Lock On: Modern Air Combat PC

  • Publisher: Ubisoft
  • Release Date: Jul 26, 2005
User Score
7.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 546 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 96 out of 546

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
  1. 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!
  2. 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
  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. 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
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. 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
  10. 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.
  11. KreckochovS.
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    not fast feeling of speed but great game is it. so 7, maybe better if fast
  12. 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.
  13. 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
  14. 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.
  15. KristofferR.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    Very nice game, well done but eats a lot of your pc's performance.
  16. 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
  17. 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...
  18. 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
  19. 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
  20. 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.
  21. 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
  22. 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
  23. Dayak
    Dec 16, 2003
    5
    the game need to be optimized and alot of bug to be squashed.
  24. 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.
  25. 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
  26. 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
  27. BrandonH.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    I think after a few patches this game will be a 10.
  28. 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
  29. 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
  30. 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.
  31. 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.
  32. SebastianG.
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    There is big potential in this game !
  33. Kev
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    In time this will be awesome. Provided Ubi stick with it that is.
  34. 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.
  35. 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.
  36. 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
  37. 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.
  38. 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
  39. 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.
  40. 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.
  41. 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.
  42. 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
  43. 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
  44. 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
  45. 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
  46. 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
  47. 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...
  48. CarlosA.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    There are many bugs for fix... but the sim is nice.
  49. JanneG.
    Dec 16, 2003
    7
    A sim with a great potential, but also with some child diseases.
  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. 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.
  52. 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
  53. MarkusB.
    Dec 16, 2003
    5
    this game will be great once the bugs are ironed out. in its current state it is hardly playable.
  54. 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.
  55. 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
  56. 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
  57. 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.
  58. 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.
  59. 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.
  60. ChrisM>
    Dec 17, 2003
    7
    If you can get it to play smooth it is awesome. Will definately need patching though.......
  61. 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.
  62. 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.
Metascore
76

Generally favorable reviews - based on 20 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 20
  2. Negative: 0 out of 20
  1. 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.
  2. Detailed terrain, buildings, water, and effects lend an unprecedented feeling of speed to low-level flight. [March 2004, p.82]
  3. 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.