SP-4 Install Woes Resolved

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

SP-4 Install Woes Resolved; SP-4 installed. Finally found an errant
file hanging out in my Temp folder. SP-4 looks pretty good so far.
Now, if I could just stop accidentally turning systems on or off. Much
to learn - again. Thanks to all that assisted.
18 answers Last reply
More about install woes resolved
  1. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:04:27 -0500, Dave Dantos <ddantos@gsinet.net>
    wrote:

    >SP-4 Install Woes Resolved; SP-4 installed. Finally found an errant
    >file hanging out in my Temp folder. SP-4 looks pretty good so far.
    >Now, if I could just stop accidentally turning systems on or off. Much
    >to learn - again. Thanks to all that assisted.

    Don't want to try Free Falcon3 then, huh?
  2. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    kalev- wrote:
    > Trinity wrote:
    >
    > > On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:04:27 -0500, Dave Dantos
    <ddantos@gsinet.net>
    > > wrote:
    > >
    > >>SP-4 Install Woes Resolved; SP-4 installed. Finally found an
    errant
    > >>file hanging out in my Temp folder. SP-4 looks pretty good so far.
    > >>Now, if I could just stop accidentally turning systems on or off.
    Much
    > >>to learn - again. Thanks to all that assisted.
    > >
    > > Don't want to try Free Falcon3 then, huh?
    >
    > Am I gonna get flamed for the below question.
    >
    > What's the major diff in: a "SP4" vs "FF3 system".. not the
    installation per
    > se - but why do some seem to avoid the FF3 gettup..? What's "wrong"
    with
    > FF3?
    >
    > PS: I haven't played F4 in a looong time now..but considering it
    >
    >
    > --
    > Every day above ground is a good day


    I do not know where you get the impression some are avoiding FF3? I
    read all
    the posts at all the boards, and I do not get that observation.
    There are a zillion places you can read about the differences between
    SP4
    and FF3. I have seen just as many people happy with SP4 as I have seen
    with FF3. Best thing about them is that you have several options to/for
    your install.
    But regardless of wether you go SP4 or FF3, there is a plethora of
    add-ons,
    cockpits, skins, terrains, theatres, weather, etc., that make ANY
    install
    worth it.
    Unfortunately, there are a group of anal pores that think it's cool to
    start
    arguementative posts about which is better, SP4 or FF3, IL2 or EAW,
    LOMAC
    or Falcon4, etc. Anyone with any sense will try them both and come to
    their
    own conclusions. Then you will see that NONE of them have it ALL, and
    that
    there is plus and minuses with them all. But whatever your preference,
    there
    is an install out there for you.
    E-Man
  3. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    Trinity wrote:

    > On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:04:27 -0500, Dave Dantos <ddantos@gsinet.net>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>SP-4 Install Woes Resolved; SP-4 installed. Finally found an errant
    >>file hanging out in my Temp folder. SP-4 looks pretty good so far.
    >>Now, if I could just stop accidentally turning systems on or off. Much
    >>to learn - again. Thanks to all that assisted.
    >
    > Don't want to try Free Falcon3 then, huh?

    Am I gonna get flamed for the below question.

    What's the major diff in: a "SP4" vs "FF3 system".. not the installation per
    se - but why do some seem to avoid the FF3 gettup..? What's "wrong" with
    FF3?

    PS: I haven't played F4 in a looong time now..but considering it


    --
    Every day above ground is a good day
  4. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    ef29@drexel.edu wrote:
    > kalev- wrote:
    > > Trinity wrote:
    > >
    >
    > I do not know where you get the impression some are avoiding FF3? I
    > read all the posts at all the boards, and I do not get that
    observation.
    > There are a zillion places you can read about the differences between
    > SP4 and FF3.

    Could you post one, I'd love to see how they break down. I['m sure
    each has strengths not shared by the other, but I'd love to know what
    they are.

    > Unfortunately, there are a group of anal pores that think it's cool
    to
    > start arguementative posts about which is better, SP4 or FF3, IL2 or
    > LOMAC or Falcon4, etc. Anyone with any sense will try them both and
    > come to their own conclusions.

