Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest secks

VCs

Recommended Posts

Guest Zevious Zoquis

lol, yes and away with all those people pestering us with stories about how great 32 bit color is. And what about those frustrating 3D plane models that needlessly waste cpu resources. Bring back the 8bit sprites I say! I never look at the exterior anyway. And who needs detailed terrain mesh? Bring back the big green triangle mountains I say!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no way I'm gonna read all the follow-up posts to this topic, but I agree with everything Andreas said. My situation in a nutshell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Daniel Pimentel

I think a careful balance of both is great. I usually take off using 2D, then as soon as I engage the AP (in airliners) I go VC to have better situational awareness. I use VC for the entire flight after liftoff all the way up to the approach, and will use 2D if I it stutters or if the visibility's so bad I can't rely on what's out the window.I think we have extremists here. For those of you saying VC's suck, get on with the times... It's something that's proving its worth as the technology improves. What we have here is people resisting change. I agree with retaining both for a while longer, but the truth is that as VC's improve the need for a 2D will gradually disappear. People always resist change, and that's fine, what we have now is nice. But really, VC's are the future, look how far we've come from FS2000, where the gauges didn't even move. Notice how MS added VC to many of the default birds... I wouldn't be surprised if we see VERY much improved VC's in FS10, and than a version or 2 later 2D's dropped altogether. Another point that was made was the difficulty in navigating VC's... Well, that could change if programs like FS2Crew reduce your workload by placing a FO to carry out its functions. In my opinion, at some point not too far away we'll be able to have a fully interactive FO (####, FS2Crew gets pretty close for being based on technology that doesn't support it)... Again, I think the fading out of 2D's is a matter of time, and as long as it doesn't happen before VC's have become highly reliable I don't mind. I, for one, can't wait to see what PMDG will do with their 744, if it's half of what they're making it out to be it might show just how good a VC can be.Daniel P.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/ng_driver.jpgMember of SJU Photography. [A HREF=http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=9004]Click Here[/A] to view my aircraft photos at JetPhotos.Net!The official psychotic AA painter. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree about extremist views.However, talking of the future I think the future are cheaper flat screen monitors that will make having 6-8 monitors surrounding the simmer giving the correct depth perception and viewpoint (with 2d displays). Turning physically the head or eyes to see the correct perspective vs. scrolling on a single screen (vc's) is much more realistic.My opinion is vc's are a cheap fix for multi monitors-but are neither elegant or natural. Fly's scrolling cockpit struck me as much the same.I have no problem with anyone prefering one over the other-but let's keep both until the price on hardware drops. I still prefer 2d. No problem with anyone prefering Vc's-why make it all one or the other-especially since Microsoft has not?As for the future-let's looks even farther...http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some very good points have been made about muti-monitor usage. I personally can't agree more that 2D panels play a big role in the home built cockpit arena. For those that have the time and money to build a full scale home cockpit, they would need a 2D option to give them the flexibility to put different panels on different screens. I can deal with that and fully support that reasoning. :-) Now for the user with only one monitor sitting in front of them, I don't see how 2D is preferred... I can understand the point some are saying that their systems can


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

>"My opinion is vc's are a cheap fix for multi monitors">>This is the future. well said Geofa!>The only way I'd have a bunch of monitors is to be close to "death", and unable to leave my room. :( In the meantime, keep up the progress with the VC's!L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Zevious Zoquis

Yeah that's fine. A lot of VCs defualt to having the panel light on even. I'm just saying that I certainly don't find it anything close to a big enough deal that it impacts my desire to use the VC or not...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not resisting change and I am not opposed to VC panels, as long as there's a 2D alternative. Yes, VC panels might be the future, but right now the VC alternative doesn't live up to the standard I would require to use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest secks

LOL!Right on. Until someone starts developing real life aircraft where the panel is completely flat and your head is plastered to it at eye level about a foot away, 2d panels will never be convincing. About all they're good for is monitoring instruments is critical phases of flight if the VC happens to have a poor gauge refresh rate / low FPS. If you can't afford a rig which can run VCs in all their splendor, don't blame VCs, blame your pocketbook!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mirage

Well... I've read all posts and I still prefer 2D panels all the time... to the point that I delete the V/C from an aircraft, not because I hate them (ok, I do not like them :-) )but because my simulator becomes smoother and quicker. To me, V/Cs still cannot reach the quality of a high end 2D panel. They just add months to the designing process of an add on.Andy signature.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>)but because my simulator becomes smoother and quicker. To me,>V/Cs still cannot reach the quality of a high end 2D panel.>They just add months to the designing process of an add on.Well, I had almost identical views on the subject of VC - until 24 hurs ago. I viewed the latests screenshots of the PMDG's upcoming 747 and the first series is devoted to VC only. I am blown away both by quality and by (promised) performance to be identical with 2D panels. If this is all true I might convert (in this one aircraft) to VC-only flying.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I was not a fan of VC's I have recently become a convertafter purchasing my Track IR system.I agree that it is not very realistic when trying to pan with a hatswitch.After becoming used to my TrackIR and some tweaking I have become a convert....at least to those aircraft that have a decent VC...and there are quite a few out there both freeware as well as payware.While previously flying mostly heavies the TrackIR has opened up theworld of small aircraft and VFR flight that was previously not possible.So before condeming VC's I would suggest that you must have the righttools do do the job you expect.If you don't like VC's I would suggest that you simply don't use them.If you have the right tools to do the job and are an avid FS useras I have been since it's inception then you can always find the software as well as hardware to make it work better.You just have to be willing to invest the time and money to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest wildfire563

I hate to add to this flame fest, but, oh well.I've gotta say that I am using a 1.7 GHz Pentium M Dell D800 with 64 MB 4200 Go graphics and 1 G ram, and I have no problem running VC in IFR. Of course, I'm doing it mostly in Pipers and twin turbos, but that's what I fly. I try to only fly craft that have a functional VC. I'm not happy unless it is basically fully functional. I don't fly the big rigs though. I have my framerate locked at 24, and it jumps from 15 to 24 mostly. I have recently started getting a periodic regular drop to 15 or so, so I think there is something I've got to debug in my system. Since I read about that thing with the waits for the graphics card (I can't remember what it's called), my system has gotten much faster.Thomas Perry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we could all sit here and throw neg's at each other. I know i could at jw, and he could do the same at me. Just something we gotta live with.. :)

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...