For Maddog fans

[Murmur 3,941]

>Computer's are so fast nowadays and gauge programming and>systems simulation are improving so much that frame hogging>non functional VC's are slowly becoming nonexistent, and>regardless to whether you prefer the old way of simulation,>2-D panels are on their way out the door. RealAir, SHockwave,>PMDG, LevelD are companies among many others that are moving>in that direction. And if you think that a group of hobbyist>who refuse to move along with it will influence the developers>to keep on with the 2-D's, you better get used to the idea of>downloading Freeware.If we consider just heavy metals, I've yet to see a VC that has the same FPS and gauge smoothness than the equivalent 2D panel.Marco

[Guest manbird]

On my computer the LevelD 767 has absolutely smooth gauges.The PMDG 747-400, and 737 series has smooth update, Lago's MD80, which pretty much encompasses the majority of payware heavy's that are worth buying. SSTSIM has horrible refresh rates which make using the 2-D panel absolutley necesary. Like I said, developers are concentrating the majority of the aircraft programming efforts on VC's because it allows them to have the best of both worlds, especially when using the new gauge proramming methods.

[Guest SilverCircle]

>I completely disagree with you.You are free to disagree with anything.>A VC is not eye candy, it is the best you can get towards simulating>realistic environments.Nope. The best way is to build a home cockpit. A VC is still nothing more than a representation of a 3d space on a 2 dimensional projection plane (your screen). It can fake the 3 dimensional aspects, but that's all.>A well designed VC, is much better than a 2-D>one, simply because the locations of the controls are in their>correct spot as opposed to having a pop up window of different>panels and the relationship and size of the instruments are>more exact. The flow of operating an airliner cockpit as>though it were the real one can only be done in a VC.It cannot simulate the workflow. It can only make things "looking" more real, but you are still operating switches and dials with the mouse and move the mouse cursor in a _2d_ space. Not much difference to a 2d panel. The only thing is that you constantly have to change your point of view and this is where a TrackIR helps immensely of course. In fact, most 2d panels offer a better workflow, because they can show more important controls and instruments at the same time. And if you are using a multimonitor setup which allows you to show subpanels without obstructing the view of the main panel, it's a lot better than 'any* VC ever will be. If you want to see all this in a VC, you'll have to zoom out so far that most instruments become hard to read even at the highest resolutions. If you zoom in to get clear and easy to read instruments, your field of view becomes completely unrealistic.>The >situational awareness (with TrackIR) when it comes to Visual>Approaches, instrument scans etc, is better with the VC.Yes, for small aircrafts where most of the instruments and switches are located on the main panel.Like I said, I'am not anti-VC, but I don't buy that "VCs give you the real experience" thing, because it simply isn't true. Anyone who can drive cars and tried some car racing simulation will know this. There isn't anything "real" when you have to zoom and pan around just in order to look somewhere. In real life, you just move your eyeball slightly and don't have to turn your head or you just "know and feel" where a certain switch is and can operate it without even looking at it. This is something, no VC can provide and this is probably the fact, why many true enthusiasts spend lots of money and time to build a home cockpit.

[Guest SilverCircle]

>On my computer the LevelD 767 has absolutely smooth gauges.Only the vector displays are smooth. The analog gauges are not and this is true for most, if not all, virtual cockpits with a very few exceptions where the gauges and needles are modeled in 3d and therefore run with the same update rate as the simulation itself.Any conventional gauge won't update faster than about 18fps and this isn't smooth.

[Staffan 12]

>And who says a plane w/o a VC is not complete? That's just not>true. There are quite a few people who couldn't care less>about a framekilling VC.Hi,I agree 100%! I am one of the thousands of simmers who couldn

[ubersu 78]

>And if you think that a group of hobbyist who refuse to move along with it will influence the developers to keep on with the 2-D's, you better get used to the idea of downloading Freeware.

[Guest manbird]

where have you been? They've always ignored us to some degree or another..

[Guest manbird]

Using TrackIR on 2 19" monitors horizontally spanned, is better than any 2-D will ever be.If you've tried TrackIR on a nice set up, you wouldn't be saying this. And if you HAVE tried it and still prefer 2-D then somethings wrong with your brain. Period.

[Guest manbird]

You are completely wrong. Obviously you haven't seen the videos done of the Level D in VC, the gauge updates are completely fluid, just as it is on mine, Standby instruments move completely fluid. Like I said, most people speaking against VC either can't run it, or have a bad setup. How can you refute that the closer you can get to a 3-D environment is not the way to go? especially since there are a great number of payware that offer Excellent VC's.Nothing is better than sitting in my LevelD 767 cockpit, looking slightly up and manipuating overhead panel, looking slightly down, and adjusting my radio. Move my head forward and see the gauges up close or the FMC. How the #### could 2-D be better than that? VC is the close you can get short of building a full size cockpit. Just because you refuse to move forward doesn't mean that VC is a bad thing. It just means you haven't grasped it yet, or refuse to. Regardless, you're 2-D panels are on there way out.

