Lock On: Modern Air Combat PC

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

Generally favorable reviews- based on 548 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 96 out of 548
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
  1. Werner
    Nov 23, 2003
    3
    Gets only three points from me, because the full version doesn't work with Windows ME. Major issue and a strange thing because the demo worked. There is no key overview card in the package, most of the manual is only available als Acrobat PDF. Some graphic bugs, complicated and confusing menus and mission planer, poor performance especially when flying over city, crashes somethimes Gets only three points from me, because the full version doesn't work with Windows ME. Major issue and a strange thing because the demo worked. There is no key overview card in the package, most of the manual is only available als Acrobat PDF. Some graphic bugs, complicated and confusing menus and mission planer, poor performance especially when flying over city, crashes somethimes with bluescreen. Looks overall very unfinished. X-MAS is coming. SO RUSH RUSH Hope the fix the major issues soon, I don't want another "Strike Fighters-Project 1" in my shelf! But even then LOMAC will be far from being perfect! Expand
  2. NoclueNeeded
    Jan 16, 2004
    2
    The first patch has improved many things, but the starting point was so low that it?s moot point at this point in time. It appears several more patches are going to be needed to bring this GAME up to playable levels for the majority of users, not just those on the fanboy sites. If you have a blind obedience mindset, like to play follow the fool, and only want to post rave reviews and The first patch has improved many things, but the starting point was so low that it?s moot point at this point in time. It appears several more patches are going to be needed to bring this GAME up to playable levels for the majority of users, not just those on the fanboy sites. If you have a blind obedience mindset, like to play follow the fool, and only want to post rave reviews and comments, warranted or not, about the game, rush out and buy it. Or, you can use common sense and wait until things are fixed before buying a game that contains un-optimized code making unplayable on anything less than a machine made for the gods. Good Luck! Expand
  3. 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
  4. KORN_WWTE
    Dec 16, 2003
    3
    The game is uncomplete, to much emphasis on having to create interesting missions yourself. Default missions are plain and short, starting in the air and not on the ramp, no need to learn engine start sequences. Campaigns are dull und unispiring. Any action on screen or weather other than clear starts to slow the FPS down until unplayable. This game needs a patch before I reconsider The game is uncomplete, to much emphasis on having to create interesting missions yourself. Default missions are plain and short, starting in the air and not on the ramp, no need to learn engine start sequences. Campaigns are dull und unispiring. Any action on screen or weather other than clear starts to slow the FPS down until unplayable. This game needs a patch before I reconsider giving it another go. Expand
  5. TomD
    Dec 16, 2003
    2
    Unfriendly user interface, taxing mission editor, vague missions, bugs bugs and more bugs. The game was rushed out, if your not into tweaking and tweaking then leave this on the shelf until the developers finish it of properly.
  6. PhillipM.
    Dec 16, 2003
    3
    Weak documentation, buggy, rushed out earily to beat Falcon4 Gold OIR in my opinion. Will be a great sim when fixed.
  7. frag_tallnmbao
    Dec 16, 2003
    0
    They 've to give us money cause we need CRY2 system to run this missed game, i said "game" ok? :) that is.
  8. TorL.
    Dec 17, 2003
    2
    Poorly written graphics engine, will not perform on current hardware. Minimum specs (on the box) is a joke / marketing ploy. I returned the game for a refund.
  9. CarlN.
    Dec 17, 2003
    3
    It's a bit shite.
  10. Hocking
    Dec 17, 2003
    4
    In it's current state, the F15 can be considered still in development, and therefore not flyable at this time. The radar has a few bugs, but more importantly, the missiles are under-modeled by about 10 times. They are simply not effective at all, and extremely unreallistic upon the time of release. They need a complete makeover to bring them up to the level that can be considered In it's current state, the F15 can be considered still in development, and therefore not flyable at this time. The radar has a few bugs, but more importantly, the missiles are under-modeled by about 10 times. They are simply not effective at all, and extremely unreallistic upon the time of release. They need a complete makeover to bring them up to the level that can be considered realistic. The Aim120 has a range of less than 5 miles, the Aim 7 is the most accurate of the group, and the Aim 9 has difficulty tracking down a target at less than 2 miles (I once fired three Aim 9's at a MIG about 2 miles in front of me while I was on his six and all three missiles missed). Can't beleive that this passed the beta testers. The game can become good, but upon release, it is about 70% complete. Expand
  11. DavidDuce
    Dec 17, 2003
    3
    Buyer BEWARE and not so fast my 9/10 rating friends. This game may be a 9/10 in a few years, but right now it?s just another little light on the horizon. Many things are wrong with this game that will need heavy patching to fix.

