Lock On: Modern Air Combat

 PC
  • Publisher: Ubisoft
  • Release Date: Jul 26, 2005
User Score
7.4

Mixed or average reviews- based on 553 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 383 out of 553
  2. Mixed: 72 out of 553
  3. Negative: 98 out of 553
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Aaron
    Dec 18, 2003
    8
    Overall, I have to say that I am impressed with this game thus far. Going into it, I was not expecting Falcon 4 or Janes F-18. When purchasing a survey sim, it is completely unreasonable expecting a dynamic campaign and having every radar mode modeled for every aircraft. Even study sims don't model avionics exactly. When looking at this game as a survey sim, the amount of detail is Overall, I have to say that I am impressed with this game thus far. Going into it, I was not expecting Falcon 4 or Janes F-18. When purchasing a survey sim, it is completely unreasonable expecting a dynamic campaign and having every radar mode modeled for every aircraft. Even study sims don't model avionics exactly. When looking at this game as a survey sim, the amount of detail is stunning. It is the first survey sim I have played that has truly unique avionics for each aircraft. Let me tell you this, I don't miss velocity search at all. In fact, I never use it in the sims that feature it. LOMAC gives you all the features you need to fulfill the missions. Now to the actual review. Starting with the campaign, it does what is expected well. What would have been beyond expectation is at least a branching campaign. That would add to the immersion factor. Perhaps one could be added on later in an update or expansion pack. The flight models seem believeable. I cannot swear to their authenticity since I am not a pilot myself. They seem at least on par with every other sim. In addition, they all differ in a believeable way from plane to plane. The one thing I did have a problem with is an easily corrected one. In fact I am sure it is being fixed as I type this. This issue is of course the F15 radar and air to air missles. I never though I would see myself selecting an AIM-7 over an AIM-120 during intermediate range engagements. Even with the Sparrow the engagements in my opinion are at near dogfighting range. The radar seems to be off a bit as well. However, all I have to do usually is climb to a higher altitude to pick up a bogey. I hope the developers just fix the problem and don't dumb the radar down. It would just be nice to be able to use it at altitudes below 4000 feet. That is the only real issue I had with the game. Alot of complaining seems to be going on about frame rates. Thinking back, I cannot remember a single flight sim that ran perfectly smooth with all the details on high or even medium. In fact, I get better initial performance out of LOMAC than I ever have with previous titles I own. Only within the last year and a half have I been able to run Falcon 4 and Janes f-18 at acceptable frame rates. F-18 was especially hard on the system I had at the time I purchased it...not to mention USNF. Even with the settings turned down to mid level, the graphics are stunning in LOMAC. A few things like the highest detailed water, anti aliasing, and heat blur will definitely bring the average system to its knees. LOMAC is the first sim I have seen to do trees correctly as well. I am also impressed they modeled the low smoke rocket motor of the AIM-120. So, for a quick recap, don't expect a dynamic campaign...its a survey sim for crying out loud, avionics details are good, weapon and radar performance need to be tweaked, and the graphics rock.… Expand
  2. ArthurK.
    Dec 19, 2003
    8
    + Very nice graphics Good mission editor Excellent flight model Slightly simplyfied but still very good avionics wounderful cocpits - no dynamic campaign some bugs (crashing in some situations) horrible hardware reqirements for high settings errors in the German version weapon texts bad tutorials no printed manual (only to buy separate)
  3. ApathyC.
    Feb 6, 2007
    7
    A decent effort and very pretty, but it was programmed the way Russians approach everything -- by half-measures. Quite entertaining, and by far the best effort in the "medium-realism" sim market, it trips over constant bugs and design flaws, even after three years of patching. Its strength lies mainly in the A-10 missions, which are the most credible yet in the sim world, and an A decent effort and very pretty, but it was programmed the way Russians approach everything -- by half-measures. Quite entertaining, and by far the best effort in the "medium-realism" sim market, it trips over constant bugs and design flaws, even after three years of patching. Its strength lies mainly in the A-10 missions, which are the most credible yet in the sim world, and an accessible (though buggy) mission builder. In many ways, however, LOMAC is little more than "Flanker 3.0." In the end, the interface and design quality of the game simply mirror the confusion and dodginess of the real plane's avionics. It is, other words, a quintessentially Russian game -- with both the good and bad things that entails. On a realism scale of 1 to 10, LOMAC is clearly a seven. If you desire ultra-realism, then Falcon 4.0: Allied Force is a much better choice. For the occasional "hop," however, LOMAC makes for a nice, relaxing, (if somewhat buggy) distraction from the real world.… Expand
  4. JackG.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    Its just a patch away from getting an 8 or 9 from me. I love the game but bugs do bring the rating down for me.
  5. Zembla
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    The game is known to bring even the best platforms to its knees, reason for this is the complexity of the game. A rather unpleasant side effect of this is the prone-ness to bugs, simple logics. Unfortunalty the the game currently is far from bug-free, even though the designers spent lots of time debugging the product some evident bugs have slipped through to the "gold disc". Additionally The game is known to bring even the best platforms to its knees, reason for this is the complexity of the game. A rather unpleasant side effect of this is the prone-ness to bugs, simple logics. Unfortunalty the the game currently is far from bug-free, even though the designers spent lots of time debugging the product some evident bugs have slipped through to the "gold disc". Additionally the creators have done little or nothing to improve compatibility with common hardware such as for example the GeForce 4MX line of graphical cards. Eventhough they have made improvements in that regard, the effort seems a little sloppy through some evident bugs that are connected with this compatibility. One would wonder what's the best suitable system for Lo-MAC? I don't know, I'm able to run it on my P4 2Ghz 768MB PC2100 and my GF4MX460 pretty fine (part from the bugs). Of course if you're used to FPS framerates you'll be disappointed when seeing the FPS readouts. The game itself is magnificent in every way, perhaps the lack of a dynamic campaign is a little disappointing, but the gameplay and realism make up for this, this realism however is something that's not entirely bug-free - BUT don't start saying they're biased in their 'accurate' modeling of softicitated military hardware. The graphical beauty is endless. Get's a 7 from me... … Expand
  6. MamJ.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    I like averything in this game exept 3 things. you need a very fast machine and a good video card to run this game at max settings even if you max it out you will still have low fps sometimes. second this is Campaign, you can't play the next mission if you have not completed the one your curently in, how arcade is that? and last is the lack of communication between flights. if you I like averything in this game exept 3 things. you need a very fast machine and a good video card to run this game at max settings even if you max it out you will still have low fps sometimes. second this is Campaign, you can't play the next mission if you have not completed the one your curently in, how arcade is that? and last is the lack of communication between flights. if you are not using labels you will have no clue whats going on. Overall I will recommand to buy this game, I have only said bad things about this sim but it deos not mean it's not good. this sim has more good things than bad, it would take too much time for me to write all the good things.… Expand
  7. AndyK.
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    Good potential, but shipped with a lot of bugs. The first patch or two should shape it up nicely though.
  8. KreckochovS.
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    not fast feeling of speed but great game is it. so 7, maybe better if fast
  9. AndyS.
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    This game sets new standards for Flight Simulations in the future. Awesome Graphics and tons of features and details. But a complicated sim like this needs good documentation and there is none. Even the 3rd-Party manual which costs an extra $40 is not comprehensive enough to cover everything.
  10. KristofferR.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    Very nice game, well done but eats a lot of your pc's performance.
