F-16 Aggressor PC Game Full Version Free Download
F-16
Aggressor PC Game Full Version Free Download
The
real shame of it is there is a fine, fine flight simulator at the core of Aggressor.
Sometimes
when I'm cleaning my ears I push the Q-tip just a little too far in, and it hits
something that hurts like hell. It kind of hums for a while and then settles into
a dull ache. The thing is, I can experience this sensation all I want for about
a quarter cent per tip, whereas Bethesda would have me pay upwards of $40 for relatively
the same sensation. That throbbing in the brain, that jabbing pain in the head:
That's about what I took away from Bethesda's first attempt at a flight simulation,
F-16 Aggressor.
British
flight sims are like the British: They may have one or two good bits, but it always
goes to hell when you get to the teeth. In the case of British sims, things always
go to hell when you get to the controls. They wind up assigning simple commands
like "fire guns" to Alt + Ctrl + ~ and so forth. Let's face it: There has never
been a British sim that was worth a damn out of the box. DID took two years to get
EF2000 up to par, and Total Air War still isn't exactly burnin' 'em up. Rowan seems
to assign controls by having a chicken pick at three successive keys and binding
all three to a common command like "raise flaps." And now we have GSI, composed
of former employees of DID, and their brainchild F-16 Aggressor. Their key assignments
aren't as baroque as in other games, but they've managed to commit the Unholy Trinity
of sim no-nos: no key mapping, no joystick configuration, and, stunningly, no keycard
included in the packaging. It's almost like they want to make your brain hurt.
F-16
Aggressor has puzzling aspirations. The designers actually set out to re-create
Strike Commander. Remember Strike Commander? It was going to be Origin's flight
sim version of the Wing Commander format, a narrative-driven mercenary flight simulation.
Unfortunately, it didn't turn out quite right. It was incredibly late, pretty buggy,
and just not all that impressive. So of course it makes perfect sense to emulate
it. And then, to really nail the lid down, GSI emulates it badly.
The
real shame of it is there is a fine, fine flight simulator at the core of Aggressor.
GSI has modeled the F-16's flight properties with commendable detail. The funky
handling of the rudders at certain speeds, tough landings, speed bleeding, and other
things related to flight are all smack on. It's a flight model worthy of the best
F-16 sims, poised to offer the hard-core crowd everything it could demand... until
you get to the systems modeling. These are more on par with a Novalogic game. The
complex instrument modeling of Falcon 4.0 and other true hard-core sims is only
hinted at in Aggressor.
This
is not a problem for a midlevel sim, but Aggressor has pretensions of hard-core
greatness - pretensions that crash to the ground due to grossly simplified radar
controls. A sim has two prime components: the modeling of the flight of the plane
and the modeling of the systems. On one count, the developers succeed at realism,
and on the other, they fail. In the end, they scuttle all their good programming
by failing to offer any realism or difficulty switches whatsoever. The flight model
is set to its full realism level at all times. When you have a very realistic flight
model, an unrealistic set of sensors, and no ability to change the complexity of
anything, you have some truly schizoid problems.
Graphically,
while F-16 is quite good, if at times mind-blowing, it's true that there are better-looking,
better-performing sims out there. The terrain is a bit patchy, but object modeling
is good. Cockpits look very good and have effective dynamic animations for throttle
and stick. HUD overlays and quick-view keys provide excellent perspectives on the
instruments. In another stunning lapse, however, GSI has failed to include a padlock
view. This makes situational awareness well nigh impossible and deals another serious
blow to the sim.
Possibly
the most baffling aspect of F-16 is its alleged "mercenary flight sim" nature. You
would expect to have to fly missions to earn money to pay for weapons and upkeep
on your planes. That was the plan in early specs for this game, and there are traces
of it left. You still fly for money, but the money is merely used to rate your performance.
It has no other function. As for the "mercenary" element, it's mainly limited to
mission structure and some cursory background info. Missions range across Africa
and include a fair selection of strike and dogfighting action. Without any in-game
mission statements or target priorities, it's often hard to remember just what you're
supposed to be doing. The quick-start missions allow for some custom dogfighting
configurations, but there's no mission editor. As for the AI, it's OK, but nothing
special. Wingmen (when you have them, which is rarely) aren't much help, and enemy
pilots aren't all that aggressive. At least Aggressor has multiplayer, which compensates
for these failings only slightly.
Aside
from a very good flight model, there really isn't a lot for which to recommend F-16
Aggressor. For a company to create a sim with not only no key mapping, but also
no key assignment card, is just mind-blowing. (You can find the key assignments
buried in a 200-page manual.) This feels like a game that started out really good,
with some strong elements and good design intentions. But then it got delayed over
and over, features were dropped, sections removed, and finally it just shipped.
You know, like most computer games.