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. Mike'sDaddy
    Dec 19, 2003
    0
    I wouldn't give this to Goodwill, it would be a crime! Don't ruin someone's Christmas by giving them this.
  2. JamesT.
    Dec 19, 2003
    1
    Terrible game. Got it for me and my roomate. Yet to get his to work and mine will load, but framerates are terrible. No voice and images will ghost at various times. Have to spend hours and hours learning to fly and Sturmovik I got into the cockpit and was flying in seconds. Next time make it as easy as Sturmovik and not such arcadic graphics like it is.
  3. WilliamM.
    Dec 19, 2003
    2
    Beware of the Fanboy?s that give this a 9 or 10. They are mindless trolls that have been seduced into coming here to inflate the rating of this over-hyped GAME. How they can rate this game a 10 at this point in time, with the hundreds of bugs present, doesn?t say much about them. I say game because at this point it?s as far from a simulation as can be. Proper system configuration is Beware of the Fanboy?s that give this a 9 or 10. They are mindless trolls that have been seduced into coming here to inflate the rating of this over-hyped GAME. How they can rate this game a 10 at this point in time, with the hundreds of bugs present, doesn?t say much about them. I say game because at this point it?s as far from a simulation as can be. Proper system configuration is important in some game and maybe this one, but the way the game is programmed, it doesn?t matter at this point in time. Multiplayer performance is pitiful, you must turn the settings down to get it to play on even the most high end machines, and the ?dynamic campaign? is a joke. If all you want to do is look at pretty pictures, like the stooges that give this a 10, buy it. If you want a game that you can play, PASS this one by.… Expand
  4. HaroldR.
    Dec 19, 2003
    2
    Pass on this for now. Too buggy for the average user, much less a juvenile.
  5. ClintG.
    Dec 19, 2003
    3
    Spend your money on another product, this one bites the high hard one!
  6. Colin
    Dec 21, 2003
    1
    Utter rubbish! How this made it out of the door and still bought by consumers is above comprehension! With trash like this, UBI and Eagle Dynamics should?ve lost the confidence of all but the most brainless buyers!
  7. Thesoloelite
    Dec 20, 2003
    1
    1st off you need a mega machine to play this game ;( I OPEN THE BOX NO MANUAL no key card and then u have to buy a 3rd party manual for 40.00 more bucks.kinda sad the game had to be realesed during hoildays(all about the money) ban the french.
  8. Eagle
    Dec 22, 2003
    1
    If you haven't bought it, don't, if you have, too bad! The devs should've put this one in the recycle bin instead of burining it to a CD.
  9. RolfF.
    Dec 22, 2003
    2
    Do as someone here suggested, download the demo and try it first. I wish I had read that before buying mine.
  10. 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
  11. Chris
    Dec 5, 2003
    1
    This game is still a beta. I've tried it with Win98SE and Win2K with DX9. Both are unstable. Using my GF4, 512Mb RAM and a XP2000+ uP, there are various graphics anomolies, freezes and crash-to-desktops. This game is a very poor relation IL2-FB. Don't make my mistake and buy it - at least yet. Maybe if it goes through a few patch releases things will be different - however, at This game is still a beta. I've tried it with Win98SE and Win2K with DX9. Both are unstable. Using my GF4, 512Mb RAM and a XP2000+ uP, there are various graphics anomolies, freezes and crash-to-desktops. This game is a very poor relation IL2-FB. Don't make my mistake and buy it - at least yet. Maybe if it goes through a few patch releases things will be different - however, at this time I feel totally duped.… Expand
  12. [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.
  13. DisappointedBuyer
    Jan 12, 2004
    1
    Don?t waste your time with this POS at this point in time. Even after the patch, it?s still buggy as hell, frame rates are still low, and the graphics engine has still not been optimized. It looks like Eagle Dynamics and UBI have pulled off a good one. They release a beta, almost alpha, product before the holidays for a quick buck. All the defending fan boys and company reps on the LOMAC Don?t waste your time with this POS at this point in time. Even after the patch, it?s still buggy as hell, frame rates are still low, and the graphics engine has still not been optimized. It looks like Eagle Dynamics and UBI have pulled off a good one. They release a beta, almost alpha, product before the holidays for a quick buck. All the defending fan boys and company reps on the LOMAC site can?t change the truth, this game is still not ready for public use. Don?t waste your time posting negative comments on the LOMAC site, you?ll be attacked as a troll and an idiot; makes you wonder who moderates and backs the company on the site? [Ed: I moderate & nobody backs anybody. Get a clue.]… Expand
  14. 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.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. 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.
  18. 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
  19. 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
  20. WonHongLo
    Dec 16, 2003
    2
    Crappy work by the developers. Doesn't work with Win98SE,2000 etc. No manual. Bugs out the ying-yang. Crappy message boards and tech support.
  21. 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
  22. 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
  23. 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
  24. 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.
  25. 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...
  26. AnthonyB.
    Dec 16, 2003
    2
    This game is in dire need of some more work. Too many things were left unfinished and the amount of bugs and the fact that members of the community have to rely on third party programs to run the game with the joystick they have is just upsetting. I hope this game gets a good strong patch to fix this soon.
  27. 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
  28. CarlosA.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    There are many bugs for fix... but the sim is nice.
  29. JanneG.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    A sim with a great potential, but also with some child diseases.
  30. 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.
  31. 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.
  32. 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
  33. MarkusB.
    Dec 16, 2003
    5
    this game will be great once the bugs are ironed out. in its current state it is hardly playable.
  34. 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!
  35. DMoust
    Dec 16, 2003
    2
    Waste of Hard Drive Space !!!
  36. NicoleF.
    Dec 16, 2003
    1
    Lack of documentation makes this a lame game. Performace is poor and if it wasn't for the pretty graphics and ability to make nice desktop shots, this would be a total bust! AVOID IT !!!
  37. 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.
  38. 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
  39. 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
  40. 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
  41. .: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
  42. 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
  43. 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.
  44. 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.
  45. RonaldT.
    Dec 17, 2003
    2
    BEWARE of the high ratings. It's a scam from the members of a certain forum to flood this place with overly high ratings to cover up a less than average game. It plays too slow, there are too many bugs, excessive tweaking is needed to even get the game to run, and the documentaiton is poor! Avoid this one like the dead skunk.
  46. 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.
  47. 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.
next
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 »