  11. JData
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    For its release, LOMAC isn't bad at all. There are some areas that need a tweak here and there but they sure aren't show stoppers. There would be hardware and gameplay issues for people not familar with the minimum requirements on the box. Most people would tend to expect a lot from LOMAC in regarding FPS but they forget that a modern combat game/simulation takes far more For its release, LOMAC isn't bad at all. There are some areas that need a tweak here and there but they sure aren't show stoppers. There would be hardware and gameplay issues for people not familar with the minimum requirements on the box. Most people would tend to expect a lot from LOMAC in regarding FPS but they forget that a modern combat game/simulation takes far more calculations than your standard prop WWII game. Graphically, it is beautiful with its stunning landscape, weather, andeffects/damage modeling. Some 3D models are updated and some are not. The overall color palette is tad bright for my tastes but I do prefer the winter landscape over the summer any day. Artificial Intelligence behavior needs a tad bit of work as they don't use correct logic nor are they using their true aerodynamic capabilities and the redundant/repetative audio calls can be a sore spot. Moreover, the overall atmosphere lacks as they are no abundance of calls from other flights which could lead to a lack of immersion as it is just bland. Yet, in RL isn't exactly Hollywood with its glitz and glamour in the communication department. Flight modeling is nice with the scripted high AOA behavior. Yaw authority is a bit too sensitive enough I have tried modifying the axis curve and it still feels artificial. The bottomline? Well, LOMAC is above average in most areas and below in others. The PROs outsway the CONS IMHO but I don't see higher than 9+ given its current state. Let's just be honest. LOMAC has a lot of potential and hopefully the sales will continue and the saga continues. *crossing fingers* Jewels… Expand
  12. Stan
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    While i was very disappointed at the begin (LOMAC would crash with my DirectX7 card on a Geforce4), i am increasingly developing a greater interest for this sim. Although i need to set my effects to none (a patch might make it possible to play Lomac with effects set at least to low), i'm exploring all the facets of this wonderfully programmed game. Going from free flight to complex While i was very disappointed at the begin (LOMAC would crash with my DirectX7 card on a Geforce4), i am increasingly developing a greater interest for this sim. Although i need to set my effects to none (a patch might make it possible to play Lomac with effects set at least to low), i'm exploring all the facets of this wonderfully programmed game. Going from free flight to complex missions created with the internal mission editor (which should be improved in terms of more editing freedom), Lomac finally hooked me up and i can say it definatelly was worth the long wait and... the initial struggles to have this product run at all on my XP2000-512mb ram-GF4MX400 system. The upcoming patches might raise my initial rate of 7 to a full blown 10.… Expand
  13. Burgers22
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    Great grahpics, though they tax even the best systems, at least this means it'll look even btter in years to come. Flying low & fast is a great buzz & at altitued the visuals are realy good. I love the view comands with fluid zooming & real head movment add greatly to the imersion. On the minus side the avioncs are ok, but are bettered else where, the MFD displays are a bit unclear & Great grahpics, though they tax even the best systems, at least this means it'll look even btter in years to come. Flying low & fast is a great buzz & at altitued the visuals are realy good. I love the view comands with fluid zooming & real head movment add greatly to the imersion. On the minus side the avioncs are ok, but are bettered else where, the MFD displays are a bit unclear & the lack of a keycard is a real disapointment. The flight model seems good at speed, but slow speed departs just cause you to sink to earth, whilts the controls retain there autority, very odd when compared to IL2. Over all, you need a fast system, great imersion, ok avionice & flight model, good damage model. … Expand
  14. SpektreUser
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    Having been flying the Flanker series of flightsims I had high expectations for this game. But then again, they promised much. Throughout the development, we were constantly fed plenty of eye-candy as the game progressed. Graphically...LOMAC is second to none. In playability...its sub-par. For some, the lack of a "dynamic campaign" was a major issue. For others, it was more about the Having been flying the Flanker series of flightsims I had high expectations for this game. But then again, they promised much. Throughout the development, we were constantly fed plenty of eye-candy as the game progressed. Graphically...LOMAC is second to none. In playability...its sub-par. For some, the lack of a "dynamic campaign" was a major issue. For others, it was more about the avionics and flight model. For me, it was the "whole experience" both within the game and out. I was recently BANNED from their forums for questioning their software testing especially after they admitted that they had allowed certain KNOWN bugs to make it to the final release. I helped the community at first but when I "stepped out of line" I was ostracized and criticized and then eventually banned. I hope that all that purchase this game realize that the sense of "community" is reserved for a select few and in particular all that don't question. Once the games' performance issues are addressed, as well as the AI issues, the Windows 98 compatability issues, and some other minor details I think this sim has tremendous potential and will definitely have some serious longevity. But then again...one can only hope... … Expand
  15. Archangel
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    Every game has it teething problems, and LOMAC is no different. I find this game very good value and a hell of a lot of fun. It will take a bit to learn but that gives the game longevity. All I ask is PLEASE, PLEASE bring out addons for this game and please make it so we can customize our skins!! Way to go UBI! your close to having another winner.
  16. AnonymousMC
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    ED/UBI know how to make a flight sim. Graphicly LOMAC will amaze you with it's level of detail. Each of the flyable aircraft have a distinct look and feel. Some people say it's a survey sim but they are wrong. You will have 100s of hours of gameplay as you become proficient with each aircraft. The mission editor is probly the best ever seen in a flight sim. The campaignED/UBI know how to make a flight sim. Graphicly LOMAC will amaze you with it's level of detail. Each of the flyable aircraft have a distinct look and feel. Some people say it's a survey sim but they are wrong. You will have 100s of hours of gameplay as you become proficient with each aircraft. The mission editor is probly the best ever seen in a flight sim. The campaign unfortunatly is not dynamic. Multiplayer runs well and is a good time when you can find a game you want to join. There are some things that prevent the game from getting a higher score...lack of printed manual, poor quality PDF manual, varius bugs that can range from slight annoyances to very frustrating...and what has been the biggest problem with the LOMAC community...the VERY hefty system requirements to see the game run with much, if any of the graphics set to high. LOMAC has some problems but the game is still amazing and you will be blown away by the sence of flight, the weapons, and the landscapes. For any flight sim enthusiast this game is a must have that will only get better as patches are released as UBI/ED is currently to working on patches for the game.… Expand
  17. BrandonH.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    I think after a few patches this game will be a 10.
  18. NicholasF.
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    This product has the same vision and goal as the Old Falcon 4.0 did and certainly has promise with further support. But in its current form is is incomplete, lacks documentation, and its campaign is just a series of six canned missions per aircraft. However, if you are a diehard flight simmer with some serious hardware you will no doubt find hours of enjoyment with this product and at This product has the same vision and goal as the Old Falcon 4.0 did and certainly has promise with further support. But in its current form is is incomplete, lacks documentation, and its campaign is just a series of six canned missions per aircraft. However, if you are a diehard flight simmer with some serious hardware you will no doubt find hours of enjoyment with this product and at only 39$ it doesn't hurt the wallet a much.… Expand
  19. GaryR.
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    Superb. Points dropped for lack of paper manual and problematic (for some) copy protection. Requires a good system apparently, but I'm problem-free with a 2.53P4, 9700pro and xp with 1 gig memory. Some slow-down in parts but not life-threatening. If you like jet sims buy it without hesitation. If you don't - don't. Its that simple. Graphically and aurally unmatched, great Superb. Points dropped for lack of paper manual and problematic (for some) copy protection. Requires a good system apparently, but I'm problem-free with a 2.53P4, 9700pro and xp with 1 gig memory. Some slow-down in parts but not life-threatening. If you like jet sims buy it without hesitation. If you don't - don't. Its that simple. Graphically and aurally unmatched, great work by developers, support from them is wonderful, active forum, let down by the usual piss-poor performance from Ubisoft (not even a keycard in the box).… Expand
  20. HenrydeLange
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    A 7 at current status but could be more if the patch makes it more fps friendly and no blue screens.
  21. SebastianG.
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    There is big potential in this game !
  22. Kev
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    In time this will be awesome. Provided Ubi stick with it that is.
  23. JohnK.
    Dec 18, 2003
    7
    7 now, but as I find more bugs and figure a way around them I'll revote. Great game and has the potential to be even greater than Falcon 4.0. Just started, so give me time.
  24. Cudaguy
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    I give this a 7 out of 10. It's got great potential to be the best flite sim out there for the next few years. But the glaring bugs it shipped with tells me this was rushed out unfinished for the Xmas season. I really detest paying 40bux to be a beta tester. Having said that the upcoming patch will "hopefully" fix alot of things that this sim shouldn't have been released with.
  25. AnonymousMC
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    As a Flanker 2 fan, I had waited a long time for this "sequel". Along the road, delays were announced, and features (dynamic campaign, Su-39, etc) were dropped. I had mixed feelings about it, but kept thinking positive. Now, the game is finally available. On the publishing part it should be noted that too many mistakes were made.