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

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

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

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

    People, educate yourself before buying this game, in its current state, it can?t be called a SIMULATION. To compare it to previous SIMULATORS is a slap in the face to them. Take the advice of several other reviews here and elsewhere, wait at least a year before buying it, you?ll save yourself a lot of wasted time and by then, hopefully, the beta testing period will be over.
    Expand
  12. ErikF.
    Dec 17, 2003
    3
    This game has problems, many problems. The system required to play this game is not yet available, but people say to upgrade this and upgrade that. What a bunch of bull! If the game is suppose to play satisfactorily on mid range systems, why do they say to upgrade? To cover up a poorly programmed game, that?s why. Those that say they have bought this and that are only fooling themselves This game has problems, many problems. The system required to play this game is not yet available, but people say to upgrade this and upgrade that. What a bunch of bull! If the game is suppose to play satisfactorily on mid range systems, why do they say to upgrade? To cover up a poorly programmed game, that?s why. Those that say they have bought this and that are only fooling themselves and buying into the hype, don?t fall into the trap they have! How it can be rated over a 6 at this point in time is beyond me. There are bugs everywhere, the game runs slow, setup is horrendous, and no one knows how many patches it will need to bring it up to an acceptable level. As far as looking good, that?s the best thing that people can say about it. See it in action before you buy it. If the store won?t load it up for you, walk away from it until summer. It will need longer, but at least you?ll get it at cheaper price. $40 is way too much for a game that was slapped together with proper Quality Assurance procedures in place. Expand
  13. FaelF.
    Dec 17, 2003
    4
    Ok, First I have to be honest about my experience with fighter sims. Im not an enthusiast who logs 30 flight hours per week. In fact, the last flight sim I played religiously was US Navy Fighters (loved that game). But I am a hardcore gamer that tries to keep up with the hardware upgrades (as much as my wallet allows). So with that my review. Dissapointment...plain and simple. Im not Ok, First I have to be honest about my experience with fighter sims. Im not an enthusiast who logs 30 flight hours per week. In fact, the last flight sim I played religiously was US Navy Fighters (loved that game). But I am a hardcore gamer that tries to keep up with the hardware upgrades (as much as my wallet allows). So with that my review. Dissapointment...plain and simple. Im not talking about the graphics and in-game realism. Im talking about my expectation as a consumer...ipso facto...a money spending one. The amount of support available, the state in which my product was purchased (incomplete), ease of use (this game is more dialed into experienced flight simmers so it has a steep learning curve), and the famous bug issues most lo-mac forums are rife with. Let me say that most of those bugs are fixable if you tone down the settings and take the time to bug hunt your problems. But for ease of use and consumer satisfaction....lo-mac is stuck with a generous 4. Its just not "out of the box" satisfaction. Expand
  14. GrantM.
    Dec 17, 2003
    3
    The reason for the low score is that the game is not finished yet by a long shot. Its like a beautifull woman that never stops moaning. An irritation at this stage. The game should still be on the development desk sorting out the similar problems that were in the demo. No doubt this game has potential to be a fantastic flight sim and a 9/10 rating at the end of the day. The minimum specs The reason for the low score is that the game is not finished yet by a long shot. Its like a beautifull woman that never stops moaning. An irritation at this stage. The game should still be on the development desk sorting out the similar problems that were in the demo. No doubt this game has potential to be a fantastic flight sim and a 9/10 rating at the end of the day. The minimum specs on the box are a total thumb suck. If you dont have the biggest, meanest pc with an 'UBER' GPU forget about getting this game. Patches will no doubt sort out a lot of the problems, but this is a clear case of getting releasing the game before Christmas just to reap in the sales when they new all to well the game was still in a beta stage. It does have fanatastic potential though. Expand