    Yes but non-anal guys like me whop barely have enough time to wrestle
    with a single version of a sim like F4 would love to have the benefit
    of their opinion. I don't think being opinionated makes you anal.

    > there is plus and minuses with them all. But whatever your
    preference,
    > there is an install out there for you.

    You've missed the point - it's by now accepted that each has something
    the other doesn't have, but how are users supposed to know which is
    better for them?
  5. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    ef29@drexel.edu wrote:

    > I do not know where you get the impression some are avoiding FF3? I
    > read all
    > the posts at all the boards, and I do not get that observation.
    > There are a zillion places you can read about the differences between
    > SP4
    > and FF3. I have seen just as many people happy with SP4 as I have seen
    > with FF3.

    Tnx for the feedback. I just happened to stumble on something
    (ie. a forum-thread) that caused me to ask.
    I hope to install F4 soon, just got to figure out a way to "anchor" my TM
    throttle and 'stick...:-)

    --
    Every day above ground is a good day
  6. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 15:57:24 +0100, kalev- <you.wish@duh.net> wrote:

    >ef29@drexel.edu wrote:
    >
    >> I do not know where you get the impression some are avoiding FF3? I
    >> read all
    >> the posts at all the boards, and I do not get that observation.
    >> There are a zillion places you can read about the differences between
    >> SP4
    >> and FF3. I have seen just as many people happy with SP4 as I have seen
    >> with FF3.
    >
    >Tnx for the feedback. I just happened to stumble on something
    >(ie. a forum-thread) that caused me to ask.
    >I hope to install F4 soon, just got to figure out a way to "anchor" my TM
    >throttle and 'stick...:-)
    >

    My little trick several years ago, that's kept on working for me is -
    take a scrap of kitchen counter top (Formica or equivalent) roughly 10
    inches by 18 inches and epoxy it to a suitable size of 1 inch thick
    wooden board. Then use Velcro to attach the TM throttle and stick to
    the Formica. I place this assembly in my lap and fly like I know what
    I'm doing. It's heavy enough it doesn't need more anchoring, and
    feels very comfortable in that location.

    Of course, I also anchored the TM rudder pedals to the floor
    separately.

    Olin McDaniel
  7. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    (You've missed the point - it's by now accepted that each has something
    the other doesn't have, but how are users supposed to know which is
    better for them? )

    I've missed the point? I have, and have tried many patches without the
    benefit of prior knowledge, but "I" missed the point? I, like many F4
    simmers, was interested enough in it when it came out, to try it, and
    keep trying and patching it through the years. Users can only know
    what's best for them if they TRY them. But since you
    are NOT anal, it should be no problem for you to understand that there
    are many variables that constitute whether SP, RP, FF, BMS, Cobra, or
    any other upgrade or patch works for you. Preferably your comp specs
    and your personal preferences. No one else is obligated
    to you or anyone else to tell you exactly what each does. If you have
    any sense at all, just download the patch and read the read-me! Then
    you can pass judgement and decide all by yourself%^) Then, if it's
    still important enough to you, YOU can explain the difference to
    everyone!%^) I personally use FF3 for the simplicity of the install.
    But the SP4 install is quite simple to others, so
    that's just my preference. Do you understand?
    But hey, if your just too much of a putz to try any of the patches
    yourself, go to any of the forums below and search the threads for FF3
    or SP4.
    <http://www.simhq.com>
    <http://www.frugalsworld.com>
    <http://www.freefalcon.com>
    E-Man
  8. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    Olin K. McDaniel wrote:

    > My little trick several years ago, that's kept on working for me is -
    > take a scrap of kitchen counter top (Formica or equivalent) roughly 10
    > inches by 18 inches and epoxy it to a suitable size of 1 inch thick
    > wooden board. Then use Velcro to attach the TM throttle and stick to
    > the Formica. I place this assembly in my lap and fly like I know what
    > I'm doing. It's heavy enough it doesn't need more anchoring, and
    > feels very comfortable in that location.
    >
    > Of course, I also anchored the TM rudder pedals to the floor
    > separately

    You used Formica (= not porous) so any adhesive (Velcro backside) would
    stick I assume? How much velcro -fully covered footprint?
    I forgot about the pedals, good thinking...