    First there was the decision to omit a printed version of    As a Flanker 2 fan, I had waited a long time for this "sequel". Along the road, delays were announced, and features (dynamic campaign, Su-39, etc) were dropped. I had mixed feelings about it, but kept thinking positive. Now, the game is finally available. On the publishing part it should be noted that too many mistakes were made.
    First there was the decision to omit a printed version of the manual (although an excellent third party substitute was provided by Nic Cole). What makes things even worse (documentation-wise) is the fact that in several localized versions, the online PDF manual was missing, leaving the users with no manual whatsoever! Also the PDF-based keycard didn't appear to be present (in all versions). Even though these documents were quickly offered for free download, this isn?t really a professional way to do business, especially considering the fact that it's very easy to get access to illegal software nowadays. A professionally written, printed manual could be a means for the publisher to reduce warez.
    More communication and support for the community from UBIsoft (and to less extent ED) and support for fan sites (the smaller ones, that aren't "close buddies", to put it politely, with producer Matt Wagner were left out). The publisher should support the community, not the other way around.

    The game itself has both positive and negative aspects. To begin, the performance of the game is quite poor, even with sufficient hardware, and when the graphics settings are lowered, resulting in less than amazing graphics (yet still good enough). There are some elements of the graphics that will cripple performance, even on the fastest systems out today, while they shouldn't be such a large performance hit (flares will slow down performance even when not in view). (other performance culprits are smoke, fire of destroyed tanks, water which is rendered even when not visible [covered by terrain] etc) Optimization of the graphics and other parts of the game should be able yield significant improvement. Regarding the performance of the aircraft, it was sad to see the "advanced simulation" package being dropped. It wasn't finished and is thus understandable to see this happen. The radar (low altitudes) and performance of some missiles needs to be fixed. There are also some other minor mistakes (some of which have been acknowledged and may not be hard to fix, such as the amount of rounds for the MiG29?s gun). The game's user interface looks nice but doesn't always work as expected. In some cases it's even confusing.
    I know I've said quite a few negative things. They should be considered according to their proportion. Overall, playing the game itself is absolutely great, especially in multiplayer coop missions. As said by others, the game is scalable so rookies and veterans should be comfortable (those who want more complexity may always fall back on F4 SP3 ;) ).

    Final verdict: a great game, with a bumpy release, and some issues (technical and gameplay), most of which can be fixed with further support (patches). Let?s hope Lomac is the base of further modern air combat simulations.
    … Expand
  26. CarlosA.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    There are many bugs for fix... but the sim is nice.
  27. JanneG.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    A sim with a great potential, but also with some child diseases.
  28. JimL.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    I think if this game had been designed from scratch and not based on flanker technology and with bits and pieces robbed from left right and centre it would have been a lot betterand probably worked better straight from box. You cannot make a silk purse out of a sows ear, but lomac team have come close to working the miracle.
  29. Trout
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    Stunning graphics. It would only lack some minor post processing to be photorealistic (well, major). Very beautiful game. I read a lot of praises about Flanker's Flight Model (never played it) and so I expected it to impress me in Lock-on as well, I think it's good but still a bit "itchy" and lacks the smoothness of IL-2. The mission editor seemed pretty much excellent to me as Stunning graphics. It would only lack some minor post processing to be photorealistic (well, major). Very beautiful game. I read a lot of praises about Flanker's Flight Model (never played it) and so I expected it to impress me in Lock-on as well, I think it's good but still a bit "itchy" and lacks the smoothness of IL-2. The mission editor seemed pretty much excellent to me as it allows (with a scary ammount of settings at first) large scale missions. Like some reviewers mentionned, bugs & hard to find combo of drivers & stuff make it kinda hard to approach, without mentionning heavy memory usage... I think this game holds a very HUGE potential for future but definately needs some hot fixes (the guys at ED are hardworking for sure), optimizations, ---flight model tune up--- & more community options (easily editable camos & paintschemes). Seven.… Expand
  30. Kblocker
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    Rather than spend another couple of months to insure the game they were about to release was finished, UBI went for the holiday bucks and left us with an unfinished, unpolished game that is following an all too familiar marketing strategy, RELEASE NOW AND PATCH LATER. Stormin and Wags deserve tons of credit for their dedication to the community, and I hope their good intentions come to fruition.
  31. EricB.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    Lock On definitely has a very good start, but it simply needs some more work to it. I think it is safe to assume that flight sims need several months (if not years) of work on them after they are released to get everything working properly. Right now the game does have several bugs that are being worked on, and there will probably be bugs in the game that need fixed throughout the next 12 Lock On definitely has a very good start, but it simply needs some more work to it. I think it is safe to assume that flight sims need several months (if not years) of work on them after they are released to get everything working properly. Right now the game does have several bugs that are being worked on, and there will probably be bugs in the game that need fixed throughout the next 12 months I am sure. The game, graphically, is the best ever made. As far as scalability is concerned, it is still a flight sim and you are going to have a very difficult time figuring this one out if you are not into flight sims. If you give yourself some time, and alot of trial and error, you will learn it. It is not as scalable as I imagined. As far as documentation is concerned, the internal manual is terrible. I am shocked at how much information that they DID NOT cover. Nothing about radio communication is mentioned (and the radio in Lock On is extremely primitive to begin with), and there is very little new information in the manual that was not in the Flanker manual. I think they almost copied the Flanker manual onto the Lock On CD and released it. Bottom line (in my opinion) is that this game has a very good start, but it still needs alot of work on top of the 2 and 1/2 years of development already put in the game. Many bugs to fix, and I have no idea how the BETA testers missed some of the obvious ones. In the end, this game could be in the 8 to 9 range within the next 12 to 18 months, but the verict is still out for now.… Expand
  32. Steven
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    It looks great, but looks aren't everything. There's not a lot of game play. Sure, you can create your own missions, but with that you already know the recipe and there's no surprises or wondering about the entire scenario.
  33. FredM.
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    Great visuals but lacks a printed manual that is really neded for the complexity of the game. I do not think that a person should have to pay to have the manual. Also I have a high end machine...the best of everything and the game play hiccups.
  34. FredM.
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    Great visuals but lacks a printed manual that is really neded for the complexity of the game. I do not think that a person should have to pay to have the manual. Also I have a high end machine...the best of everything and the game play hiccups.
  35. ChrisM>
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    If you can get it to play smooth it is awesome. Will definately need patching though.......
  36. WynH.
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    This game needs optimizing. It's a little too little work for 2 years of waiting. Gotta wait for patch.
  37. FloE.
    Dec 17, 2003
    6
    A bit dissapointed.gam is not what was advertised.too bad.F4 + SP3 still remain de refference.amazing , eh? after 5 years!
  38. MathewR.
    Dec 16, 2003
    6
    LOMAC is destined to be a good sim in the long-run, assuming the developer follows through with their promises, which I have confidence in. I'm really enjoying it already, but can't give a high score until the overall program code is more refined and stable. I look forward to that taking place. Regarding complexity, I had expected LOMAC to be very challenging to learn the LOMAC is destined to be a good sim in the long-run, assuming the developer follows through with their promises, which I have confidence in. I'm really enjoying it already, but can't give a high score until the overall program code is more refined and stable. I look forward to that taking place. Regarding complexity, I had expected LOMAC to be very challenging to learn the controls and flight, and as it turns out, it's a lot easier than I expected. I somewhat hope there's an enhancement to the difficulty, later, once they release the more important fixes. A dynamic campaign system would be great, especially if it worked for Multiplayer. … Expand
  39. Drummerwhosaidthat
    Dec 16, 2003
    6
    Going to be a great game but not yet. The bugs and the lack of a decent written manual by the publishers [UBI soft] mean I give it a 6. Now maybe in six months when the bugs have been addressed in a patch or two....I would love to revise this score.
  40. DaveD.
    Dec 16, 2003
    6
    Good graphics/Sound just does'nt feel 'right' engaging enemies is a chore, finding out why you can't lock with Long Range, why the little lines keep dissapearing, also runs ridiculously slow on my fairly modern system. Feels like it could've used an open beta...
  41. MrDude
    Dec 16, 2003
    6
    Good game and alot of work done to make it realistic. Nice graphpics but needs a patch. Runs rather OK with lowres mods (sky/water) but without them you have to turn a lot of the graphic goodies down and then it looks rather "cheap". 2,1 Ghz 1gb RAM and ATI 9800 Pro should get me a litle bit further than this.