  15. GunterH.
    Dec 18, 2003
    4
    So-so game with good graphics. Needs work.
  16. M.
    Dec 18, 2003
    0
    Great ideas behind the game BUT realisation is poor for now. Very bad. Lots of bugs of important functions, killing the fun to use the game - very, very sadly...
  17. NikkiS.
    Dec 18, 2003
    2
    Compared to Falcon 4.0, this is just another game. The avionics are arcade-like and a generation behind the king. To compare this game in its current state to Falcon 4.0 only hurts LOMAC! Its graphics are the best thing going for it and if it weren?t for that, who knows where it would stand. It appears plenty of work needs to be done to get this lump of code in working order. It actually Compared to Falcon 4.0, this is just another game. The avionics are arcade-like and a generation behind the king. To compare this game in its current state to Falcon 4.0 only hurts LOMAC! Its graphics are the best thing going for it and if it weren?t for that, who knows where it would stand. It appears plenty of work needs to be done to get this lump of code in working order. It actually appears to be Flanker rewrapped with a few more planes ?thrown? in. The consumer was taken for granted on this one and it seems many fell for the trap and hype. Don?t be one of them. Wait until Falcon 4:OIR comes out before making your decision. There?s more to calling yourself a flight?SIM? than pretty graphics. Expand
  18. SimonL.
    Dec 18, 2003
    3
    I really should have given a 0, but that's to harsh and would really like to give it a ten, but I hate to lie. This has got to be the most overrated game in a long time. People state to make sure your system is properly configured and optimzed, but even that doesn't cover up the sloppy coding that has brought out hundreds of bug reports. They say they are being sorted out, I really should have given a 0, but that's to harsh and would really like to give it a ten, but I hate to lie. This has got to be the most overrated game in a long time. People state to make sure your system is properly configured and optimzed, but even that doesn't cover up the sloppy coding that has brought out hundreds of bug reports. They say they are being sorted out, we'll see. My money goes elsewhere for now, your's should too. Read the 9 and 10 reviews with your fingers crossed, they are misleading and an attempt to ramp up the ratings, Expand
  19. ShawnD.
    Dec 18, 2003
    3
    Really poor programming. This program was not ready to be released. It may improve in the future if they have competent developers on-hand.
  20. GaryP.
    Dec 18, 2003
    3
    Plenty of PROMISE, but in its current state, its still a dream.
  21. NolanS.
    Dec 19, 2003
    1
    Sickening framerates and useless support! This puppy is going back. Anybody want to follow me and be the next sucker to buy it?
  22. Warthog
    Dec 19, 2003
    2
    Assumptions by some, like Bruce and Steve, are what landed this game in the position its in. The programmers thought they needed to develop the game to novices and it shows and that?s why you see all the 9 and 10 ratings. The hardcore simmers are the ones that don?t like it due to its simplicity and piece-meal design. Some say it?s a follow up of the Flanker series. This game makes you Assumptions by some, like Bruce and Steve, are what landed this game in the position its in. The programmers thought they needed to develop the game to novices and it shows and that?s why you see all the 9 and 10 ratings. The hardcore simmers are the ones that don?t like it due to its simplicity and piece-meal design. Some say it?s a follow up of the Flanker series. This game makes you glad you didn?t play Flanker. This game will lead the real flight SIM genre in the wrong direction. There is no immersion factor in the game; the terrain is bland, it contains useless cockpits that add nothing to the feel of the game except in reducing frame rates, and the hundreds of bugs make trying to setup your system to play this things a pain in the royal behind. If you have time and money to waste, this is your game, but realize you?re not getting a true FLIGHT SIM, only an arcadish survey game with aircraft in it. Expand