    --
    Every day above ground is a good day
  9. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    ef29@drexel.edu wrote:
    > (You've missed the point - it's by now accepted that each has
    something
    > the other doesn't have, but how are users supposed to know which is
    > better for them? )
    >
    Though on second thought...noi actually, I guess you really did botch
    your response. Looking at Kalev's earlier post, he asked why "some"
    avoid FF3 - asking what's wrong with FF3 for those who don't use it.

    > I've missed the point? I have, and have tried many patches without
    the
    > benefit of prior knowledge, but "I" missed the point?

    The above is pretty pointless, so I guess the answer is...yes. Who
    cares if you've tried both unless you're willing to compare the two.

    > I, like many F4
    > simmers, was interested enough in it when it came out, to try it, and
    > keep trying and patching it through the years. Users can only know
    > what's best for them if they TRY them.

    Was that ever a subject for debate? Okay, I can play counterpoint here
    - sure it's nice to give everything a trial run, but for those whose
    time is at a premium, so much time is spent downloading, patching and
    tweaking that time left for actually playing the game is drastically
    reduced. The optimal option seems useless when you've got little time
    to enjoy it. Right now, we're not even talking about two games - just
    one version of the same game. Given how high-maintenance F4 is, is it
    realistic for simmers to have to learn the nuances of each? And aren't
    we a tad exacting on the knwoledge-through-use principle? Apparently
    you gave F4 a try before you knew it was best or at least very jolly
    good - why did you do that? How did yo know it wouldn't utterly bollox
    your system? Somewhere down the line you probably read some review and
    decided that that was good enough reason to at least give F4 more of a
    trial run than say "Heroes of the 357th". All I'm asking for is that
    somebody point the way to a similar op. that covers both FF & SP. Why
    does that get a rise out of you?

    > But since you
    > are NOT anal, it should be no problem for you to understand that
    there
    > are many variables that constitute whether SP, RP, FF, BMS, Cobra, or
    > any other upgrade or patch works for you.

    I don't think I have to be made to understand something I made pretty
    clear already. If I said that each probably had its own unique
    strengths, obviously I'm saying that there are numerous variables
    involved - you don't need me to start listing those variables, do you.
    Since you seem so bothered by my reliance on subtext, then there's
    little question left that you are in fact the more anal of the two of
    us.

    > Preferably your comp specs and your personal preferences.

    Preferably my comp specs and preferences what? What does this even
    mean? There's nothing anal about desiring a coherent sentence.

    > No one else
    > is obligated to you or anyone else to tell you exactly what each
    does.

    ....and as soon as you can clip a post where I even hinted otherwise, I
    shall surely retract it.

    > If you have any sense at all, just download the patch and read the
    read-
    > me! Then you can pass judgement and decide all by yourself%^) Then,
    if
    > it's still important enough to you, YOU can explain the difference to
    > everyone!%^) I personally use FF3 for the simplicity of the install.

    Unbelievable - you apparently get all hit & bothered about an innocuous
    post of mine, and then after all your huffing and puffing simply answer
    it. Would it have killed you to say "Yeah, I find FF much simpler and
    problem free than SP, but that's just my op" without the editorial on
    proctology?

    > But the SP4 install is quite simple to others, so that's just my
    > preference. Do you understand?

    Not really, but you must think that a person is a real putz if he tries
    to save himslef the time of evaluating two apparently redundant
    versions of the same game.

    > But hey, if your just too much of a putz to try any of the patches
    > yourself, go to any of the forums below and search the threads for
    FF3
    > or SP4.

