Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest

I thought I was in it for the pretty graphics...

Recommended Posts

Guest

I discovered something funny last week. I always thought I was the kind of 'simmer' that was focused on good graphics and nice scenery. I wanted things to look great and systems were of less importance.

 

Lately I have been flying the PMDG 737NGX with FS2Crew a lot, with the graphical settings pretty low. The last few weeks however I was looking at scenery some more and downloaded various photoreal addons, compared Orbx with those addons and default scenery and even gave Aerofly FS a try (because of the nice graphics).

 

While flying around in a GA (and not using all the systems but simply using Ctrl-E to get up in the air quickly) and (sometimes) enjoying the scenery, I noticed I was missing something... Even though things looked good (every now and then...) I was bored to death pretty quickly... I was wondering what it was. What did I miss? Why didn't the scenery satisfy me?

 

And after a while I got it: what I missed was 'depth in the sim'. I was missing fooling around with systems, knobs, switches, starting up from cold and dark (no matter how simple in a GA), using NAV, VOR, etc. etc. etc. Just flying around aimelessly, 'enjoying' the scenery, is utterly boring! And so I found out I DO appreciate 'deep systems', simuation of this and that, more then I do lovely scenery, and that I am not only in it for the pretty graphics. Pretty graphics are nice and I want them but they are clearly secondary to depth in a sim. (Hence Aerofly FS was removed from my HD in no time: it can't get more boring then with that game...)

 

This doesn't mean I immediately bought Topcat :rolleyes: , but it was odd to discover that over time my focus has apparently shifted into another direction without me really knowing it... ^_^

 

Anyone else who has had a similar experience? Maybe in the opposite direction? ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I'm in the same boat with you. Scenery is nice and I want it just nice enough to be believable, but what I really want is an aircraft that has reasonably good systems modeling and a realistic flight model. My computer is getting quite old and I cannot turn all the graphics sliders to maximum, but as long as the scenery is close enough to fool my aging eyes, I'm happy. The scenery aspect I am more focused on these days are the airports. Many of those that I frequent have either been replaced with add-on packages or I've upgraded them using Airport Design Editor X. Outside of the airports... well, close enough is good enough for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I discovered something funny last week. I always thought I was the kind of 'simmer' that was focused on good graphics and nice scenery. I wanted things to look great and systems were of less importance.

 

Lately I have been flying the PMDG 737NGX with FS2Crew a lot, with the graphical settings pretty low. The last few weeks however I was looking at scenery some more and downloaded various photoreal addons, compared Orbx with those addons and default scenery and even gave Aerofly FS a try (because of the nice graphics).

 

While flying around in a GA (and not using all the systems but simply using Ctrl-E to get up in the air quickly) and (sometimes) enjoying the scenery, I noticed I was missing something... Even though things looked good (every now and then...) I was bored to death pretty quickly... I was wondering what it was. What did I miss? Why didn't the scenery satisfy me?

 

And after a while I got it: what I missed was 'depth in the sim'. I was missing fooling around with systems, knobs, switches, starting up from cold and dark (no matter how simple in a GA), using NAV, VOR, etc. etc. etc. Just flying around aimelessly, 'enjoying' the scenery, is utterly boring! And so I found out I DO appreciate 'deep systems', simuation of this and that, more then I do lovely scenery, and that I am not only in it for the pretty graphics. Pretty graphics are nice and I want them but they are clearly secondary to depth in a sim. (Hence Aerofly FS was removed from my HD in no time: it can't get more boring then with that game...)

