Combat Flight Simulator 3: Battle for Europe Image
Metascore
69

Mixed or average reviews - based on 16 Critics What's this?

User Score
6.5

Mixed or average reviews- based on 22 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Summary: Feel the adrenaline rush as you start strafing enemy positions at 350 mph, 600 feet above the European countryside, guns blazing and bombs blasting. In Combat Flight Simulator 3 (CFS3) you can fly for the USAAF, RAF, or the Luftwaffe in some of the most advanced and exotic aircraft of WWII.Feel the adrenaline rush as you start strafing enemy positions at 350 mph, 600 feet above the European countryside, guns blazing and bombs blasting. In Combat Flight Simulator 3 (CFS3) you can fly for the USAAF, RAF, or the Luftwaffe in some of the most advanced and exotic aircraft of WWII. [Microsoft] Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 16
  2. Negative: 1 out of 16
  1. There is a hangar full of new additions including new 3D cloud textures that make hide-and-seek dog-fighting a real possibility.
  2. I have played a lot of flight simulation games; this one definitively gives you more control over the fate of the world than any I have played before.
  3. 73
    "IL-2 Sturmovik" is better in many technical areas but is somewhat less approachable than CFS3.
  4. By far the best-looking and most entertaining simulation in the series so far. But the improvements are marred by A.I. oddities and performance problems. [Feb 2003, p.82]
  5. There are just enough things wrong with this title that it feels like it needed another few months in development before being sprung on the public.
  6. From the interface, through performance to the actual gameplay, it fails someone, somewhere, at every level. The missions are too simple, the campaign usually ends up looking strategically dubious, and there aren’t enough rewards for the prestige the player earns.
  7. The lack of support for AI in dogfights, a bad padlock, and a half-assed view system make this a second-rate multiplayer flight sim. [Jan 2003, p.66]

See all 16 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 15
  2. Negative: 4 out of 15
  1. RyanC.
    Jan 13, 2008
    10
    Good game better than IL-2 because it's user friendly.
  2. JohnG.
    Jan 10, 2003
    10
    This game kicks major ass.
  3. BrettD.
    Nov 28, 2007
    10
    Incredible missions that intrigue. As with any new technology, two years is actually a long time. CFS2 was great, CFS3 is better! Same old Incredible missions that intrigue. As with any new technology, two years is actually a long time. CFS2 was great, CFS3 is better! Same old game but more of it, and the graffics have improved. Will there be a CFS4? I hope so! Expand
  4. ChrisP.
    May 3, 2005
    5
    Fun game except for the fact that the control sucked! If you know anything about real airplanes, you know that when an airplane stalls it is Fun game except for the fact that the control sucked! If you know anything about real airplanes, you know that when an airplane stalls it is because it runs out of momentum. Tell me something, in the game you can be diving then pull out of it and it says you are stalling. Another thing is that it should take many more bullets to shoot down an airplane. The AI stinks. If you are looking for a fun game and aren't concerened to much about realism, then this game is for you. Yet if you are a gamer who demands reality then NO. Expand
  5. Jul 14, 2013
    5
    This is a pretty accessible game all things considered. The quick combat feature is easy to use and the missions give you a taste of what theThis is a pretty accessible game all things considered. The quick combat feature is easy to use and the missions give you a taste of what the campaign is like. The campaign is also an amusing yet incredibly interactive system that takes a strategic mind to play through and get good results. The option of initiating ground offensives, the notion of striking the point on that map that represents the biggest blow to the enemy, deciding your payload, and even upgrading to aircraft before they were even delivered by their respective designers all contributes to a very dynamic and exciting campaign. It takes weeks to play through which is what I like best. I can kick back and enjoy a few missions or spend a few hours pummeling my opponent but the excitement is available for quite some time. Its even cooler how you can change the outcome of the war.

    The cool parts aside I am actually quite disappointed in this game in its historical omissions and inaccuracies. The selection of aircraft is limited and on top of that they left out some of the big players in the war. Where is the Hawker Hurricane? And where is the Whitely, the Lancaster, the Wellington, the Hallifax, or the Stirling bombers? Instead the British get the B25 which was an American plane first of all and second of all it wasn't used in any impressive numbers on lend lease. And what about the Germans? They got cheated too. No Me110s, or He111s, Do17s, and most angering, no Ju87 Stuka. And these two bug me most of all; no B17 or B24 for the Americans. I mean come on! The B24 was the most produced American bomber of the war and the B17's reputation will precede it into the 22nd century. Weirder yet, they omit the biggest, baddest. and most famous but they put in experimental aircraft of which only a two or three prototypes were ever made (P55 Ascender, Do335, Go229). Where is the logic?

    In terms of a flight simulation, CFS3 could also use a lot of work. Whichever game designer though that stalling happens as a result of max elevator deflection needs to lay off the crack. Really, learn your damn physics. Stalling happen because you've exceeded the critical angle of attack and usually only once your airspeed has dropped sufficiently; Its nothing to do with the deflection of your elevators. You don't just stall out of the blue when you pull up hard going 250 knots. Another laughable feature of CFS3 is how using coordinated rudder and ailerons to turn like in a real aircraft literally doesn't work at all; gotta give a great big slow clap on that one. Almost all steering must be accomplished with the elevators after doing a ninety degree roll. And then you stall in the turn and drop like a stone because someone didn't understand physics. Wonderful! In general the controls are unpolished, unresponsive, and barely accurate of flying in a real aircraft. I also seriously doubt the glide ratios of the aircraft in this game were as bad as this game makes them out to be.
    Expand
  6. SteveP.
    Nov 10, 2002
    4
    A system hog even on the best of systems, The graphics look like something out of playstation back in 96' , Horrible textures, lousy A system hog even on the best of systems, The graphics look like something out of playstation back in 96' , Horrible textures, lousy game play. Very dissapointed personally. Only thing i liked is the campaign mode! . Have the campaign mode on a game like Janes WW2, and you got yourself a good sim. Collapse
  7. GE
    Dec 31, 2006
    0
    I returned the game to the retailer and obtained a refund. I loaded it onto a dual core AMD 64 bit system running at 2.4 GHz, and 4 GB of I returned the game to the retailer and obtained a refund. I loaded it onto a dual core AMD 64 bit system running at 2.4 GHz, and 4 GB of memory. My monitor has a resolution of 1680 x 1050. At the highest resolution the game could produce, the ground effects were patchy, with little detail. Viewing out the cockpit looking at the "ground" was nauseating. The aircraft were slow to respond and extremely difficult to control. Don't waste your time or money. The product did not match the advertising hype. In my opinion, this game is a complete piece of crap. Expand

See all 15 User Reviews