    What's a blowhard like you even doing on NG anyway? You criticize a
    perfectly reasonable question, insult the person who asked it - then
    come up with an answer, and it's useless anyway. What's an easily
    annoyed giuy like you doing on NG's anyway?

    > <http://www.simhq.com>
    > <http://www.frugalsworld.com>
    > <http://www.freefalcon.com>
    > E-Man

    Any chance the E-Man frequents these sites? He must between doing
    whatever Drexel students do when they're not flaming NG's or flying F4
    on their LAN, or trying as many different 3rd party patches for the
    same program as possible. Of course he's a totally different character
    entirely when it comes to the forums on those site - obviously he
    approves of those who bring their Falcon questions to those sites, or
    he wouldn't have attahced links to them, but bring your questions here
    and you're a putz in his book.
  10. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    Very interesting.

    Seems that FF is more difficult to install, but it's harder to find
    add-ons for SP.

    In any case, thanks for the exp.

    Markku Ojala wrote:
  11. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    In article <38g6t1F5mloj1U1@individual.net>, kalev- <you.wish@duh.net> wrote:
    > Trinity wrote:
    >> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:04:27 -0500, Dave Dantos <ddantos@gsinet.net>
    >> wrote:
    >>> SP-4 looks pretty good so far.
    >> Don't want to try Free Falcon3 then, huh?

    Now now everyone! To distract you lot from your quarrel-business that
    seems to fork from <1109594137.051053.190670@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
    before things start getting daft, here's some quick thoughts of mine,
    regarding the SP<->FF issue.

    > Am I gonna get flamed for the below question.

    If it escalates that far, maybe they'll just flame each other. Let us
    fly low, sharp and focused and let other's do the dogfighting. :)

    > What's the major diff in: a "SP5" vs "FF3 system" why do some seem to
    > avoid the FF3 gettup..? What's "wrong" with FF3?

    I don't know really. Don't we all wish we could all co-operate and have
    one mod only, heavily configurable via F4Patch or some such. Obviously
    we don't. I've seen some interviews (which, because i'm terribly llame,
    cannot reference here because i didn't take note of where i saw them)
    where the SP people (whatever that means) claim they've contacted the FF
    people in the name of peace, but to no avail. If i understand anything
    about inter-group relations and public relations among us humans of
    planet earth, there are interviews somewhere with FF people (whatever
    that means) repeating those same things. I'm honestly afraid that as
    things evolve, the flavours might start getting further apart from one
    another, with addons to each being more and more incompatible with the
    /other/ flavour. I *really* hope i've got all this horridly, horridly
    warped in my very own head, and the situation is in reality under
    progress towards a jolly come-together!

    From what i understand, some code from BMS was nicked at some point, and
    put into CobraOne, which some people didn't like one bit. Maybe all
    of this is just a load of BS (and i'm not referring to "BenchSims" here
    (ha ha)) i've heard. Whether that would make the FF, or C1 people
    rogues in a romantic way or 3v1( +err0r1$+z (with some nasty WMDs,
    who knows), is a matter of taste.

    I really ought to know better not to spread any unconfirmed
    rumours like that, especially on online forums, where things start getting
    rather hot all too easily. I mean no harm as you can hopefully read from
    my posts, and if someone would wish to correct me, maybe that'd shed
    some light into this for all of us. Yes, i've been concentrating my
    reading more on tactics, how to work the F-16 and the sim itself and not
    quite as much on "politics", which even seems to be a somewhat banned
    topic on some the boards.

    The CobraOne mod that sits on top of FreeFalcon has the BMS weather
    turned back on, which i do fancy a great deal. I might start getting
    into that multi-install hassle one day, i really, *really* would love to
    have the weather back on. Now that Atari, the "Intellectual
    Property" <pthui> owner of Falcon 4.0 has outlawed exe modding, i don't
    see another version of BMS coming anytime soon. Shame on them!

    My experience is that weather (or lack of) includes things like time of
    the day too... blows.

    I understand that Reality Patch 5, and High-Fidelity Flight Models are
    both included in both flavours. I see RP5 as the absolutely most
    important patch(set) of all times, accompanied by it's marvellous
    documentation. Since both flavours, SP and FF have this, there's plenty
    of common ground coming from there.

