Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
btacon

I see a Big Problem with FS10(FS2006).......

Recommended Posts

>The bottom line is the Bottom Line!>>ROI is what it is all about! They can't fix everything, or>they wouldn't be able to sell future versions.>>So a little frustration, is a good marketing strategy. It IS>all about marketing. If they just solved the FPS problem>where it didn't dip below 30 REGARDLESS of Panel, weather, AI>AC, etc with A/I and cloud rendering, I would be happier.>>I hope they take FS 2006 to a platform like XBOX II (MS next>version of XBOX). Then ALL that time WAISTED tweaking>performance can be spent flying! Imagine, Flying on a>bigscreen in HD, WOW!> >If you think about it, MS then could really optimize for the>platform instead of dealing with a couple of bizillion>configurations. Flight Simulator DOES not need the overhead>of any OS. Imagine the performance!>>And really, I have ended up spending $400 - $500+ even more>probably upgrading video cards, motherboards, memory, hard>drive etc when the new version of FS comes out. So if MS sold>a console specifically optimized for FS and or other games,>and it was priced around $200, I would buy it.>>Of course it would have to support USB 2.0 and have a Control>SDK, because after all, a Yoke and Pedals are a core component>of flight realism.>>MS, just give me a 10% cut for my idea, thank you! :)>>Barry>the thing is if they optimize it for XBOX 2 it will take as backwards really. Though XBOX 2 specs looks really impressive today (except for CPU) it will look worse than FS 2004 most likely. And again I don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I think his idea is that if Microsoft didn't have to take care of supporting millions of different hardware/software configurations they could spend more time on optimisation so FS could run on lesser hardware and therefore still perform well on XBox.There IS some truth in that but I severely doubt the difference they could make would be large enough to compensate for the amount the XBox specs are lower than those of an average PC.As you say I don't see myself using a game controller to control FS, but for the average punter this may not be such a problem (for him his XBox controller is likely an improvement over the $10 joystick he uses today).And of course Microsoft would no longer have to worry about addons, plugin interfaces for external hardware and software, etc. etc. as those aren't supported on a closed architecture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest byoung

If you read my thread...>Of course it would have to support USB 2.0 and have a Control>SDK, because after all, a Yoke and Pedals are a core component>of flight realism.If it only supports gamepads, then most hard core simmers won't move from FS-2004.If this is going to be a viable solution, MS will have to provide High Def output, and or allow you to connect to your current PC monitor.Even my DreamCast which is 3+ years old, looks pretty good on my big screen. And thats not even High Definition! If you haven't seen a high definition broadcast, it is spectacular.If you eliminate the OS and write the code to optimize the processor, thus reducing layers and overhead, I can't see the PC version even coming close..Not to mention, no CTDs. No overhead of all the utilities and excess baggage that comes with IE and the internet.No, fellow simmers, done correctly, this would be the way to go.Barry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Zevious Zoquis

haha, you should have read the next sentence. :)(not to mention the last sentence I wrote...)The point I'm making (and which Jeroen made above) is that our sense of our own significance in the grand MSFS scheme is a bit exagerated really. The unfortunate truth is that the people actually making the decisions about new versions and release dates and so forth probably don't give a rats behind about forums and "hardcore users". If any of the marketing suits ever actually do venture into these forums and read a few posts they likely spend more time laughing than actually considering any of the suggestions. The development team are a different story, but MS is a huge company and the guys actually coding the sim don't have much say at all about the overall marketing plan. Thats not good or bad, it's just reality. It's the way huge corporations run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are microsoft's fs 'fanbase' here, if they were truly as uncaring of their fanbase as you say, and largely based their decisions on the 'casual' buyer who gets it for little Johnny or flits around in the 172 then puts the box on a shelf, then how come the sim looks or flies any better than fs98? Casual users don't give a hoot do they?Sure the MS shareholders could care less, but there is a passion for this game that both us the fanbase and the fs team share that drives this thing on even in the face of relatively little or no serious sustained competition.And IMHO forum numbers don't mean much - I was a diehard simmer years before I ever uttered a peep, and there's lots more where I came from.regards,Mark