  42. JeffN.
    Dec 17, 2003
    6
    This game has great potential and will no doubt in it's finished form blow everything else out of the water! But hey, lets be honest here..this is supposed to be a rating of the game "As it is " not how it "Will be ". My advice..wait a month or so till some of the MAJOR bugs are worked out.
  43. I-Me-minemine
    Dec 18, 2003
    6
    A very good game i have been waiting for 1 year at least. But I was disappointed when I bought it because of several bugs and the need of big specs to make it run.
  44. SguysRon
    Dec 16, 2003
    6
    This game needs serious patches...the game run horrible on high-end machines. the game is basically great,and has a potential. but unplayble..due to bugs..and most important..can run smoothly on any hardware.
  45. Habu
    Dec 16, 2003
    6
    Diamond in the rough. Great flight models and terrain graphics. Mission editor has limited functionality. Avionics shortcuts reduce realism. Aircraft are dang fun to fly around in, but the combat part and AI need work. Runs fine on my system: XP, P4 2.7, 1 gig DDR, G4.
  46. SucelusM.
    Dec 16, 2003
    6
    Manual is poor PDF in vital information. Paper manual is inexistent. Printing PDF is money taxing as it is NON B&W, on an inkjet you´ll waste 3 times the game price. Independent manual taxed40US is lame, it only add screenshot and enciclopedia. The training missions are good but do not provide enough infos. Some missions are buggy and your find yourself looking at your lap. Canned Manual is poor PDF in vital information. Paper manual is inexistent. Printing PDF is money taxing as it is NON B&W, on an inkjet you´ll waste 3 times the game price. Independent manual taxed40US is lame, it only add screenshot and enciclopedia. The training missions are good but do not provide enough infos. Some missions are buggy and your find yourself looking at your lap. Canned missions, no dinamyc campaign.(usually not a problem as comunity work fast on it, but if a win it or redo it situation pisses you badly stay falcon4) Game engine is great but buggy, looks like patchwork thrown out for christmass probably UBIreapper work. By experience this shall be fixed if UBIthieves support the game. Visual is great, but due to problems only an Athlon 3.2ghz f51 with a giga+ ram and a rateon 9800xt 256mg will be able to run it near its splendor. Counsels : Wait for patching then grab it. When patched it´ll be a classic. Invest in your rig if you don´t want to deceive yourself If you want to get in and bust asses right on with full reality be sure to have mastered Flanker 2.5 if your patient, get it, it surely will be a extremely rewarding piece of software in some months. If UBIcrappers don´t cut it to another SAME product (IL2-> IL2FB) Fact : I play it everyday and sent any other modern flightsim to hell. … Expand
  47. NealG.
    Dec 16, 2003
    6
    Tried a lot of other jet combat sims, found none worth climbing the hefty learning curve - until this one. It has it's problems...lots of them...and constant tweaking is needed to get it to run acceptably even on higher-end machines ( and that depends a lot on one's definition of 'acceptable'). And due to bugs, sometimes one doesn't know if changing settings even Tried a lot of other jet combat sims, found none worth climbing the hefty learning curve - until this one. It has it's problems...lots of them...and constant tweaking is needed to get it to run acceptably even on higher-end machines ( and that depends a lot on one's definition of 'acceptable'). And due to bugs, sometimes one doesn't know if changing settings even worked...but, all that taken into account, this one has the promise that might get me to finally advance from the WWII prop planes. The sim itself deserves a higher rating, but I cannot honestly give it until some of the major bugs are squashed, including the lack of Win98/Me support and the use of newer copy protection which serves only the purpose of penalizing the legitimate purchaser while not slowing down the 'pirates' one iota. The sim is definitely a 'keeper', though, and this is from a WWII simmer whose motto heretofore has been 'no jets!'.… Expand
  48. RacingSloth
    Dec 16, 2003
    6
    Although the graphics are gorgeous and I don't have many problems running the game, my score reflects the manual, lack of polish which an average QA rep could find within an hour of testings (spelling mistakes in training, buttons in the options not sticking, invisible planes are airfields etc), lackluster missions and poorly implemented ground combat units. In 6 months it might be a Although the graphics are gorgeous and I don't have many problems running the game, my score reflects the manual, lack of polish which an average QA rep could find within an hour of testings (spelling mistakes in training, buttons in the options not sticking, invisible planes are airfields etc), lackluster missions and poorly implemented ground combat units. In 6 months it might be a 9/10 but as of now, I say 6… Expand
  49. JackC.
    Dec 16, 2003
    6
    A great game is here, but it obscurred by the numerous release bugs. If the first/second patches address the major playability bugs, then I would give this game a solid 9 or even a 10 for it's great depth of realism and many aircraft. It's still a blast at 6..when it works...at 5 frames per second...
  50. OscarK.
    Dec 16, 2003
    6
    This is a great aircombatsim but there are many bugs . the grafics look great when they work. don,t get me wrong i love this game , but it just aint finished yet. also some things important for a good flight experience such as training for in flight relueling is not included.
  51. Blake
    Dec 16, 2003
    6
    While I think we all know this game has the goods; I think we mostly agree that they (the goods) have been mixed up, jumbled around, and generally thrown to code before all the "optimizations, tweaks, and compatibility issues" have been addressed. On the distributers website (ubi.com) there are numerous complaints from even the most handily equipped (latest processors, ram, video cards While I think we all know this game has the goods; I think we mostly agree that they (the goods) have been mixed up, jumbled around, and generally thrown to code before all the "optimizations, tweaks, and compatibility issues" have been addressed. On the distributers website (ubi.com) there are numerous complaints from even the most handily equipped (latest processors, ram, video cards etc. etc. ) enthusiats about incompatiblities, bugs, and general slow frame rates, even at low graphics/game settings. That being said, what we have all witnessed (if only for a few minutes before a crash occurs), is that this game is "the latest, greatest flight sim", but it definately needs some serious work to become a 9 or a 10!! (on a side note) I hope the developers/Ubi Soft/Programmers stick with the fixes long enough to make it a 9 or a 10, I trust they will :)… Expand
  52. Sputnik
    Jan 29, 2004
    5
    Unlike others here giving this game an 8 or above, I see it for what it is now, not what it?s going to be after 4-5 more patches. How else should it be rated? People stating they?re getting great performance and frame rates, they achieve this by turning the settings to LOW, don?t be fooled by their rhetoric. There are problems with the F-15?s avionics, along with the toning down of US Unlike others here giving this game an 8 or above, I see it for what it is now, not what it?s going to be after 4-5 more patches. How else should it be rated? People stating they?re getting great performance and frame rates, they achieve this by turning the settings to LOW, don?t be fooled by their rhetoric. There are problems with the F-15?s avionics, along with the toning down of US missiles and radar effectiveness. To the zealots, it?s always ?The next patch? will fix it. Too many with high end systems are having problems and knowing how to setup your system is not the problem. The problem lies in poorly designed code. As you can see in previous posts, those that post other than stellar reviews or comments are called complainers, whiners, trolls, and other names. It?s not that we don?t own or play the game, it?s because we dare post accurate comments, according to what we see, and aren?t so weak-minded that we are swayed by the fan-boys to post lovely reviews and comments. If you?re not expecting outstanding performance and want a great LOOKING game, this is for you. You can always take and post your lovely screenshots to certain message boards or give them to your friends for their desktop. … Expand
  53. PaulH.
    Dec 16, 2003
    5
    Me being a die hard Falcon 4 flyer, I can honestly say that this game has much potential. The graphics are suberb, the FM's are awesome, sounds quality explosive. Not to mention that you can fly other planes with it's own characteristics. The things that I did not like are: No dynamic campaigns Cockpits lack realism in functionality In time, I feel that the furture releases may Me being a die hard Falcon 4 flyer, I can honestly say that this game has much potential. The graphics are suberb, the FM's are awesome, sounds quality explosive. Not to mention that you can fly other planes with it's own characteristics. The things that I did not like are: No dynamic campaigns Cockpits lack realism in functionality In time, I feel that the furture releases may enhance these experiences and be a truely great sim.… Expand