    FF installation seems less like a mess to me by adding more glue.
    In SP it's mostly the job of the user to know whether SP3 versions of
    some theaters are ok to install on SP4 and all that.

    Textures and skins come in n+1 flavours. There's one module to
    F4Patch, TexMan, that's supposed to help in automation of this, but since
    not all the skins/textures support it, it brings it's own part to the
    mess.

    I'm not complaining, though it sure sounds like it. This hassle is part
    of the thrill. For me, the natural way to handle all this would
    be the `cvs update falcon4 && cd falcon4 && ./configure && make && make
    install´ workout. All in some nice copyleft, naturally, but i can only
    speak for myself; other's are used to different tools.

    Or no tools, even <evil grin>.

    The bottom line here, the answer to your question what's "The Major
    Diff" between them two flavours, i'd say it's the installation. I've
    walked the SP path by chance. After reading some forums, i somehow got
    the idea that SP is more popular, so i decided to give that a try first.
    If i had read some other forums, i might be running FF instead. There
    was no good reason for me to pick SP over FF, but i had to pick either.
    Multi-install will come later, i thought.

    > PS: I haven't played F4 in a looong time now..but considering it

    I haven't really played any flightsims since Falcon 3.0 and Tornado, but
    am now getting into Falcon 4.0. The tune i've danced to is:

    0. Falcon 4.0 1.061
    1. 1.08US paikka (f4108us.exe)
    2. SuperPAK 4 (FalconSP4_Installer.zip)
    3. SuperPAK 4.2 (Sp4.2_Hi-res.zip)
    4. BMS2 (BMS2.zip)
    5. SuperPAK 4.2 BMS data patch 1.0 (Sp4.2_BMS_DATA_v1.0.zip)
    6. BMS2 radar fix (BMS2.0_radar_fix.zip)

    Plus following candy:
    - BaZT 1.1 (BaZT_-_Korea_v1.1_Installer.zip)
    - Bushmaster's Sound Pack (Sounds.zip), from which i found some
    lethally corrupted philez. See message-id
    <421c3fe0$0$32193$39db0f71@news.song.fi>.
    - Forgotten Textures for SP4.2+BMS (HiRes_ForgText_ForSP4.2+BMS.rar)
    - Panther's F-16C Block 50/52 cockpit (panthersf16pit.zip), plus
    three updates (Panther_F-16_updatev_1.zip,
    panthers_f16_updateV2.zip and Panther_F-16_updatev_3.zip)
    - Ayes, Daws and Tomas Hamarcak's F-16C 3D Superpit
    (F16_3DSuperpit.exe)

    And theaters Balkans, ODS, Israel, some nice kneemaps and a nice library
    of documentation. BTW. it's astonishing how hard it is to find these
    files to download. On the boards i read, Frugal's mostly[0], people
    have posted links, but they've died. Haven't really found a
    *comprehensive* repository, that would clearly indicate versionnumbers
    too. I might install some more addons, if i knew whether they, or
    equivalents were already included in the SuperPAK. Textures and such.

    [0] at http://forums.frugalsworld.com/vbb/forumdisplay.php?s=f2f1b675e27446f12d81d4786a311828&f=11

    ..mace --- +1+ +
  12. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    FatKat wrote:
    > Very interesting.
    >
    > Seems that FF is more difficult to install, but it's harder to find
    > add-ons for SP.
    >
    > In any case, thanks for the exp.
    >
    Too assuming FatKat. You assume through written text that someone is
    pissed,
    and someone posts a big long post trying to answer the questions you
    should
    be answering yourself, and you still get it wrong. FF is the simplist
    of the
    installs. F4CD/FF3/FF3-2in1 patch, done. But because your not getting
    the answers you want, everyone is uneccessarily stupid. But hey, your
    opinion of me means squat.
    One thing you are correct about, I should'a just posted the links and
    been done
    with this, as this has been exactly what that question has always
    resulted in,
    which is why my first answer.
    E-Man
  13. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    AM wrote:
    > <ef29@drexel.edu> wrote in message
    > news:1109766185.139159.219070@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
    >
    > > installs. F4CD/FF3/FF3-2in1 patch, done.
    >
    >
    > Nope, ya want to add the CobraOne patch as a final to what
    > you wrote.
    >