 

This doesn't mean I immediately bought Topcat :rolleyes: , but it was odd to discover that over time my focus has apparently shifted into another direction without me really knowing it... ^_^

 

Anyone else who has had a similar experience? Maybe in the opposite direction? ^_^

 

Yes back in 2000 after a certain 767 :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the same realization recently too, partly because I got tired of tweaks and this and that trying to get the sim to look best, so I turned down by sliders, turn off ORBX and started going into complex airliner. I would have to say, it is a very satisfying experience. So much so that I now contemplating getting X-Plane 10 64 bit and the T777 Worldliner with it. The only scenery I care for these days is airport scenery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the same experience too, well, before orbx's PNW I was randomly flying tubeliners and GA in europe, not really too into the stuff (i guess i was too young to really learn Leonardo Maddog back then :P ) then with PNW i started to really fly GA and enjoying the scenery, now after NGX was released i've found myself lean more towards tubeliners fulltime, with 1-2 GA flights in the mix. But i don't have my FTX stuff installed on my FSX right now, i want it to be just for tubeliners and for that UTX + GEX and airport addons do just fine!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the same realization recently too, partly because I got tired of tweaks and this and that trying to get the sim to look best, so I turned down by sliders, turn off ORBX and started going into complex airliner. I would have to say, it is a very satisfying experience. So much so that I now contemplating getting X-Plane 10 64 bit and the T777 Worldliner with it. The only scenery I care for these days is airport scenery.

try it and you will really like the feeling of flying a 64bit 777 in a 64bit flight sim :drinks: a little warning before you buy: after seeing xplane10 with HDR settings at night and day, you will not be able to fly fsx again :lol: I even got depressed for spending $thousands$ on fs9/fsx/p3d without trying xp10 first. :good:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

try it and you will really like the feeling of flying a 64bit 777 in a 64bit flight sim :drinks: a little warning before you buy: after seeing xplane10 with HDR settings at night and day, you will not be able to fly fsx again :lol: I even got depressed for spending $thousands$ on fs9/fsx/p3d without trying xp10 first. :good:

 

I've been a pilot, and systems guy for a good part of my life. And of course the real life scenery was an excellent reason for doing so. My plan is a CPU upgrade to enjoy the "best" scenery possible for flight simming. That plan would surely include X-Plane.......................but it would take a whole lot of extra 3rd party effort to create new planes & scenery for X-Plane, before I'd ever think of giving FSX up. Perhaps in another five years or so???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being engaged with a flight is key. Whether it be through keeping track of VC buttons/gauges or trying to spot that cabin near the river fork so you don't enter the wrong valley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being engaged with a flight is key. Whether it be through keeping track of VC buttons/gauges or trying to spot that cabin near the river fork so you don't enter the wrong valley.

 

I agree. I fly FSX for the pretty graphics and in depth GA (such as Carenado and RealAir aircraft). I never get bored with it, perhaps because I fly with Tileproxy, generated photoreal scenery and see scenery comparable to what I see when flying in real life. I even fly the same routes repeatedly (such as Napa to Reno) and discover something new each time I fly them. I haven't touched the big jets in a long time--too much to do, not enough time to enjoy the sights. It's funny, when I first took flying lessons, my CFI (who knew of my my MSFS background being an MSFS fan himself) had to coach me on looking outside more, and worrying about the instruments less. Once I did I was much better at handling the aircraft and learned to have a much lighter touch on the control stick.

 

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photoreal scenery itself sticks me low and slow, the flying at 30,000 following ATC and programming FMC takes on desk job and do not fly tube-liners for that reason. FSX with water and photo-real is awesome always find something new with photo-real flying. Lately, just stick with one plane to make things simple and nothing complicated beyond using the rudder pedals, yoke, throttle, trim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being engaged with a flight is key. Whether it be through keeping track of VC buttons/gauges or trying to spot that cabin near the river fork so you don't enter the wrong valley.