Regards,

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Zevious Zoquis

Sure, but theres also lots of registered forum members who actually aren't really "die-hards". The forum numbers give a reasonable indication of the numbers. I'd imagine the number of people who actually own an add-on for the sim and aren't members of one or more of the FS forums is tiny indeed...Casual users do give a hoot. They want the sim to look good compared to other currently available software, and they want to have a reason to believe the sim is realistic. Thats where we come in. Again, we're talking here about the big marketing decisions, not the actual coding of the sim. The dev team are given a timeline by the marketing suits and they do their best to implement as many new features and improvments (many of them things that we may have suggested) as they can within that time constraint. But they aren't the ones deciding if or when to release a new version...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Zevious Zoquis

Nope, any console version of FS would be hugely stripped down and not nearly the sim it is on the PC. I've owned many console systems over the years and I've always given the "hot flightims" a try and invariably I have been hugely dissappointed. The day when a sim as deep and detailed as MSFS (or any other serious PC sim) is available for a console is a loooooong way off...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok - I admit fs98 was a stretch, and believe me I get it about the marketting etc - heck I'm a tech 'struggling' with sales/marketting daily :), I guess I'm just emphasizing that I don't think we're like completely irrelevant.After allI personally emailed tellfs about fs2002's blasted blue band of a horizon and they fixed it - just because of me!! :+ :+regards,Mark3.2HT/1GIG/X700pro256=> 15fps mostmaxed


Regards,

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>If they just solved the FPS problem>where it didn't dip below 30 REGARDLESS of Panel, weather, AI>AC, etc with A/I and cloud rendering, I would be happier.Impossible and unreasonable.Keep in mind, MS's only obligation in terms of aircraft and program performance is to make the sim work with the default aircraft they include. It's up to third parties to be able to figure out how to make their stuff work, what the minimum PC specs are, etc. I'm quite sure those who are running the PMDG 737 and are experiencing frame rate issues at 1600 x 1200 res and sliders right would find that the default 737 makes sim performance smooth as silk under similar conditions.And there lies the boundary of MS's obligation to the end user. Same with ATC. With the default AI, I can't recall ever having go-arounds stacked on eachother. It wasn't until I started adding PAI packages that I realized the system was "flawed". In essence, it's like pronouncing an economy car engine as "flawed" if you run super high test gasoline, constantly redlining your RPMs, and mysteriously experience performance issues. "Heck, it never did that when I was driving down the highway!"


"No matter how eloquent you are or how solidly and firm you've built your case, you will never win in an argument with an idiot, for he is too stupid to recognize his own defeat." ~Anonymous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it would be possible but why? Seeing the life span of FS you tend to use it for several years it make sense to scale it so when you upgrade you can still get some better visuals. I know it can stress people out that buy very expensive stuff and not being able to max the sim out but you wouldn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong Vernon.... :-roll No one knows the official sales numbers but I know we have an influence on sales and development in this community. The percentage of so called


FS2020 

Alienware Aurora R11 10th Gen Intel Core i7 10700F - Windows 11 Home 32GB Ram
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB DLSS 3 - HP Reverb G2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Zevious Zoquis

I think you are hugely over-estimating the interest level of the average buyer of this product. The notion that the sim can barely be run out of the box is completely wrong. The sim runs just fine ootb and most of the million or more users who buy it don't even realize they can get newer drivers for their videocards, let alone alternate clouds and texture sets. A fair percentage of buyers are folks who just bought a new PC and they get MSFS to "test the horsepower" so to speak. They might load it up a few times to show it to friends and thats about it. We're lucky that the development team are passionate about the sim and are flightsim fanatics like us becuase they could easily "get away" with doing alot less and still sell nearly as many copies...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Dakota

The other thing to realize is that though there is a large amount of hard core simmers and a good market for add-ons, the MAJORITY of people that have bought FS2004, play around with it once in awhile or use it as a refresher for real flying. The fact is they don't care about add-ons, AVSIM or making it "as real as it gets". To them it is just a toy that could be played on console.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...