Conference hydra::amiga_v1

    I've got it, and I think it's rubbish. Before I start a riot though,
    I'll explain - the scrolling is jerky. You may not think that's
    a sufficient reason to condemn a game totally, but in my book there's
    no excuse for having jerky scrolling on something like an Amiga,
    and CERTAINLY not on something that costs that much. In other respects
    I'm sure it's fine, but for me this totally spoils it.
    
    -Rog
    

    I've only flown it once by myself,I must admit I did'nt notice anything
    particularly bad about the scrolling,but I will see what I think
    after a few more flying hours.
     The reason I bought it was the good review it had in a magazine
    I read,97% the highest that had ever been given.
    TYRONE
    

    
    And I thought that Falcon was junk too.  So don't let one mans opinion
    toss you off.
    
    Steve
    

    I'll toss my opinion here too!
    
    I've flown Falcon(v1.0&v1.1), CombatPilot and the Bomber + Interceptor.
    
    Specially the Falcon v1.1 is my favorite, because of the feeling to fly
    multimillion machine and to outtake Mig's.
    It's scrolling and movement handling is excellent, although the AI of
    Mig's could be much better. And don't forget to read the manual, the
    most important thing that came in the package.
    
    Yes, the CombatPilot has the looks, but not the feeling, not a even
    little bit of it. Scrolling is jerky, although the night scenery
    outtakes definately Falcon and Bomber. But the enemies are quite poor
    in realism.
    
    Now, the third one Activision's Bomber, it's has the feeling, but
    lack's the reality what Falcon has. Although Bomber isn't bad, cause
    you don't have to learn all 99 key functions 8+). I would put Bomber to
    same basket where the Interceptor is, FlySims that can be flown without
    the manual(manual is very badly written!!!). Most powerfull option in the 
    Bomber is the ability to design you own combat sceneries and let someone 
    else fly them.
    
    And remember this is only my opinion!!!
    
    Regards,
    
    	-Kari-                                                         
    

    
    I've got FALCON, BOMBER, INTERCEPTOR and GUNSHIP.
    The best way to judge if a games good or not is to see which one you
    play the most and in my case this must be INTERCEPTOR. Followed closely 
    by BOMBER and GUNSHIP. On the odd occasions that I put FALCON on it's
    usually put away again after 30 mins due to lack of interest.
    Are there any other GUNSHIP jock's out there ????? I think this is a
    great game which i haven't heard mentioned in this notes file.
    
    				geo
    	 		(the man who patiently awaits F29 RETALIATOR)

    re .3
    
    Ditto here,
    
    Ken
    

    I'll have to go with INTERCEPTOR.
    
    While I agree that FALCON has more realistic details, just the FEEL of
    flying with INTERCEPTOR can't be beat.
    
    I wouldn't necessarily say it's the game I find myself going back to,
    but I find myself flying just for the sake of flying rather than
    treating it as a game or a combat mission.
    
    Terry
    

    Ditto. IMHO, FALCON is the better *simulator", but F/A-18 INTERCEPTOR
    has that "seat-of-the-pants" feel that FALCON seems to be missing. For
    example, on a fly-by with opposing aircraft, FALCON seems a bit choppy
    but with INTERCEPTOR, the action is smooth and fast. Maybe I'm too
    brain-dead, but FALCON is difficult (extremely challenging?) to get a
    comfortable feeling with.
        Some of the most enjoyable sleepless nights spent so far was with
    INTERCEPTOR; the lights down low, headphones cranked, white knuckles on
    my joystick hand, and back drenched with sweat, chasin' them MIG-29's
    (or were they chasing me?) mumbling an endless refrain of "damn...
    damn...DAMN!". Then when I finally had enough and went to bed, I
    couldn't sleep; mostly from being "wired", but the worst thing were
    those incoming missle alarms going off in my head.
        It's nice that Spectrum Holobyte has come through with at least one
    mission disk whereas INTERCEPTOR leaves you at a dead end. Robert
    Dinnerman, where are you?

    Pete

    As as aside you may like to know that F-29 Retaliator is due to be
    released next week.  From the reviews, it appears to have the edge
    on Falcon.  I'll wait and see............
    
    -Dave.

    I've read these comments and was very supprised by the lack of interest
    in Falcon. F-18 Interceptor has a superficially 'cleaner' look and feel
    but after mastering the basics of Falcon I found it like playing space
    invaders or returning to roller skates after driving a sports car.
     There is a steep learning curve on Falcon-seemingly endless.
    But once you reach the top whole new areas of flight simulator
    entertainment open up infront of you. Nothing in Interceptor compares
    to blowing up ground targets like the bridges, CCIP and AGM-64 missile
    fir multiple s SAM dodging and the red haze of a super tight neg G
    pulling the eyeballs right out of your head as you switch on ECM and
    power up to full afterburner, locking in on the damn mig as SAM lockon
    blinks and warning lights flicker like crazy and the horizon  spins
    like crazy and the mig appears right in the middle of the aiming
    recticle... 
    	Well  anyway I get a rush just writing about it. Just a couple of
    hours and you'll never look back to lesser pursuits.
    	Good luck!

    Has anybody been able to copy F-16 yet onto another disk.I had a
    go last night and it came up with an error saying that I should
    key in 888 and use diskdoctor.
    
    TYRONE
    

    Yep, I encountered the same. I made my copy with a backup utility
    called
    Raw Copy. I got the game started but in the middle of a mission it
    just quits and hangs I like the simulation though I like the night
    and weather capabilities especially. The night missions are fun and
    the weather makes things different.
    
    Todd