 

True, and it gets even more engaging when you DO enter that wrong valley. Nail%20Biting.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, I disabled Orbx scenery (After spending hundreds of dollars, sigh) and tweaked my game/computer to be able to run ultimate terrain USA, FSgenesis mesh, Ground Environment, and Active Sky 2012 with the PMDG NGX. So far I'm having a blast flying real multiple leg routes from Southwest to various addon scenery airports I have. LAX, PHX, LAS, SAN, SFO, SJC, DEN, MDW, BUF, etc. The graphics are nice but obvious could be better in the Orbx areas but I too am enjoying the realism more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting post. I guess we all enjoy our flight sims for various reasons but it shows that putting the sliders all the way to the right ( or trying to ) is not the be all end all of making a quality sim. Simply flying from A to B can be limiting in what you get out of it as well, though sometimes it can be satisfying enough now and again & when time is a factor, but theres more life in trying to work out an aircrafts systems and doing the ATC stuff along with navigation etc. It can be more rewarding too.

Personally, i like it to look reasonable & also tinker with some systems stuff ( not upto NGX level though ), so half and half for me,

All down to the individual though of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. I was just thinking about this, actually. I suspect its because sim flying is actually kind of boring if you are just puttering along in the sky......

 

Sooner, rather than later, you need something to keep your enthusiasm up, and some do that, I think, by throwing themselves into the innards of the aircraft and then digging deeper and deeper and deeper, finding variety in endless detail. If that's not enough, then there is the option of buying whole fleets of aircraft to dig into, switching from aircraft to aircraft (or combos of aircraft and scenery) constantly on the lookout out for something new to maintain interest.

 

Sometimes that interest is in competition; Aerial combat and testing your mettle against the AI and other players in varying scenarios, with the rush of climbing leader boards and making a name for yourself to drive you on. But even then, unless new challenges, planes, scenerys and etc arrive, then just like the technical simmer, familiarity can breed contempt, and boredom will rear its head..........

 

All caused by the basic fact that just flying around aimlessly up there is inherently........ boring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. I was just thinking about this, actually. I suspect its because sim flying is actually kind of boring if you are just puttering along in the sky......

 

Sooner, rather than later, you need something to keep your enthusiasm up, and some do that, I think, by throwing themselves into the innards of the aircraft and then digging deeper and deeper and deeper, finding variety in endless detail. If that's not enough, then there is the option of buying whole fleets of aircraft to dig into, switching from aircraft to aircraft (or combos of aircraft and scenery) constantly on the lookout out for something new to maintain interest.

 

Sometimes that interest is in competition; Aerial combat and testing your mettle against the AI and other players in varying scenarios, with the rush of climbing leader boards and making a name for yourself to drive you on. But even then, unless new challenges, planes, scenerys and etc arrive, then just like the technical simmer, familiarity can breed contempt, and boredom will rear its head..........

 

All caused by the basic fact that just flying around aimlessly up there is inherently........ boring.

 

Whatever aircraft I fly, from ultralights on the low end to the GA turboprops on the high end, I try to fly with a destination in mind. Sometimes if my heart isn't in a full flight, I'll divert to an airport along the way. I always try to complete my flights--I don't like to just exit the sim after flying around for a bit, although sometimes other things require me to do that. When I don't have Tileproxy running and I'm flying with the default textures, I tend to do more touch 'n gos and flying around airports, practicing my landings. In FS9 I tend to fly airliners into areas with heavy traffic. I have FS9 loaded to the max with WOAI traffic, especially in the States. There is nothing more exciting than flying in the flight levels and watching the contrail of a jet crossing below at a 90 degree angle to my flight path. I enjoy that because I've seen it so many times as a passenger flying across country like my flights a few weeks ago to and from Orlando.

 

This is such a rich hobby--rich in possibilities. There's something there for everyone to enjoy and the efforts of add-on developers have made it even more special. I take breaks from it from time to time, but I always come back and find enjoyment in it. I've been at this hobby one year shy of thirty years now and it's been the one hobby that has stayed with me throughout adulthood.

 

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been at this hobby one year shy of thirty years now and it's been the one hobby that has stayed with me throughout adulthood.