    Er, um, no......what I listed is all that was necessary for FF3. But
    yes.....Cobra1 was made to apply over FF3, and adds other enhancements.
    But it also applies an older version of BMS to bring back the old
    weather, which I didn't like, along with some other stuff, so I
    re-danced to the basic FF3. But, I have seen others that Love
    theCobra1.
    All of these patches and modds have different effects and enhancements
    that work for some, and not for others, or are more appealing to some,
    etc. So again, just my opinion, but I believe it depends on your
    computer specs, (IE speed, mem, hardware, platform, as some patches
    work better with Win2000, others XP, etc.) and your own personal
    preferences. (IE don't like the weather in BMS1.0 but love the puffy
    clouds and shadows of BMS2.0, etc.) There are so many variables with
    the different patches, who is to say which is better? I think someone
    in this thread or another one, mentioned about the seeming lack of
    continuity with the patches. And this is not a flame. I'm happier than
    a pig in slop to get any of em! But, because of ownership, copyright
    etc. all the modders cannot be on the same page. Some patches, although
    adding some new enhancements, have fudged other enhancements. Cobra,
    for instance, had alot of guys complaining about the "black screen"
    after a mission that would lock the sim up. Who would have guessed that
    creating a new pilot would get rid of that, or that creating a new
    pilot would have anything to do with it? I remember flying Falcon4 out
    of the box when it came out, and AI flights would run all over the
    tarmac in afterburner, or crash into you while you were flying in
    formation to the target. Or 2 of your 4-ship would not take off. All
    that was gone with 108. But for me, it was back with Cobra, but I have
    not heard anyone else complain of this. Is it just MY install?

    I would love to see just ONE great patch, as good as the first 108. And
    all of us as the beta testers! Goodness knows we complain more than any
    modders ever would!%^) and always find all the flaws.....But unless the
    modders and owners or whatever can become one team, there will always
    be all these differences.
    E-Man
  14. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    <ef29@drexel.edu> wrote in message
    news:1109766185.139159.219070@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

    > installs. F4CD/FF3/FF3-2in1 patch, done.


    Nope, ya want to add the CobraOne patch as a final to what
    you wrote.


    --
    Only A Gentleman Can Insult Me And A True Gentleman Never Will
  15. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:59:59 +0100, kalev- <you.wish@duh.net> wrote:

    >Olin K. McDaniel wrote:
    >
    >> My little trick several years ago, that's kept on working for me is -
    >> take a scrap of kitchen counter top (Formica or equivalent) roughly 10
    >> inches by 18 inches and epoxy it to a suitable size of 1 inch thick
    >> wooden board. Then use Velcro to attach the TM throttle and stick to
    >> the Formica. I place this assembly in my lap and fly like I know what
    >> I'm doing. It's heavy enough it doesn't need more anchoring, and
    >> feels very comfortable in that location.
    >>
    >> Of course, I also anchored the TM rudder pedals to the floor
    >> separately
    >
    >You used Formica (= not porous) so any adhesive (Velcro backside) would
    >stick I assume? How much velcro -fully covered footprint?
    >I forgot about the pedals, good thinking...
    >
    >
    To be a bit more detailed - I epoxied the rough side of the Formica to
    the wooden board. Then I cut strips of the Velcro (of the 1 inch wide
    stock) and peeled off the paper that protects the sticky side, stuck
    about a 5 inch long strip along both edges of the stick and did the
    same on the throttle. Then I placed the companion half of the Velcro
    in the same position on the Formica, directly in alignment with the
    pieces under the TM devices. Lightly press each into place, they will
    stay put, but can be separated with care.

