What would a future Flight Simulator look like for PS4

[mr340 56]

So today i was reading on what Sony added to the new soon to be release some time this year Playstation 4 . From what i read the PS4 will be powered by an eight-core CPU, a powerful GPU and 8GB of RAM. It is said that it will have computer graphic or even better to come . Now computer games such as diablo 3 will be compatible to play on PS4. So i stop to think what would a Flight simulator look like on a powerful game console as the PS4 will have. I mean you can also be able to add a keyboard just like a normal computer also most likely a joystick , don't know about a yoke or anything like that. It will be pretty amazing to see flight simulator finally on a game console . But when i stop to think about it i find it very impossible , because what would happen to developers like PMDG , Aerosoft , sony is a little greedy when it comes to adding extra addon to their console or anything in that matter. What do you guys think share your opinions? My personal opinion is that i don't think that might happen because i know how sony are with their products , if they do release any flight simulator for PS4 i don't think they will support any 3rd party addons .I don't think it will be so much realistic speaking when it comes to looking around a VC or actually panning adding altitude an messing around with other controls of other aircrafts. But what can i say i have an open mind an you never know what sony comes up with in this new PS4. If it can support diablo 3 that is a big heavy games in graphic an CPU power who knows if a flight simulator might come next.

[Gazzareth 97]

Well after Microsoft Flight - which looked like it was designed for a console I doubt any major software developer is going to make a serious effort at it.

 

The major developers are also far too greedy to make it worth the while of the likes of PMDG to get seriously involved...

 

G

 

Sent from my S3 using Tapatalk. Typing errors expected....

 

 

[Warmbrak 5]

The PS4 specs are already below that of the average flightsim PC setup. There was a recent article that discussed how at least the next two generations of consoles will lag behind PC's. I can already see Sony doing drivers for my Thrustmaster Warthog setup & Saitek Pedals

[simmerhead 884]

The PS4 specs are already below that of the average flightsim PC setup. There was a recent article that discussed how at least the next two generations of consoles will lag behind PC's. I can already see Sony doing drivers for my Thrustmaster Warthog setup & Saitek Pedals

 

Not so sure about that. Have not seen many PCs with 8 GB GDDR5 RAM. Also a standard setup makes it easier to create optimized software. PC software development is an act of compromises since there are so many different hardware setups out there.

 

Not sure if AMD is a good choice of partner though...

 

 

[anachron13 0]

The 8-core AMD 'Jaguar' CPU is actually a low power CPU, would probably be a problem to run FSX smoothly.

[pegger74 18]

Any flight sim based games for consoles are usually jet fighter games. I would be completely floored if any game developers made a hardcore sim geared to aviation buffs. Flight simmers are a different breed of gamer...well their attitude anyways when it comes to simming. They are willing to spend hours in the cockpit watching guages adn readouts, and doing all the other things most gamers would consider "boring". The average console gamer is seeking "instant gratification", by means of flashy graphics, in depth stories, and mass mayhem. Hours of cruise flight at FL300 isn't going to attract many.

 

The other constraint is the many peripherals that simmers like to use. Multiple display screens, yokes, TQ's, rudder peddles, guage displays, home built controls, etc. How do you plug all these in, and how do developers afford the cost to get a licence to use the source code to allow interaction of their peripherals? Many peripherals rely on the open source nature of FSX to work with such modules like FSUIPC. Things like this just aren't going to work on consoles.

 

And when you look at the graphical abilities of consoles, sure they look great, but how much do they really show? Flight simmers expect a higher level of detail and draw distance than I think any console could manage to display.

[HansRoaming 70]

Just wanted to highlight that there is a thread about what flight sims could look like you all might find interesting.

[Guest]

Not so sure about that. Have not seen many PCs with 8 GB GDDR5 RAM.