 

Funny you should say that. I was thinking the same thing. I started on the subLogic version on a Commodore 64 and have been at it ever since, although I did lay off it for a bit in the '90's due to college and later work, but have been pretty steady since I joined Avsim in 2003. I can say that there aren't a lot of hobbies besides golf that I have participated in as regularly as simming and golfing. More so simming since I dont golf every day, but even days I dont fly the sim, I still read the Avsim forums. Come to think about it, since 2003 I can't even remember a day, including ones where I have been sick with a flu or something, that I didn't at least read the forums if I didn't fly. There's not much more I can say about a hobby that has that kind of staying power and never seems to grow old. I think you could almost consider it a life style when your that active in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta agree with Jereon, I have several different scenery add-ons, but If I had a choice of taking a default 747 into ORBX territory ending, with a marvelous landing at Ketchikan, or taking the Coolsky DC-9 through default Alaska and fully going from Cold and Dark and mastering radio navigation all flight, I'd easily take the DC-9 any day. It alone has taught me almost as many things as the rest of my hangar combined, and I love the challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

This is a really good thread. Nothing wrong with flying around aimlessly, to each his or her own. The fact FSX is still going strong this long even after the official "end-of-line" goes to show just how much depth the product has and how everyone changes with it.

 

I'm looking forward to the future and enjoying the moment (be it FSX, P3D, XP10).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's all cool everybody, but for me, I find myself stressed out by the myriad of details involved in the millions of different procedures and systems for thousands of different aircraft. I guess I'm the biggest fan of ctrl+e! Daily life is stressful enough, so I sim fly to relax, and nothing relaxes me more than watching a beautiful aircraft flying through the bright blue sky with fluffy white cottonball clouds scattered here and there... whether in real life or on a computer. I would say that 99% of my sim flights are flown in spot view outside the aircraft looking at the aircraft as it climbs and decends, banks around, flaps deploying, ailerons twisting, rudders, elevators I can watch it all day and never get bored! I especially love a well-modeled thrust reverser on the heavies! GA singles, light twins, turboprops are my favorites. Mostly from the 60's and 70's era. Aerobatics from tower view with a white smoke trail turns me on also. Oh sure, now and then I'll cold and dark the old Cessna 152 and try to keep current by shooting touch and goes at Fleming Field (KSGS) as precisely as I remember doing them them in real life (by the way, the Carenado Cessna 152 and CR-1 Aeronca Champ are the only 2 payware aircraft I own after more than a decade of flying the computer) but the spot view of an aircraft in flight is my main attraction to flight sim. I can get lost in it until all the day's worries have faded away... I go into a kind of a trance watching them fly around. Scenery isn't that important to me either, as I'm watching the actual aircraft flying throughout most of the flight. I fly IFR (I Follow Roads) a lot, mostly in Minnesota/Western Wisconsin. I enjoy a nice little well modeled mom and pop country airport with lots of eye candy whenever I feel like looking at scenery, or when I'm flying a helicopter, but the big airports don't turn me on... too much hustle and bustle. They cause stress. And I'm a guy who likes to keep his hangar full. I would guess there's well over 10,000 aircraft liveries in my menu, maybe 20,000, and I like to keep them all in FSX, not in an outside file to be moved in and out of the sim. This doesn't hurt my framerates. I have a machine that is powerful enough to handle the sim with all settings maxed out and all liveries in 32 bit, but it does take several minutes for the sim to startup with all those aircraft in the menu... time spent dreaming about watching aircraft flying! Whatever works!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

come to think of it you can get a pretty realistic radio navigation scenario in the default 172 with all the stuff to the right and my traffic 2013 at 30 percent with rex at real word weather 100 mile vis in overcast conditions with most photo or land class scenery

I love fooling with knobs and buttons but I also appreciate a good view Otherways I would just fly by night......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else who has had a similar experience? Maybe in the opposite direction?