  54. RobertF.
    Dec 23, 2003
    5
    Not a particular good game, at the moment. There are numerous problems and a patch is promised. There are quite a few bugs, of which quite a few are hampering my game play at the moment. System setup is important, for any game, but it seems this game needs more than even Computer Science major can supply. After reading all the reviews here, I'm stunned at the number of 10's. Not a particular good game, at the moment. There are numerous problems and a patch is promised. There are quite a few bugs, of which quite a few are hampering my game play at the moment. System setup is important, for any game, but it seems this game needs more than even Computer Science major can supply. After reading all the reviews here, I'm stunned at the number of 10's. This game has the potential to be a 10, but that?s far in the future. To give it a 10 now means it has nowhere else to go or nothing left to fix, which all but the most mindless fanboy knows to be false. If you have a strong high-end system, which is required for this game, and you have the time to sit and tinker instead of playing, and you can wait for many, many months before this game is really playable, take a chance and buy it. I?d wait 6-8 months until the most major of bugs are worked out before buying this if I had the chance to do it again. … Expand
  55. TheREALMower
    Jul 11, 2006
    5
    A mediorce sim in the abstract and lite weight in the absolute. For beginners and the easily impressed/amused only.
  56. Olivier
    Dec 16, 2003
    5
    Flight sim enthousiast since Falcon 1, Lomac is a pleasure to fly if you have a machine powerfull enought. I love the attention to details in the graphics and military hardware used. A true pleasure to see each individual parts in action from the SAMs to the planes. Alas, the lack of Dynamic Campaign makes the game quickly borring, then your only satisfaction becomes to fly online with Flight sim enthousiast since Falcon 1, Lomac is a pleasure to fly if you have a machine powerfull enought. I love the attention to details in the graphics and military hardware used. A true pleasure to see each individual parts in action from the SAMs to the planes. Alas, the lack of Dynamic Campaign makes the game quickly borring, then your only satisfaction becomes to fly online with your friends your favorite mission over and over. More planes+dynamic campaign would make me rate a 11 despite demanding computer hardware requirement.… Expand
  57. Dayak
    Dec 16, 2003
    5
    the game need to be optimized and alot of bug to be squashed.
  58. ErichH.
    Dec 16, 2003
    5
    While I see the potential I find it very lacking. The publishers charge teh same amount $39.99 and give you a game with no manual but do place it on the CD if you want to kill 168 pages and dry up your print cartridge. The interface is easy enough and the training missions are ok. With the amount of lag though due to graphic drains even on high end systems, locking on with Mavricks is While I see the potential I find it very lacking. The publishers charge teh same amount $39.99 and give you a game with no manual but do place it on the CD if you want to kill 168 pages and dry up your print cartridge. The interface is easy enough and the training missions are ok. With the amount of lag though due to graphic drains even on high end systems, locking on with Mavricks is best saved for auto. The layout and key commands are very clumky and not very well laid out. I recommend spending about an hour going in and reassigning all of the key funtions for not jsut your keyboard but you stick as well. A HOTAS setup with save you lots of time but with the lack of a mouse selectable cockpit there are to many functions that asre basically jsut for fine tuning radar settings etc. BEing able to use the mosue and have an interactive cockpit control enviroment would have really helped. Again though to get decent frames I had to turn many of the eye candy off and I am running a AMD2800+ with 1GB of PC3200 on a GeForce FX5900 256Mb card! Still fun to tool around in though but I am waiting on a patch to see if this simm can then shine.… Expand
  59. ShawnW.
    Dec 18, 2003
    5
    A very good beginning for a game that has the potential to be the best ever flight sim produced to date. I gave it a '5' because of obvious faults that should have been fixed before release, such as the game's inability to hold the options that the player picks. That is a pedestrian effort at best. I hope that forcing the customer to be the ultimate beta tester isn't A very good beginning for a game that has the potential to be the best ever flight sim produced to date. I gave it a '5' because of obvious faults that should have been fixed before release, such as the game's inability to hold the options that the player picks. That is a pedestrian effort at best. I hope that forcing the customer to be the ultimate beta tester isn't going to be the future trend of software development.… Expand
  60. CharlesK.
    Dec 19, 2003
    5
    Other than the flight models none of the combat is very realistic, if it has to do with anything on the ground then it's completly unrealistic.
  61. Stoman
    Dec 27, 2003
    5
    Got the game, installed it and it plays ok, but the frame rates are the lowest I?ve seen. I have a high end system; Athlon 3200+, 1GB RAM, and a 5950 Ultra, so you can forget what the 10 rating fan-boys are saying. This game was/is not ready for primetime and definitely doesn?t deserve anything higher than a 6. Like an earlier rater stated, this thing has far to go, and giving a high Got the game, installed it and it plays ok, but the frame rates are the lowest I?ve seen. I have a high end system; Athlon 3200+, 1GB RAM, and a 5950 Ultra, so you can forget what the 10 rating fan-boys are saying. This game was/is not ready for primetime and definitely doesn?t deserve anything higher than a 6. Like an earlier rater stated, this thing has far to go, and giving a high score means it almost there, well its not. There are game-play issues, radars not working, performance issues in the actual programming of the game and it seems that a big cover-up is in place that?s trying hide these issues. Ratings over a 6, forget them. There?re written by those fan-boys that feel cheated by the game and want you to join them, or they just don?t know how a real sim is supposed to behave. … Expand
  62. PeterF.
    Dec 16, 2003
    5
    Bugs,Bugs,and more Bugs...had to call the orkin man to get it to run. System specs on the box are a bald-faced lie,F-15 radar doesn't work right,Aim-120 doesn't work right, and a host of other stuff. Support is almost non-existant on the ever-slow UBI boards and anybody not happy with the product wil be jeered by the fanboys and banned by the officials. Was really looking Bugs,Bugs,and more Bugs...had to call the orkin man to get it to run. System specs on the box are a bald-faced lie,F-15 radar doesn't work right,Aim-120 doesn't work right, and a host of other stuff. Support is almost non-existant on the ever-slow UBI boards and anybody not happy with the product wil be jeered by the fanboys and banned by the officials. Was really looking forward to this game, but UBI ruined it after making me wait for 2 extra years by putting out a product that doesn't work as advertised or on the systems written on the box.… Expand
  63. MarkusB.
    Dec 16, 2003
    5
    this game will be great once the bugs are ironed out. in its current state it is hardly playable.
  64. SteinarE.
    Dec 26, 2003
    5
    I would give this game a 10 if it were not for all the problems with the controller. I have to restart the bloody game (because it is a bloody game:) ), to get the mouse and most of the keyboard controls which are freezing suddenly.
  65. ErikK.
    Apr 29, 2004
    4
    Played the demo, but I don't think I'm gonna invest my few euros on this sim. It's just another Flanker-sim with a couple of american jets thrown in. The western aircraft somehow have too much of a russian feel. Sure it looks good, but it still can't beat that certain modern air combat sim that has been released six years ago and has gotten better ever since.
  66. Ty
    Dec 23, 2003
    4
    Do yourself a favor and believe the lower ratings. Wait for the patch to see if it really improved anything before plunking down your cash for this game. The time it's taking to get this patch together is a big indicaton of number of bugs that are present. Hopefully the performance issues will be addressed.
