moment. Could you land and take off with the 747-300 without the stick, even though the whole procedure checklist is huge and the forces and limitations to the aircraft are huge in numbers? Yes. Could you launch and get the kill in Lock-On using keyboard as a sub for axial control interface? Easily. Do you have to rattle and beat your stick around in Lock-On/MSFS as much as you would have to do with BF2 1 vs 1 dogfighting? Not nearly as much.
Ask yourself, what demands more from the player, the limited and slower paced tactical realistic FPS, or an ultrafast Quake 3 round? As an answer, you could go and play SWAT4 for days and you would be fine. You would be completely exhausted and fvcked up after just 1 round in Q3.
Note to self, before you respond- the word "limited" and all of its forms and abbreviations are used in a different context that you think. "Limited" as in "limited by the real world and the functions", MS uses almost the whole KB, almost all of the JS keys for control. That is a limiting factor. BF2 uses 3 axii and 4 keys. That is a freeing factor.
EDIT: Just to slow you silly rabbits down. Why the hell do you think the concept of HOTAS was developed? Or FBW? Or even the HUD? People at Boeing would kill you and your whole family treeline (all on one branch, of course) to be able to get their jets flying as they are flown in BF2. Alas they cant, real world sets its limits.Comment
-
Using a mouse or a joystick, it is simple to escape, go straight up, stall, then hold S and keep going.
The main feature about the joystick is of course the simplicity of holding it in one position and your continuously doing the exact maneuvers. Like if I were to just keep the stick to the right, I keep doing barrel rolls. Big deal, it just takes more effort to do it with the mouse.
It is all a matter of personal preference, we can argue all day and night, so just try both and determine which you like better.Comment
-
And that sir - because of the simplistic controls - means it can be done using a mouse and keyboard. Case and point.Comment
-
Ok I just read all of the last page. I have to say no you dont need a joystick for battlefield 2. I have been playing Flight sims since I was 6 years old. Always used a joystick, battlefield 2 comes around and I find it very hard to fly with a joystick. Personally I like realism in my air to air combat, I guess other people dont and thats fine. You can practice with either one and sooner or later you will get really good. I just have to say that Bf2 is unrealistic out the ******* and back just the fact that you gain airspeed as you gain altitude is so stupid. I agree with Kodaks post and everything he said.Comment
-
Intensity of control, intensity of control, intensity of control, intensity of control, intensity of control, intensity of control.
To end the case, watch a dogfight video of Lock-On and compare it to a 1 vs 1 in BF2. By the time you finish a maneuver in Lock-On, youve finished 5 in BF2.
By the end of the day, joystick just helps that much more in BF2 to ease up the intensity, enhance the speed of switching between controls and jump around in the armament/maneuvering aspect to deliver those ordnances in the right split second moment.
Something that you have a lot more time to do in Lock-On. And something that you dont need to do in MSFS.
Joystick for BF2 is like high grade precision gaming mouse for UT2004/Quake 3. You can do without it, but by the end of the day, once you get used to it, its invaluable and you wont go back unless force majeure makes you. Case in point, I dont know of anyone who has gone back from a JS, but I know a messload who have gone forward to a JS.
The fact that the interaction and change in maneuvers with the 3 axii is far, far, far, far more intense in BF2, than it is in MSFS/LOMAC/Lock-On, means that the stick is far more useful in BF2, than it is in flight sims.
If you feel the need to argue, simply go to Youtube.com and search for Lock-On dogfight videos, then look for BF2 dogfight videos. Which ones are intense because they are fast and require a whole boatload of reflexes, and which ones are intense because they are so slow that its painful.
Your earlier quote.
Is wrong. Ill let you do the research as to why.One may be easier at first, but there IS a limitation to how the jets can perform in BF2Comment
-
Yawn...
There is no point in posting here anymore. People have their own opinions, and they are not going to be swayed unless they actually have experience with either set of controls.
It's like the chicken and the egg, this argument will go on for ever without a correct answer.Comment
-
Battlefield 2 is a First Person Shooter it was designed to be played with a mouse and keyboard not a joystick.Comment
-
A moderator who spams threads just because most of his posts have as much substance as grade school kids movie project... OCTOCAT FINDS PARENTS!!!
Dont worry, I wont use the report function, not even on you.
Aerialz, lets make a pact to not to make this thread into "arcade games vs realism games".Comment
Comment