My point is, that for what they do, sims like ROF, or DCS, already include a bunch of these must-have environmental things that are necessary to keep FSX alive. In other words, you don't need to have a sim that costs an arm and a leg, relatively speaking to have good simulation out of the box, with study-sim type systems detail (DCS), excellent flight physics, great graphics, great sound, pretty much great everything.

 

And I think Ian's point (with which I agree) is that it's still not necessary, nor even desirable, to have a sim which tries to satisfy everyone with everything, everywhere in large part because that's almost impossible.  Better to have one which has a greatly improved base platform and hooks which allow talented 3rd parties easy access. 

 

Why?  Well look at your examples.  Sure, DCS and ROF might have better looking wx than default FSX, but do they support real-time, real-world in the incredibly detailed way that products like ASN do?  And as already noted (and you've acknowledged), the products you've named, while highly detailed in some ways, still aren't world products.  Fleshing out an entire world to high standards, complete with RW wx, traffic, airports (and of course, I mean the ones I want), is tougher than just one limited region with features tailored to a specific use.  ROF and DCS, good as they are, still don't offer the kind of flexibility which would support an entire world with the kind of completeness and specificity most here demand.

 

It's many faults aside, no one yet has done as good a job of supporting a whole world product as FSX has done in large part due to 3rd parties.  I can't help but think that the next great sim will still be best if it's a really solid base platform with a great SDK.

 

Scott

 

Edit:  This is precisely why I remain excited about the possibilities of Outerra.  A solid base for a world product, with an ever-expanding toolkit and a great deal of interest on the part of talented creators.

I'm sorry to say, but FSX is still the best out of box simulator today.

 

EDIT: Together with p3d "expansion" of course.

You mean FSX with hundreds or thousands of dollars of addons is the best sim out there, right?  Vanilla out of the box?  I mean it's default weather engine is so basic that it doesn't even know how to place clouds above ground level correctly!  And after you add in all those dozens of addons, you need a mean machine to run it all at a good performance level.

 

Remember, we are talking a hypothetical, fantasy future flight sim.  My point is that I don't want to have to spend anywhere near all this money that I've spent on FSX 3rd party addons to provide basic things like realistic weather, and realistic and accurate terrain.  I'm not expecting to have the perfect all-in-one world-coverage flightsim for $50, or something hopelessly unrealistic like that!!!!  But I do expect a future base simulation platform to provide basic things like cockpit shake and utilitarian camera switching, decent and believable weather, and a good flight/physics model, and good looking textures out of the box.  Heck, without the 3rd party FSUIPC, it wouldn't even be possible in FSX to set up controls on a plane by plane basis. 

No, I mean FSX/P3D, clean, without any addons. Features wise, it offers more than all other sims combined.

Aerofly FS v2 may be a light at the end of the tunnel... 

 

I like them and like some of the directions they are taking, but I'm not sure about the practicality of world coverage if they stick to photo-scenery.......

It's a mix of good points this thread :-)

 

I agree with KingGhidorah regarding the way he, just like I think, describes what we would like to have in a flightsim, but I also agree with Ian's comments and with "g-precentralis" assessment of FSX / P3D. 

 

For me a flight simulator has to, in the very first place, be as good as possible physical modeling wise. Systems modeling comes next, closely followed by Weather. Then Scenery, ATC, AI, activities, RWW and realistic Time of Day, etc... follow, in no particular order.

 

When I returned to flight simulation, after a 3 year hiatus in which I spent most of the time flying for real, I really wanted to feel the closest possible to "being there". Glider simulation was my first re-install, but honestly, Condor was already old, SilentWings unsupported, so....

 

Soon after MS FLIGHT was released. I should say that only three simulators have so far given me the topmost feel of being there - MS FLIGHT, Riso of Flight and IL2 BOS. DCS follows closely and will probably share it's place with these when EDGE get's released.  

 

Unfortunately, we know the fate of MS FLIGHT, and IL2 BOS is a combat flight simulator, still in pre-release, limited to a "small" area, just like RoF, and DCS.

 

The area "per se" is no big deal for me. DCS does not include RWW, but it has an interesting advanced weather generation model based on Low / High areas and the synoptic weather associated with those ( including frontal weather ). Not bad! I believe DCS may well evolve in the weather area during the next releases, specially after EDGE being the new rendering base.

 

While I agree that MS FSX and LM P3D are, out of the box, probably the best covering of what a flight simmer may ask for ( provided he's not a combat only simmer ) I also have to be honest in that both have very limited flight dynamics modeling, and even weather modeling ( even when using the best add-ons! ). Unless external FDMs are used, I don't think that in this particular area MSFS or P3D can compete with DCS, IL2 BOS or RoF.

 

There is also XP10, and there will probably be XP11. I was very disappointed with X-Plane, and although I have found a way to use it after all ( as a scenery display engine for Aerowinx PSX... ), I honestly don't place big expectations on it's future :-/

 

Then, there are very specific products, way ahead of any of the above mentioned products, with World coverage, super-detailed / unique weather modeling, systems modeling etc... - Aerowinx PSX and probably an about to be released Airbus CBT are in this class.

 

I also see Outerra and feel amazed at it's graphics, but ... it's naked World reminds me of the problem I had with X-Plane, or even worst... Sure it can have an external FM driving it's vehicles, but.... I will wait and see....

 

Aerofly FS v2 is a promising alternative, I believe, but we know very few details about it....

 

So... for the time being, I really enjoy a small flight in IL2 BOS or DCS World, a short / medium or long  haul in one of the 747-400 models of Aerowinx PSX, with XP10 used for taxi, takeoff and landing phases, and RoF, when I have the time to start it ( very few times a month... ).  Whatever will come next, I will consider, but FSX, X-Plane 10 and even P3D are far from being my focus of attention...

I tried DCS (bought the P51) some time ago, but uninstalled it after a while. The overall graphic engine, for my taste, is inferior to FSX, X-Plane or even Condor Soaring. Ok, I have a low end PC, but even at lowest settings, with clear skies, DCS has barely acceptable performance in terms of smoothness and FPS. Also, I don't like the actual visual rendition of the world, I find any other simulator has better visuals for my tastes. These two factors completely destroy the immersion I could otherwise have thanks to the custom-made flight model. Add to this the fact that its world is very limited and that it's basically made to be a military flight sim, and my interest in it quickly vaned.

 

That being said, comparing flight sims with custom made flight models (like DCS, Aerowinx or Condor Soaring) to flight sims with "open" flight models (FSX/P3D, X-Plane) is pretty much like comparing apples to oranges.

Murmur, if you can, give IL2 BOS a try :-)

To clarify my comment, i would very much like the simulator "KingGhidorah" describes, i just don't think it's practical for all the reasons given above.  ASN does weather better than any current simulator out today even newer ones like DCS or RoF.  PMDG and others are able to give us aircraft on a par with those 6DoF ones in DCS.  I really don't think that you would be able to get this out of the box in any simulator consider X-Plane, it comes with 100's of planes, most of which wouldn't give FS2.0 a run for its money.