jwalk2c

My Feedback: (47)

Hello everyone.
I have Real Flight G2 with usb.
However thanks to Tower Hobbies return policy I can return it as I have not opened it yet.
My question is how would Aerofly compare to G2 with USB or does USB not add that much improvement to G2. I know there are different versons of USB and I wonder if the newer versions are that much faster, or does it matter in this case?
I have owned Real Flight G2 (serial interface) and it was OK but I thought it was to easy to fly, ie:models did not stall as easily as real r/c planes, nor did things happen as fast as in reality.
But as far as torgue rolling I thought G2 was realistic. (Never did learn though,no fault of the sim however )
Any advice in making a decision between the two would help.
I was able to run G2 on a P3 550 mhz with old Nivada TNT
16 mb card and 256 mb ram.
Does anyone know if this same setup will run Aerofly Pro if I turn off extras. I only care about practicing and I want a realistic experience.
I can turn the preety graphics and extras on when I finally upgrade my computer.
Thank You
Johnny Walker
CVRC'ers

Red123

turning off extras in aerofly only makes a 10-15% (guesstimate!) diffrence in the frame rates, unlike realflight where there is huge flexibility. i dont think aerofly pro will run well on your current system. however u could consider upgrading your graphic card only, as a cheaper option, and things might be very diffrent.

i agree-- both sims need to run faster than their default 'speed' setting.....so no diffrence in that respect.

cant comment about the rest....sorry.

jwalk2c

My Feedback: (47)

Hi RED123,
Thanks for reply.
I am glad to recieve your information that they both need to be running faster.
So I assume you have seen them both run on similar machines.
Is there a day and night difference in the two?
When I previously owned G2 non-usb I remember there was a option to run the sim at a faster real time rate,or something to that effect.,but if I remember correctly my computer did not have enough power to do that.
So I never really got to experiment and see just how realistic G2 could be.
Aerofly Pro sure looks good in the pics I see but a lot of that as your mentioned depends on your graphics card.
And with a faster computer Aerofly Pro might be the better of the two.
Thanks Again,
JohnnyWalker

Red123

So I assume you have seen them both run on similar machines.

Yes, i have.

Is there a day and night difference in the two?

No......... but for me G2 is marginally ahead.

When I previously owned G2 non-usb I remember there was a option to run the sim at a faster real time rate,or something to that effect.,but if I remember correctly my computer did not have enough power to do that.

Both sims have the option to change 'speed'.


Aerofly Pro sure looks good in the pics I see but a lot of that as your mentioned depends on your graphics card. And with a faster computer Aerofly Pro might be the better of the two.

Aerofly pro's minimum hardware requirements, i think are higher compared to G2.........but that doesnt mean it will clearly outperform G2 on a faster system (atleast in my opinion!).

KnifeedgeHover

Johnny,
I have both.
Aerofly Pro has clearer graphics and better
realism/ feel in the Airplanes and Choppers.
The stalls and high-alpha 3d/stuff is modeled great
right out of the box with Aerofly; G2 needs heavy
massaging to get it right, but it's never spot- on.

Just my two cents.

Knifeedgehover

rscamp

I think the version of USB (1.1 or 2.0) is of no consequence. Only 1.1 is currently supported and only 1.1 is required. I don't think TX signalling qualifies as a high data rate application for a serial link.

Rob