    Olin
  16. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    AM wrote:
    > <ef29@drexel.edu> wrote in message
    > news:1109766185.139159.219070@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
    >
    > > installs. F4CD/FF3/FF3-2in1 patch, done.
    >
    >
    > Nope, ya want to add the CobraOne patch as a final to what
    > you wrote.
    >
    Thanks for the info AM, however I'm still having some troubles. The
    other night, I downloaded the FF3 installer, FreeFalcon-31, and I a
    file took to be the CobraOne hotfix, which had the version no. 1.6.3.3.

    Unfortunately, it wouldn't get me past the mission screen. Any time I
    tried to start a mission, I'd get a CTD. I'm running on WinXP if that
    matters. I have little experience with any of the FF series, so I'm
    not sure what question I have to ask. I'll probably check out the F4
    web sites but wondered if anybody on this NG even knows what questions
    I should be asking. Does it matter if I'm running on XP? Your
    suggestions appreciated.
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > Only A Gentleman Can Insult Me And A True Gentleman Never Will
  17. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    Fatcat -

    Uninstall F4 and then manually delete the /Microprose/Falcon 4.0
    folder. Reboot.

    1. Install Falcon 4.0 FULL off the CD into the default folder if
    possible.
    2. Reboot
    3. Install FreeFalcon 3.0, setup video mode to 1024x768 32bit for a
    start and whatever options you want.
    4. Try it quick in Instant action, see if it works.

    If NG post here, else

    5. Install FreeFalcon-3-Hotfix1n2.exe
    6. Install FreeFalcon 3.1 (FreeFalcon-31.exe)
    7. Try that and see if it works, you will be running
    C:\MicroProse\Falcon4\CobraOne.exe and using
    C:\MicroProse\Falcon4\Cobra Config Editor.exe to patch it.

    Icer


    >On 5 Mar 2005 17:53:00 -0800, "FatKat" <robynari@juno.com> wrote:
    >AM wrote:
    >> <ef29@drexel.edu> wrote in message
    >> news:1109766185.139159.219070@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
    >>
    >> > installs. F4CD/FF3/FF3-2in1 patch, done.
    >>
    >>
    >> Nope, ya want to add the CobraOne patch as a final to what
    >> you wrote.
    >>
    >Thanks for the info AM, however I'm still having some troubles. The
    >other night, I downloaded the FF3 installer, FreeFalcon-31, and I a
    >file took to be the CobraOne hotfix, which had the version no. 1.6.3.3.
    >
    >Unfortunately, it wouldn't get me past the mission screen. Any time I
    >tried to start a mission, I'd get a CTD. I'm running on WinXP if that
    >matters. I have little experience with any of the FF series, so I'm
    >not sure what question I have to ask. I'll probably check out the F4
    >web sites but wondered if anybody on this NG even knows what questions
    >I should be asking. Does it matter if I'm running on XP? Your
    >suggestions appreciated.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >> Only A Gentleman Can Insult Me And A True Gentleman Never Will
  18. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

    On 5 Mar 2005 17:53:00 -0800, FatKat wrote:

    >Thanks for the info AM, however I'm still having some troubles. The
    >other night, I downloaded the FF3 installer, FreeFalcon-31, and I a
    >file took to be the CobraOne hotfix, which had the version no. 1.6.3.3.
    >
    >Unfortunately, it wouldn't get me past the mission screen. Any time I
    >tried to start a mission, I'd get a CTD. I'm running on WinXP if that
    >matters. I have little experience with any of the FF series, so I'm
    >not sure what question I have to ask. I'll probably check out the F4
    >web sites but wondered if anybody on this NG even knows what questions
    >I should be asking. Does it matter if I'm running on XP? Your
    >suggestions appreciated.

    XP should be absolutely fine.

    Have you created a new pilot? Set GFX to 32-bit mode?

    If you're installing FF 3.1, I don't think there was a need for the
    hotfix.

    Adamski.
Ask a new question

Read More

PC gaming Games IBM Video Games