Question of the week. MiG-25 vs MiG-31

This is a little experiment. Anyone who wants to may answer the question in the comments. I will try to make the questions more weekly than the posts have been so far. This weeks question, Witch is faster, The MiG-25 or the MiG-31. I have my own answer but based on proof and eloquence presentation I might change my mind. For now think of it as way to show off what you know!  
                                                                                                                                                     

Lock On (Modern Air Combat, Flaming Cliffs, Platinum)

The Lock on series (again From Ubisoft do I sense a trend?). Is an unofficial sequel to the Flanker series. The first version had the same Russian aircraft and the F-15C and A-10A from the U.S. and Flaming Cliffs ads the SU-25T Frogfoot. There is a significant graphical improvement over Flanker and the same great landscaping. But it is set in the same place, and remains so through all its expansions. Platinum attempts to switch things up by moving the setting several hundred miles southwest. The greatest strength of Lock On is its incredible realism. Individual flight models, authentic radio chatter, and complex aircraft systems. It even has a similar damage simulator to IL-2. However it's greatest strength is (in my opinion) also it's greatest weakness. Even when on lower difficulty settings the game is so real that it often loses the fun turn and burn feeling of Flanker 2.5. Although you can still decimate enemy aircraft with unlimited missals and impossible maneuvers, it feels like you're cheating somehow. Although Ubisoft will try to sell Platinum as the best version, Modern Air Combat is basically the same game. (And I feel as though MAC is more visually pleasing in the game menu). I would say that Lock On is a great series that only fails by taking its self to seriously, although there are some comedic moments in the radio chatter for scripted missions. It is a simulator all the way and if you but it only to play with invulnerably, unlimited ammo, and unlimited fuel on, you just overspent by a good 40 bucks when H.A.W.X. is available on Steam for $10.       

      

Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004

This title will always hold a little soft spot for me, as it was not only my first Flight sim, but also my first computer game of any kind. The Game itself is superb, the stock version comes with 24 aircraft and there are hundreds of downloadable aircraft as well. Now since 2004's release Flight Simulator X has also made a name for itself. However I have never played FSX so I can't make a good judgment on it. From what I have heard people who owned FS2004 and then bought FSX have no end of criticism for the latter. But people who have only played FSX say it's great. But back to FS2004. The game not only comes with plenty of aircraft, but also an entire dynamic earth to fly around in. And the best part is if you fly from New York to Hong Kong there are no load points the whole way. The weather system is equally impressive, you can either create your own or fly through real time weather. The one biggest complaint I have is the ground detail. No roads, no cars, no radio towers. In a city you might be able to make out the Empire State building but other than that houses and buildings are completely generic. Another issue is one that I've had trouble nailing down for a while now. It stems from a feeling of detachment, meaning you don't feel like you're in the plane. And the reason is that even in the 3D cockpit your view is rigid and follows the aircraft's movements exactly so that the cockpits' image does not shift on your screen. To get a better idea of what I mean, next time you're in a car pay close attention to how your head moves with the car. It doesn't just sit there does it? It's moving so that your view is constantly shifting. Sorry to spend so much time on that but it really bugs me. But despite even that I would say that Flight Simulator 2004 earns a solid 8/10 from me.
 And just to clear things up I will not be doing a separate post about FSX, so I will pass my judgment now. As far as I can see FSX and FS2004 are very similar, FSX has more interactive missions and probably better visuals. But in terms of the aircraft they look basically the same in both games until you get real close, then you'll notice that FSX has better HD textures. But still if you want an open world to fly in FS2004 is my first choice. 

this is where i get most of my addons.

IL-2 Sturmovik (1946)

IL-2 is yet another Ubisoft masterpiece. With 229 Flyable WWII aircraft, after all expansions, no other game matches the variety that IL-2 does. Better than decent graphics and gameplay that works for both rookies and aces alike make this game a whole lot of fun. probably the most appealing aspect of the game (at least for me) is the damage simulator. Your aircraft will break apart from where the bullets are hitting not from some set point. And the best part? Addons are still being made, IL-2 Cliffs of Dover was released in early 2011, and although its not an addon in the same way as Pacific Fighters or Sturmoviks over Manchuria its made by the same people and is a similar game. The biggest issue that I came across playing IL-2 is that after a while all those aircraft loose their appeal. In fact some times it feels as thought there are a lot fewer planes than advertised, and that's because different models of the same plane count as different aircraft, there are at least 10 versions of the  A6M Zero. Also the game's mission editor is very buggy and far from intuitive. But once you get passed all that the game, and I use game loosely because it's really more a simulator, can be lodes of fun. Just one thing though, you will need a joystick. keyboard and mouse just aren't gonna do it for this one.

here's were you can try a Demo.
http://www.fileplanet.com/63881/60000/fileinfo/IL-2-Sturmovik-Demo-v2.0

Flanker 2.5

Flanker 2.5 is quite simply in my opinion one the best flight games ever made. Released in 2002 it is a continuation the "Flanker" series of sims, SU-27 Flanker, and Flanker 2.0. By today's standers Flanker 2.5's graphics are a little outdated but that does not detract from the game play. In fact out of the dozens of games I've played few have matched Flanker 2.5's performance. For those of you who have played Lock On the game will be very familiar, same controls and world map. the Biggest difference between the two is the graphical game play, and the fact he Flanker 2.5 does not have the A-10 of F-15 as playable aircraft. But it's not all good. the multiplayer community is virtualy none existent, that is of the game doesn't crash as soon as you click "multiplayer". And as with all old games there is little to no official tech support.  (you can check out http://www.fixya.com/support/p1127032-ubi_soft_entertainment_flanker_2_5)  But if you're looking for a fun action packed Flight sim/game, you can't go wrong with Flanker 2.5. 

This says "Flanker 2.0" but it's the also the intro for 2.5. 

    

A little introduction

Every week (approximately) I will discuss a different flight sim. The term "sim" will be fairly broad as I will cover everything from IL-2 to piloting the chopper in GTA IV. I will cover old, current, and upcoming sims and  I mean for this to be a reference for anyone looking to buy a game and who wants some sort of review. So please come fly with me :)