 

You will soon ... however be aware that GDDR5 is still too slow and doesn't make for good CPU operations (very high latency) ... it's great for graphics operations and parallelism, but computation work will suffer with GDDR5. But console gaming has never been about computational requirements like you would see in a flight simulation ... hence their focus on the GDDR5 and graphics -- 3D twitch games and the like.

 

Also the PS4 is 1.8 TFLOPS, current nVidia GTX 680 4GB is 3.1 TFLOPS -- so the PS4 is already way behind what can be done on a PC today.

 

But inevitable problem console platforms will have is POWER! To crank out calculations and manipulate polygons and their textures takes power -- I've seen many desktop computers consuming (under full loads) over 1000 watts of power ... a console simply doesn't have the ability to operate at those levels ... not unless it physically gets MUCH larger.

 

I have a PS3 (came with my TV bundle), but I don't use it for gaming ... I use it for Netflix and BluRays and to this date I've not encountered a BluRay player than is as good as the PS3.

 

But agree with other comments, as far as the "casual" simmer, there aren't that many ... MS Flight's failure was a clear indication of that.

[goates 315]

The other constraint is the many peripherals that simmers like to use. Multiple display screens' date=' yokes, TQ's, rudder peddles, guage displays, home built controls, etc. How do you plug all these in, and how do developers afford the cost to get a licence to use the source code to allow interaction of their peripherals? Many peripherals rely on the open source nature of FSX to work with such modules like FSUIPC. Things like this just aren't going to work on consoles.

 

And when you look at the graphical abilities of consoles, sure they look great, but how much do they really show? Flight simmers expect a higher level of detail and draw distance than I think any console could manage to display.[/quote']

 

Current consoles use USB ports to connect peripherals, so attaching multiple yokes, rudder peddles and the like wouldn't be a problem, at least technically. Whether Sony and Microsoft would enable this to happen is another matter. There are a number of peripherals for consoles already. The multiple monitor part is the only real technical limitation. However, with a console attached to a big screen TV, I'm not sure many would care too much. Not to mention there are other possible solutions to this. Do a search on Microsoft's IllumiRoom R&D project as one example.

 

As for graphics, current consoles should be able to match FSX level graphics. The new generation coming out now should be able to do better. Something to keep in mind with consoles is that they use a different system architecture than desktop PCs. So while individual parts, like the CPU and GPU, may be lower spec, they are much more tightly integrated. And the standard design makes it possible makes it possible for developers to go much further with code optimization.

 

As with developing a new PC based sim, the primary limitation is the demand for, and resources required, to develop a new enthusiast level sim.

[laserit 69]

The future of flight simulation will look like this

 

 

 

[pegger74 18]

And the standard design makes it possible makes it possible for developers to go much further with code optimization.

 

No, it gives developers a flat baseline to work with, which is generally a good thing for developers however limiting the standard design may be. No need to worry about what components and drivers might be in use as opposed to PC's which are so highly customizable.

Current consoles use USB ports to connect peripherals

What if USB is not the defacto connection method? many proprietary connection types (like apples usb plugtype) must be licenced to the developers so that they can use them in their addon peripherals.

[tttocs 298]

The multiple monitor part is the only real technical limitation. However, with a console attached to a big screen TV, I'm not sure many would care too much.

 

Today's standard "big screen TV" is still just a 1920x1080 device. That's middle-of-the-road single monitor resolution by today's PC gaming standards. And for simming, multiple monitors are often used to display other features so as not to block the main view. That part has nothing to do with size or resolution.

 

I'm sure there'll be flying games for the new console, and I'm sure some of them will look and play very nicely, but I can't imagine we'll see much for the simulation audience.

 

Scott

[goates 315]

 

No' date=' it gives developers a flat baseline to work with, which is generally a good thing for developers however limiting the standard design may be. No need to worry about what components and drivers might be in use as opposed to PC's which are so highly customizable.