  67. DaleW.
    Jan 27, 2004
    4
    First, this game is not a 10 and won?t be for some time. How people can continually give it above a 7 is a real mystery. The bugs are still highly numerous, the American planes have been designed to be inferior, and even after the patch the graphics engine has not been optimized. They state the game is built for the future; but it?s appearing it?s a statement made to cover up poor First, this game is not a 10 and won?t be for some time. How people can continually give it above a 7 is a real mystery. The bugs are still highly numerous, the American planes have been designed to be inferior, and even after the patch the graphics engine has not been optimized. They state the game is built for the future; but it?s appearing it?s a statement made to cover up poor programming. Do yourself, or someone else a favor and avoid this for a year until it?s been fixed. … Expand
  68. Ferdy
    Nov 23, 2003
    4
    + Realistic flight modelling (some of the best ever!) + Great graphics would be a 9 of 10, but... - riddled with many bugs e.g. missing radio communications between US airplanes and some graphical glitches e.g. planes dissapearing - Doesn't even start under Win 98SE/ME on three different PCs! - CD recognition problems with some drives - rebooting system problems - blue screen of + Realistic flight modelling (some of the best ever!) + Great graphics would be a 9 of 10, but... - riddled with many bugs e.g. missing radio communications between US airplanes and some graphical glitches e.g. planes dissapearing - Doesn't even start under Win 98SE/ME on three different PCs! - CD recognition problems with some drives - rebooting system problems - blue screen of death - un-user friendly menus (same als Flanker 2.0/2.5) - un-userfriendly battle planner (same as Flanker 2.0/2.5) - small printed manual, ok at least a big one is on CD. - NO keyboard keycard included! - serious framerate/performance problems even on state-of-the-art systems so the best it can get in the current state is 4 points.… Expand
  69. RobertM.
    Dec 16, 2003
    4
    I've been waiting a long time for this game. It's been in the works for a long time. I enjoy Falcon 2, Flanker 2, USAF and have been a flight simmer for many, many years. (I'm 51.) Lomac, sadly, must be reviewed and rated on what it is right now rather than what it plans and hopes to be within a patch (or two or three). Lock ups. Missing textures. Bugs aplenty, I've been waiting a long time for this game. It's been in the works for a long time. I enjoy Falcon 2, Flanker 2, USAF and have been a flight simmer for many, many years. (I'm 51.) Lomac, sadly, must be reviewed and rated on what it is right now rather than what it plans and hopes to be within a patch (or two or three). Lock ups. Missing textures. Bugs aplenty, unfortunately. However, I did enjoy the demo. If you want to fly a fun mission with the A10 (though I think the A10 model is boshed up too) then download the demo and wait on the game. Honestly, I think something's wrong with some of the files on the Lomac CD. For instance, the controlini file keeps overwriting your preferences and cannot be made to be a solely "Archive" file. It keeps reverting to be a "Read Only" and overwrites your preferences. I'll keep looking for a good future for Lomac, but I don't intend to be a beta tester.… Expand
  70. BruceL
    Dec 19, 2003
    4
    Definitely doesn't deserve an 8 or above. There are just to many things wrong. Still I can't rate it higher than a 4 for several other reasons; poor gameplay, controller setup doesn't work properly, amd the documentation is poor. And I will not be strong-armed into buying another manual for $40 when the proper documentation should've came with the game.
  71. [Anonymous]
    Dec 5, 2003
    4
    It deservers more than this but with all the bug issues that they have to work out it doesn't get much. I shouldn't have to go out and get top of the line pc for one game.
  72. GeneD.
    Dec 16, 2003
    4
    Poor performance, non clickable cockpits and the lack of a printed manual make this game more of a headache than anything fun.
  73. Essemmnope
    Dec 16, 2003
    4
    fps issues...bugs...poor coding...I can't play online b/c I have an NForce chipset...not a good game
  74. Noone
    Dec 16, 2003
    4
    This Simulator is a fine attempt at a difficult subject. A lot has been implemented but alas much of what has been done here contains many negative issues. The lack of two seat flyable aircraft being included (Even if the aircraft was to be flown solely from the Front seat perspective!) detracts greatly. Once again the flight sim community is offered Aircraft that have all been done This Simulator is a fine attempt at a difficult subject. A lot has been implemented but alas much of what has been done here contains many negative issues. The lack of two seat flyable aircraft being included (Even if the aircraft was to be flown solely from the Front seat perspective!) detracts greatly. Once again the flight sim community is offered Aircraft that have all been done before, I am surprised not to see an F-16 included as a flyable aircraft! Where are the European aircraft? Taking Ubisofts explanation of aircraft systems, two seat cockpits etc well wheres the Sepecat Jaguar? It rivals the A-10 on the Technology stakes, no major Nav Attack systems there, its single seat AND its operated by many airforces so you would get a vast coverage. It seems we are bound to the worlds policemen, as they would liek to see themselves portrayed, once more. Regarding the Bug issues being discussed on the LOMAC Forums there a distinct line between Ubisoft Fanatics that would appear that they are on the Ubisoft Payroll and those that are basically trying to trash Ubisoft. There are those such as myself that are trying to make our voices heard in a mature manner with genuine issues to raise but alas we find ourselves silenced and tarred with the same brush as those malcontents who seem hell bent to destroy LOMAC as a viable Sim. All in all it is a good attempt at a simulator, I feel confident that Ubisoft will do the right thing and get the Bugs ironed out, but the last question is: Should they have been there in the release version in the first place, what happened to plain old Quality Assurance? LOMAC, you have a long ways to go, no doubt you will get there. Good luck.… Expand
  75. .:P:.AirRaid
    Dec 16, 2003
    4
    This game is good in the sence that it has great graphics and gameplay,but in the line of how it runs is not as well. I have a state-of-the-art system and i even get shutters in the game and buttons probs,and blue screen and crashes. I hope to see this fixed ,but still stratch my head wondering why they release something saying XP/ME/98 and it doesnt. Glad i got XP. If you dont have at This game is good in the sence that it has great graphics and gameplay,but in the line of how it runs is not as well. I have a state-of-the-art system and i even get shutters in the game and buttons probs,and blue screen and crashes. I hope to see this fixed ,but still stratch my head wondering why they release something saying XP/ME/98 and it doesnt. Glad i got XP. If you dont have at least a 2.5 and 1gig ddr then dont buy this game.… Expand
  76. Kristiank.
    Dec 16, 2003
    4
    you might like it... but i am not satisfied with this product at all. reasons 1. just like flanker, LO-MAC is more of the same. very "dry" feeling, i always know im "at my desk, watching a monitor" compared to another sim, where i feel "in the cockpit".. not enuff graphical emersion the terrrain is bland looking ,very pastel colored 2.UBI did a very poor job of including several you might like it... but i am not satisfied with this product at all. reasons 1. just like flanker, LO-MAC is more of the same. very "dry" feeling, i always know im "at my desk, watching a monitor" compared to another sim, where i feel "in the cockpit".. not enuff graphical emersion the terrrain is bland looking ,very pastel colored 2.UBI did a very poor job of including several essentials, always needed for a serious flight sim.... 3. fidelity of damaged aircraft is not there. while "damaged" decals look good. its basically an intact plane . not that i need planes to explode instantly, but being hit with 9 sams should destroy an aircraft. here, you exist, and are alive in most cases. not pulling a cheap shot here, but if you like the damage system in IL-2, you wont find that here. (please dont confuse with jet vs prop damage.) i mean actual shearing,tearing.leaking,oily,breaking, bursting, damage. 4. you CAN fly thru trees. how many going to use this cheat online? 5. really NEEDS a mutli thousand $$$$ game rig to play on the best settings.. if you dont have that, you have to settle for graphics that look just like the old FLANKER. really. 6. control screen should be easier, for HOTAS/JOYSTICKS set-up. 7. sevaral variants of essesntially the same plane. not bad i guess, but thats the same to me as having every version of a honda civic LX,DX SI (or whatever the models are). sure they do different stuff, but its essentially the same aircraft. 8. there is no way to get your money back if you purchase this, and opened up the celophane wrapper. do as i did, and get it for early christmans present. that way you didnt buy it and feel ripped if you dont like it. its a a technical marvel, really! but to me, there were just to many flaws for me to like it. but im voicing my own opinoin. if you try it, i do hope you like it.… Expand
  77. Faisalx
    Dec 16, 2003
    4
    Quite a total disappointment since I have waited 1.5 years for a good sim game but still, I think LOMAC can pull it off with a couple of patches.