  23. RichT.
    Dec 19, 2003
    2
    This has got to be a joke. A company should not be allowed to release something in this state and people give it a 10? On what basis do they give it a 10? These people are mindless Lemmings that would by the Grand Canyon if you tried to sell it to them. Do believe a game in this condition is a 10. If you buy it now, you'll be sorry and if's a gift, you'll be laughed at! This has got to be a joke. A company should not be allowed to release something in this state and people give it a 10? On what basis do they give it a 10? These people are mindless Lemmings that would by the Grand Canyon if you tried to sell it to them. Do believe a game in this condition is a 10. If you buy it now, you'll be sorry and if's a gift, you'll be laughed at! Make an informed decision. Expand
  24. Curtis
    Dec 19, 2003
    2
    If you're old enough to drink a few beers before playing, it's not too bad. When you try it sober, you start looking for another few beers. Who let this out the door? Where were the quality people? You can its Christmas time when trash like this comes out. Under the influence rating: 7 Sober rating: 2.
  25. JedB.
    Mar 8, 2004
    10
    This is the best simulation I have every owned. The graphics are fabulous and the detail is incredible. I have been flying mostly the A-10 Warthog and it is a pleasure. This is the one I have been waiting for all my gaming life. Thanks to Eagle Dynamics, great job. No kudos to the publisher, Ubi Soft. They did a lousy job with the release. I finally had to order it from Amazon.com because This is the best simulation I have every owned. The graphics are fabulous and the detail is incredible. I have been flying mostly the A-10 Warthog and it is a pleasure. This is the one I have been waiting for all my gaming life. Thanks to Eagle Dynamics, great job. No kudos to the publisher, Ubi Soft. They did a lousy job with the release. I finally had to order it from Amazon.com because the EB near my house didn't have any and claimed that Ubi Soft "ran out of them". I also did not get a Key Command Card but was able to finally get one sent to me after I called Ubi Soft. (By the way, to the reviewer below - Codemasters is the publisher of Operation Flashpoint, not Ubi Soft) Expand
  26. JohnF.
    Feb 5, 2004
    9
    Just bought Lock On this past weekend. I really like it. It looks great, has lots of great aircraft and the missions are fun. I have not had a chance to fly multiplayer yet, but I will try this coming weekend. Just playing single player has shown me that this game is one of the best sims I have ever owned. I still can't believe how great it looks. Sure, it is not for older systems, I Just bought Lock On this past weekend. I really like it. It looks great, has lots of great aircraft and the missions are fun. I have not had a chance to fly multiplayer yet, but I will try this coming weekend. Just playing single player has shown me that this game is one of the best sims I have ever owned. I still can't believe how great it looks. Sure, it is not for older systems, I have a pretty good rig. But, if you are serious about flying complex jets then this is the one for you. I can understand that people that have inferior hardware might not like a game like this, but they are going to be crying big time when new games come out this year that are going to be just as demanding as Lock On. Don't make the mistake of listening to the doom and gloom bunch. Get this great game now. JF. Expand
  27. AndyM.
    Dec 16, 2003
    9
    great game, I realy dont have any problems running it at all. Ok ive got a high spec computer but if you want to run a high spec game like this then you need the hardware to run it. I some times have to reming my self that its only a sim, the graphics are that good. I know there are some problems for some people but hopefully the up comming patch should sort those problems out.
  28. MikeK.
    Dec 17, 2003
    10
    AMAZING GAME !!!
  29. DaveC.
    Dec 17, 2003
    10
    Looks amazing has cool graphics but my pc sucks to play it :(
  30. JurgenT.
    Dec 17, 2003
    9
    Great game but even on easy somme things are very hard (can't shoot a plane down whit a missle)
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. 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. 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.