[Guest SilverCircle]

>Using TrackIR on 2 19" monitors horizontally spanned, is>better than any 2-D will ever be.>If you've tried TrackIR on a nice set up, you wouldn't be>saying this. And if you HAVE tried it and still prefer 2-D>then somethings wrong with your brain. Period.I have. In fact, I frequently use TrackIR to fly planes or helicopters from the VC and I like it. I also use the VC during cruise in airliners frequently (actually, all the time). I do NOT use it on takeoff or approach and in all situations where it is necessary to deal with a lot of knobs and switches (i.e. operate the a/p, program the FMC etc.). This is where 2d panels with multiple monitors are still a lot more comfortable to use.And I can assure you that nothing is wrong with my brain. Also, my setup is nice enough to get steady and locked 25 fps with no stutters, blurries or other annoying problems, no matter what settings I use, how much traffic there is or how bad the weather may be.BTW: The only thing wrong with your brain is probably the fact, that you are unable to accept opinions different from your own.

[Guest SilverCircle]

>You are completely wrong. Obviously you haven't seen the>videos done of the Level D in VC, the gauge updates are>completely fluid, just as it is on mine, Standby instruments>move completely fluid. Then we have different opinions of smoothness. I don't need to watch some crappy video, because I can fly the plane on my own PC. And I do this frequently.Fact is: VC gauges (not vector displays) are not completely smooth. Technically not possible in FS9, with the exception of 3d modeled instruments (RealAir did it and some others aswell).End of discussion.And yes, 2d panels are dead. That's why almost any serious release still comes with one. And most of the announced future releases will come with a 2d panel as well. Why? Because you are right. Nobody cares about them, so the devs are wasting some time just for fun or for the purpose to waste some diskspace on our hard drives.

[Staffan 12]

>PMDG, LevelD are companies among many others that are moving>in that direction. And if you think that a group of hobbyist>who refuse to move along with it will influence the developers>to keep on with the 2-D's, you better get used to the idea of>downloading Freeware.Hi,I must say you are a funny guy. Just because PMDG and Level-D happened to add a VC to their aircraft, certainly doesn

[Guest manbird]

"If you want to see all this in a VC, you'll have to zoom out so far that most instruments become hard to read even at the highest resolutions. If you zoom in to get clear and easy to read instruments, your field of view becomes completely unrealistic."oh, you mean not as realistic as having an overhead panel on top of your windscreen and a throttle quadrant panel on top of your Eicas? You can't be serious...When I'm manipulating the overhead panel, I'm looking up at it. You, however, have to call up a window and fit it somewhere. maybe off to the right on a second monitor which ventures further from reality than ever. How realistic is it to look to the right to see the overhead panel, then FMC and MCP side by side? why not have a 3-D cockpit to go with a 3-D scenic world?"In real life, you just move your eyeball slightly and don't have to turn your head or you just "know and feel" where a certain switch is and can operate it without even looking at it. This is something, no VC can provide.."comes closer to it than a 2-D panel.

[Guest manbird]

"Fact is: VC gauges (not vector displays) are not completely smooth. Technically not possible in FS9, with the exception of 3d modeled instruments (RealAir did it and some others aswell). End of discussion."Like I said, you have no idea. I'm running Core 2 Dual 3Ghz and Nvidea 7900GS, my LDS767 standby instruments are fluid and the gauges are not done in 3d. But I must have some different FS9, since you say it is not possible. Same thing with my PMDG's. Your ignorance is larger than your inability to accept the obvious.

[Guest manbird]

"And I think you know that 2D panels will always be there in one way or another,"exactly, in the form of a simple basic panel like the RealAir Spitfire. "just like there will be a large numbers of simmers who wants that from the developers,..it is just that you personally prefer to lobby for a complete VC product."Can you read? I never said I wanted a VC only cockpit, I said that the Maddog's VC would probably come at an additional cost. Which I was promptly replied to by the "Old school 2-D" Clan that a VC is not needed. Thus began the discussion. You think 2-D panels are going to be around for a while? Keep dreaming. More and more people are asking if a Payware plane has a VC to determine if they should buy it or not. Especially with the development of the new Gauges OR excellent programming of old school VC gauges like the LevelD, you will find that the focus will turn to VC. I don't give a crap if a 2-D is included or not, but I say if you do not have a VC cockpit, a good funtional one, then you're leaving out a growing piece of the simming market.