 

What if USB is not the defacto connection method? many proprietary connection types (like apples usb plugtype) must be licenced to the developers so that they can use them in their addon peripherals.[/quote']

 

Yes, consoles give a baseline system to work on. However, it very much does allow them to optimize their code far more than on a PC, primarily because there are far too many PC combinations to account for. Recent Xbox 360 and PS3 games look much better than the ones first released years ago because the developers figured out how to make better use of the hardware. In other words they were able to tweak and optimize the code far better.

 

As for USB, the Xbox 360, PS 3 and 4 all support USB. Not sure about the Xbox, but the PS 3 supports standard USB HID peripherals just fine. Don't see why they would go out of their way to change it. Maybe the move to wireless will affect this in the long run, but neither manufacturer seems to have gone out of their way to exclude peripherals so far. There just needs to be enough demand for a company to put in the investment.

[mr340 56]

Any flight sim based games for consoles are usually jet fighter games. I would be completely floored if any game developers made a hardcore sim geared to aviation buffs. Flight simmers are a different breed of gamer...well their attitude anyways when it comes to simming. They are willing to spend hours in the cockpit watching guages adn readouts, and doing all the other things most gamers would consider "boring". The average console gamer is seeking "instant gratification", by means of flashy graphics, in depth stories, and mass mayhem. Hours of cruise flight at FL300 isn't going to attract many.

 

The other constraint is the many peripherals that simmers like to use. Multiple display screens, yokes, TQ's, rudder peddles, guage displays, home built controls, etc. How do you plug all these in, and how do developers afford the cost to get a licence to use the source code to allow interaction of their peripherals? Many peripherals rely on the open source nature of FSX to work with such modules like FSUIPC. Things like this just aren't going to work on consoles.

 

And when you look at the graphical abilities of consoles, sure they look great, but how much do they really show? Flight simmers expect a higher level of detail and draw distance than I think any console could manage to display.

 

That is what i said that if they every create any flight sim for PS4 it will be completely different . With out no yoke or any stuff like that . To me it will be something like X plane .

[mr340 56]

You will soon ... however be aware that GDDR5 is still too slow and doesn't make for good CPU operations (very high latency) ... it's great for graphics operations and parallelism, but computation work will suffer with GDDR5. But console gaming has never been about computational requirements like you would see in a flight simulation ... hence their focus on the GDDR5 and graphics -- 3D twitch games and the like.

 

Also the PS4 is 1.8 TFLOPS, current nVidia GTX 680 4GB is 3.1 TFLOPS -- so the PS4 is already way behind what can be done on a PC today.

 

But inevitable problem console platforms will have is POWER! To crank out calculations and manipulate polygons and their textures takes power -- I've seen many desktop computers consuming (under full loads) over 1000 watts of power ... a console simply doesn't have the ability to operate at those levels ... not unless it physically gets MUCH larger.

 

I have a PS3 (came with my TV bundle), but I don't use it for gaming ... I use it for Netflix and BluRays and to this date I've not encountered a BluRay player than is as good as the PS3.

 

But agree with other comments, as far as the "casual" simmer, there aren't that many ... MS Flight's failure was a clear indication of that.

 

I think ps3 has 514 mb of graphic memory if am not mistaken . An the ps4 will have much larger than that. I also used my ps3 for netflix , an when i do play games like call of duty sometime the ps3 sounds like it is taken a mayor beaten ,because the fan sounds like a computer cooling fan . Sometime i even look at my computer to see if it is on or off . So i can imagin the ps4 what kind of cooling system it will have. Right now we are talking of what the ps4 will have , but who knows it may have more spec's by the end of this year. I haven't even seen how the console will look like . But i do have to say it will be pretty cheap than when the ps3 came out. As read before they think the cost will be 390 to 480 something around those prices. One thing for sure why i stop playing ps3 games it is because they put to much barrier in the games , for example if am flying over a city you will come across this invisible wall that you can't go more further than that. In flight sim we can't have that.