 

I think this is why FSX has indeed 'had the magic' it takes to do what it's done: 7 y/o platform, yet still, lots of followers! Now, if only a new set of developers would FOLLOW THE BASIC MODEL of FSX, yet modernize the code so that it is congruent w/ the direction that hardware development has gone: i.e., multicore, parallelism, modern graphical APIs, etc. That, IMO, would spawn a whole new future for the hobby, and perhaps attract even more users were the product developed really well w/ a modern interface. XPlane 64-bit has some of this in terms of scalability from what we hear, but maybe is missing some of the magic, though I'm not sure as I haven't used it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, the thing that I want doesn't seem to exist. Games that have great graphics don't often have the depth to keep you occupied when the mood strikes you for detail, and sims that have details coming out of their noses seem to have graphics from the stone age. Nothing seems to combine to two, and the one project that hinted at the potential for both was never given a chance.

 

I note that the War Thunder community is edging steadily towards detail (Much talk on the forums about full realism mode being where the pros go to kick real hiney) and people who were pretty much raised with joypads are all abuzz about where to get good Joysticks, TrackIR and the sim paraphernalia that is common here; yet the two communities are worlds apart otherwise.

 

The type of sims popular here are irrelevant to the majority there (boring generally, and look dated) and the people here tend to dismiss those types of programs as games irrelevant to simming.

 

Looking back, I seem to remember the gaming/simming communities being much more tightly bound, and the hobby moving forwards together. Now, we seem increasingly far apart, which is a shame for some like me at least, since I feel the two sides have a lot they could share.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

try it and you will really like the feeling of flying a 64bit 777 in a 64bit flight sim :drinks: a little warning before you buy: after seeing xplane10 with HDR settings at night and day, you will not be able to fly fsx again :lol: I even got depressed for spending $thousands$ on fs9/fsx/p3d without trying xp10 first. :good:

I have hundreds of $ invested in FSX too, but I now stop buying any more FSX add-ons, as I hate throwing more good money after bad. P3D has no future for entertainment market, if there will be a platform that will get my money, it would be XP-10. That or I will enjoy the current run of the limping FSX until it no longer works with future OS, HW platforms, and then quit Flight Sim altogether!

 

So yes, more on the a/c and less on scenery! To preserve your sanity ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have hundreds of $ invested in FSX too, but I now stop buying any more FSX add-ons, as I hate throwing more good money after bad. P3D has no future for entertainment market, if there will be a platform that will get my money, it would be XP-10. That or I will enjoy the current run of the limping FSX until it no longer works with future OS, HW platforms, and then quit Flight Sim altogether!

 

So yes, more on the a/c and less on scenery! To preserve your sanity ;)

 

I'm going to start buying MORE FSX addons......

 

Even bought a brand new copy of FSX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thread. Myself, i really have no interest in tubeliners, tried them many times, but the whole concept of that kind of flight did nothing for me. I like having a purpose for the flight and as such imagine a scenario around the flight, much like a VA charter. I LOVE scenery, especially photoreal with autogen and the details surrounding that including a dynamic world, moving everything..Whenever I take a real flight i take note off all i see to try and duplicate it in the sim, the weather, the birds, the traffic (ground and sky), the life at the airport and the FBO. takeoff and landing are my fav parts or a flight, just as in real life..

 

being a scenery developer and a modeler and being able to change/enhance/alter any visual aspect of the sim opens so many doors for me with FS. I have done WWII scenery when in the mood to fly vintage fighters, done Vietnam FOB jungle scenery when i felt like flying military Huey flights, done photoreal Island scenery when I wanted to tool around paradise in a sailboat, done large photoreal game parks in Africa with custom lodges and animated wildlife to fly hunting parties and tourists in, even done large photoreal areas of Afghanistan to do missions in a blackhawk or Kiowa.. To me, FSX is a world simulator, not just a flight simulator. I LOVED the first person walk around view Flight had and wish it could be implemented in FSX (tried BOB, not the same).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...