  78. Hocking
    Dec 17, 2003
    4
    In it's current state, the F15 can be considered still in development, and therefore not flyable at this time. The radar has a few bugs, but more importantly, the missiles are under-modeled by about 10 times. They are simply not effective at all, and extremely unreallistic upon the time of release. They need a complete makeover to bring them up to the level that can be considered In it's current state, the F15 can be considered still in development, and therefore not flyable at this time. The radar has a few bugs, but more importantly, the missiles are under-modeled by about 10 times. They are simply not effective at all, and extremely unreallistic upon the time of release. They need a complete makeover to bring them up to the level that can be considered realistic. The Aim120 has a range of less than 5 miles, the Aim 7 is the most accurate of the group, and the Aim 9 has difficulty tracking down a target at less than 2 miles (I once fired three Aim 9's at a MIG about 2 miles in front of me while I was on his six and all three missiles missed). Can't beleive that this passed the beta testers. The game can become good, but upon release, it is about 70% complete.… Expand
  79. FaelF.
    Dec 17, 2003
    4
    Ok, First I have to be honest about my experience with fighter sims. Im not an enthusiast who logs 30 flight hours per week. In fact, the last flight sim I played religiously was US Navy Fighters (loved that game). But I am a hardcore gamer that tries to keep up with the hardware upgrades (as much as my wallet allows). So with that my review. Dissapointment...plain and simple. Im not Ok, First I have to be honest about my experience with fighter sims. Im not an enthusiast who logs 30 flight hours per week. In fact, the last flight sim I played religiously was US Navy Fighters (loved that game). But I am a hardcore gamer that tries to keep up with the hardware upgrades (as much as my wallet allows). So with that my review. Dissapointment...plain and simple. Im not talking about the graphics and in-game realism. Im talking about my expectation as a consumer...ipso facto...a money spending one. The amount of support available, the state in which my product was purchased (incomplete), ease of use (this game is more dialed into experienced flight simmers so it has a steep learning curve), and the famous bug issues most lo-mac forums are rife with. Let me say that most of those bugs are fixable if you tone down the settings and take the time to bug hunt your problems. But for ease of use and consumer satisfaction....lo-mac is stuck with a generous 4. Its just not "out of the box" satisfaction.… Expand
  80. GunterH.
    Dec 18, 2003
    4
    So-so game with good graphics. Needs work.
  81. Werner
    Nov 23, 2003
    3
    Gets only three points from me, because the full version doesn't work with Windows ME. Major issue and a strange thing because the demo worked. There is no key overview card in the package, most of the manual is only available als Acrobat PDF. Some graphic bugs, complicated and confusing menus and mission planer, poor performance especially when flying over city, crashes somethimes Gets only three points from me, because the full version doesn't work with Windows ME. Major issue and a strange thing because the demo worked. There is no key overview card in the package, most of the manual is only available als Acrobat PDF. Some graphic bugs, complicated and confusing menus and mission planer, poor performance especially when flying over city, crashes somethimes with bluescreen. Looks overall very unfinished. X-MAS is coming. SO RUSH RUSH Hope the fix the major issues soon, I don't want another "Strike Fighters-Project 1" in my shelf! But even then LOMAC will be far from being perfect!… Expand
  82. KORN_WWTE
    Dec 16, 2003
    3
    The game is uncomplete, to much emphasis on having to create interesting missions yourself. Default missions are plain and short, starting in the air and not on the ramp, no need to learn engine start sequences. Campaigns are dull und unispiring. Any action on screen or weather other than clear starts to slow the FPS down until unplayable. This game needs a patch before I reconsider The game is uncomplete, to much emphasis on having to create interesting missions yourself. Default missions are plain and short, starting in the air and not on the ramp, no need to learn engine start sequences. Campaigns are dull und unispiring. Any action on screen or weather other than clear starts to slow the FPS down until unplayable. This game needs a patch before I reconsider giving it another go.… Expand
  83. PhillipM.
    Dec 16, 2003
    3
    Weak documentation, buggy, rushed out earily to beat Falcon4 Gold OIR in my opinion. Will be a great sim when fixed.
  84. CarlN.
    Dec 17, 2003
    3
    It's a bit shite.
  85. AllenP.
    Dec 20, 2003
    3
    The 10 ratings are unbelievable! How can these people rate a game a 10 with a bug list longer than the names in the New York city phone book? This GAME is not in a sellable state, but it was pushed out because of the time year. The lemmings that rate this a 10 were asked to come here and help bump up the ratings. Wait to buy this, I wish I had.
  86. GlenW.
    Dec 16, 2003
    3
    If you own a Radeon 9800XT, 1gig of RAM and have windows XP, then this sim is ok. If you run on any other operating system or if you have a mid grade graphics card then you will have serious problems at this time. Once a patch or two fixes the insane number of bugs this will be a must have for any flight sim fan. But at the current time I can?t recommend it. The terrible performance on If you own a Radeon 9800XT, 1gig of RAM and have windows XP, then this sim is ok. If you run on any other operating system or if you have a mid grade graphics card then you will have serious problems at this time. Once a patch or two fixes the insane number of bugs this will be a must have for any flight sim fan. But at the current time I can?t recommend it. The terrible performance on good PC?s combined with serious stability issues and some very funky radar bugs on some planes makes LOMAC a bad sim to buy at this time. At the current time it is debatable as to if it was beta tested at all. I consider this an alpha version of LOMAC, it doesn?t even qualify as a beta. If you like flight sims I suggest you wait and see how this one turns out. Maybe in a month or two it will be worth getting but at the current time it is not.… Expand
  87. JackS.
    Dec 16, 2003
    3
    If Ubi/ED hadn't pumped up this sim for so long, I would feel better about it. But with all the promises and hype (3 years?) this program should work better than what it does. Runs poorly on box specs, or even worse on high octane machines. I know it's been built for the future, but what good is it if it runs poorly now, or not at all. Bug ridden...and the manual is an obscene If Ubi/ED hadn't pumped up this sim for so long, I would feel better about it. But with all the promises and hype (3 years?) this program should work better than what it does. Runs poorly on box specs, or even worse on high octane machines. I know it's been built for the future, but what good is it if it runs poorly now, or not at all. Bug ridden...and the manual is an obscene joke. Wait til they fix this thing before you consider buying it...you'll be really disappointed.… Expand
  88. LockOnUser
    Dec 16, 2003
    3
    Lock On simply was not ready to send to customers. While no software is ever released perfect, it is completely unsatisfactory that there are so many performance problems and bugs with this software. Like many others I am NOT a beta tester and did not purchase the software to be one. Maybe, with fixes, the game will be a good one someday but as it stands today it does not deserve my Lock On simply was not ready to send to customers. While no software is ever released perfect, it is completely unsatisfactory that there are so many performance problems and bugs with this software. Like many others I am NOT a beta tester and did not purchase the software to be one. Maybe, with fixes, the game will be a good one someday but as it stands today it does not deserve my recommendation. I'd return it if I could. … Expand
  89. TotalScience
    Dec 16, 2003
    3
    It has beautiful graphics, nice sound, and has immense replay value. Unfortunetly, the game will runs slow even if you have the greatest computer available. I can barely run the game on the lowest detail settings on my high end computer. I uninstalled it for now, hopefully they will optimize the code, but until then, it's not worth it. It feels like an incomplete product rushed out It has beautiful graphics, nice sound, and has immense replay value. Unfortunetly, the game will runs slow even if you have the greatest computer available. I can barely run the game on the lowest detail settings on my high end computer. I uninstalled it for now, hopefully they will optimize the code, but until then, it's not worth it. It feels like an incomplete product rushed out the door, even though it was already delayed to "ensure a quality product". Ridden with bugs. A real dissapointment for those of us who reserved our copies months and months ago. I feel very let down.… Expand
  90. Nathan
    Dec 16, 2003
    3
    Even on a high end system this game blows! I am running P4 3.2 ati radeon 9800. With this system i should have no probs but i still get ctd's. With some weather and a few units this thing starts to drop frame rates fast. This is horrendous! The graphics are well done but you can tell that this was released to early. I wish they spent more time on it.
  91. MarkB.
    Dec 17, 2003
    3
    This sim has never been immersive the real fighter jet audio on the menu puts it to shame when you hear the ingame sound which is almost non existant. Full of bugs and graphics problems. released far too early. even the campaign is a disappointment. never been so disappointed in a flight sim b4. it does have potential in a few years after half a dozen patches and 3rd party addons. but 4This sim has never been immersive the real fighter jet audio on the menu puts it to shame when you hear the ingame sound which is almost non existant. Full of bugs and graphics problems. released far too early. even the campaign is a disappointment. never been so disappointed in a flight sim b4. it does have potential in a few years after half a dozen patches and 3rd party addons. but 4 now it's total shite … Expand
  92. JG53Harti
    Dec 18, 2003
    3
    Reasons are: the german Version has NO Instruction Manual --> but i've paid for itr :( Too many bugs in the game, nearly unplayable in MP. It looks like a big betatest. After patches will be released i and the bugs are fixed i will give the game a higher ranking. maybe 8 or 9 is correct after the patch
  93. DannyT.
    Dec 18, 2003
    3
    After reading some of the reviews here, I felt I had to add mine. This game is unacceptable in the condition it?s being sold. I?m I a complainer as some seam to think? No, I?m a consumer that purchased a product that should not have been released in a beta state! Why people rate this thing a 10 is obvious, they are trying to pump up that ratings, and is beyond belief. The game is slow, After reading some of the reviews here, I felt I had to add mine. This game is unacceptable in the condition it?s being sold. I?m I a complainer as some seam to think? No, I?m a consumer that purchased a product that should not have been released in a beta state! Why people rate this thing a 10 is obvious, they are trying to pump up that ratings, and is beyond belief. The game is slow, and it?s not really the computers fault. It?s the substandard programming and quality assurance practices that were used to produce the un-optimized bug ridden code. I?m judging this GAME, in this condition it?s not a SIMULATOR, on how well of a simulator it is, or suppose to be, and on a computer that it states it can run on. With that in mind, it falls short in every category except graphics. If you want to take nice screenshots and enter a contest on a particular fanboy site, this is your game. If you wanted a flight simulator, don?t even pick this up for now. Wait until 2007 when the machines people say it needs to run on are available and after it?s 25?th patch! … Expand
  94. PhilZ.
    Dec 19, 2003
    3
    This is not the direction hard-core sims need to be going in. At best this is a survey sim and a very poor one at that. It?s simplistic design makes new users, which seems to be the 9 & 10 raters, think they are playing a complex game. Avionics are basic and landings are scripted. The only thing complex about this GAME is in setting it up. The user interface is awkward and many settings This is not the direction hard-core sims need to be going in. At best this is a survey sim and a very poor one at that. It?s simplistic design makes new users, which seems to be the 9 & 10 raters, think they are playing a complex game. Avionics are basic and landings are scripted. The only thing complex about this GAME is in setting it up. The user interface is awkward and many settings don?t persist from one session to the next. Frame rates are horrendous, yet people who have problems are called whiners and worse at the games main forum; this is an indication of extreme fanboy mentality. Some say this game needs a few bug fixes, this couldn?t be further from the truth. This game has MAJOR bugs, in the hundreds, and it?s going to take several patches to bring it up to acceptable standards. When you buy this game, you are paying for a beta, plain and simple. This thing may mature in time, but how long will it take? Too many hardcore simmers are staying away from this one, you should too for the next year. Don?t believe the egotistic morons that post the 9 & 10?s, download the DEMO and see for yourself before you buy this un-optimized piece of code! … Expand
  95. ClintG.
    Dec 19, 2003
    3
    Spend your money on another product, this one bites the high hard one!
  96. BlingBlingbling
    Dec 16, 2003
    3
    Could be good, but too many glitches and problems. Its really no better than the demo. I really don't think that it has the same accuracy and attention to functional detail as the likes of falcon 4 or Janes f18. More of just an eye pleaser with lots of bugs.
  97. PaulF.
    Dec 16, 2003
    3
    Too much wrong to list. Really a beta released to the public to get money during the Christmas rush. Avoid it for now and wait for a few patches before even trying this abomination!
  98. DavidDuce
    Dec 17, 2003
    3
    Buyer BEWARE and not so fast my 9/10 rating friends. This game may be a 9/10 in a few years, but right now it?s just another little light on the horizon. Many things are wrong with this game that will need heavy patching to fix.

    1. System requirements, high and low end: Who came up with them? They are way off and badly misleading to the consumer. Looks like a badly programmed    Buyer BEWARE and not so fast my 9/10 rating friends. This game may be a 9/10 in a few years, but right now it?s just another little light on the horizon. Many things are wrong with this game that will need heavy patching to fix.

    1. System requirements, high and low end:
    Who came up with them? They are way off and badly misleading to the
    consumer. Looks like a badly programmed graphics engine. Heavy optimizations are need to allow the average consumer to play this thing.

    2. Gamplay:
    Too scripted, boring, and clean. Limited missions for those that want to jump in and have fun. Seems to an update Flanker, another boring game.

    3. Encyclopedic bug list:
    Way too may to have let this product hit the market, Why? Where was QA? Does the company expect buyers to be beta testers? If so, we deserve a rebate!
    4. Documentation:
    No keycard shipped, but you can download one. How about the people without the means to see that chance?
    Disgustingly useless PDF manual. When you try to print it, it?s unreadable. But wait! You can purchase anadditional manual for $40 plus shipping. What a deal, they sell you a game without the documentation to properly play it, but will gladly sell you one. What a scam.

    People, educate yourself before buying this game, in its current state, it can?t be called a SIMULATION. To compare it to previous SIMULATORS is a slap in the face to them. Take the advice of several other reviews here and elsewhere, wait at least a year before buying it, you?ll save yourself a lot of wasted time and by then, hopefully, the beta testing period will be over.
    … Expand
  99. ErikF.
    Dec 17, 2003
    3
    This game has problems, many problems. The system required to play this game is not yet available, but people say to upgrade this and upgrade that. What a bunch of bull! If the game is suppose to play satisfactorily on mid range systems, why do they say to upgrade? To cover up a poorly programmed game, that?s why. Those that say they have bought this and that are only fooling themselves This game has problems, many problems. The system required to play this game is not yet available, but people say to upgrade this and upgrade that. What a bunch of bull! If the game is suppose to play satisfactorily on mid range systems, why do they say to upgrade? To cover up a poorly programmed game, that?s why. Those that say they have bought this and that are only fooling themselves and buying into the hype, don?t fall into the trap they have! How it can be rated over a 6 at this point in time is beyond me. There are bugs everywhere, the game runs slow, setup is horrendous, and no one knows how many patches it will need to bring it up to an acceptable level. As far as looking good, that?s the best thing that people can say about it. See it in action before you buy it. If the store won?t load it up for you, walk away from it until summer. It will need longer, but at least you?ll get it at cheaper price. $40 is way too much for a game that was slapped together with proper Quality Assurance procedures in place.… Expand
  100. GrantM.
    Dec 17, 2003
    3
    The reason for the low score is that the game is not finished yet by a long shot. Its like a beautifull woman that never stops moaning. An irritation at this stage. The game should still be on the development desk sorting out the similar problems that were in the demo. No doubt this game has potential to be a fantastic flight sim and a 9/10 rating at the end of the day. The minimum specs The reason for the low score is that the game is not finished yet by a long shot. Its like a beautifull woman that never stops moaning. An irritation at this stage. The game should still be on the development desk sorting out the similar problems that were in the demo. No doubt this game has potential to be a fantastic flight sim and a 9/10 rating at the end of the day. The minimum specs on the box are a total thumb suck. If you dont have the biggest, meanest pc with an 'UBER' GPU forget about getting this game. Patches will no doubt sort out a lot of the problems, but this is a clear case of getting releasing the game before Christmas just to reap in the sales when they new all to well the game was still in a beta stage. It does have fanatastic potential though.… Expand
Page:

Awards & Rankings

66
#66 Best PC Game of 2005
2
#2 Most Discussed PC Game of 2005
66
#66 Most Shared PC Game of 2005

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
76

Generally favorable reviews - based on 20 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 20
  2. Mixed: 7 out of 20
  3. Negative: 0 out of 20
  1. PC Format
    88
    Our favourite is the A-10 Warthog – cruising at 50 feet, on the prowl for enemy tanks, it’s one of the most exhilarating missions available in any recent simulator.
    Read full review
  2. Computer Gaming World
    70
    Detailed terrain, buildings, water, and effects lend an unprecedented feeling of speed to low-level flight. [March 2004, p.82]
  3. Gamer's Pulse
    70
    It has great graphics, fairly simple controls, great scenery, a decent choice of planes, and a great editor. Although the sounds easily get on your nerves, it will be the load times and need for a computer upgrade that will have you pulling your hair out.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »