fsx 2015 what would revolutionize it for you

[Need-To-Know 34]

what would revolutionize it for me;

 

If Dovetail would just make a patch for my plain old FSX.

[TooWings 17]

No, it isn't training, it is entertainment, it isn't even realism unless you compute

exactly how often in this area at this time of day/season I should suffer bird

strike, what kind of bird, how it penetrates cockpit, how it splatters blood, how I

get injured, how I can remain in control, etc.

 

(Sigh). I'm not talking about a complicated Bird Strike Simulator, simply a basic depiction of a bird strike to wind-shields in FSX, albeit with next-gen graphics.  Such a feature would indeed provide both armchair and student pilots with a rudimentary experience of such strikes at a time when Boeing themselves are keen to increase pilot awareness of this everyday hazard.   (See enclosed link to Boeing website).

 

As it stands there is no such bird-strike feature in FSX.despite wind-shield strikes being common worldwide and FSX pilots can fly around the world without encountering a single strike to their wind-shields. "As real as it gets' ??

 

Update. Actually I see that X-Plane started to incorporate this very feature into its

flight-simulator over 7 years..albeit with old -gen graphics.  Well X-Pane always did tend to think outside the box (plus they featured road traffic etc many years before MSFS);  and of course X-Plane is FAA-Certified, so perhaps more in line with real-world flying.

(BTW. I dont currently use X-Plane).

 

X-Plane Bird Strike - circa 2007

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwMCo4WzfFE#t=1m10s

 

By the way I agree with your earlier posts - people walking on the ramp, palm trees

swayed by winds, etc, it is every much a cartoonish effect. Some may like it, even

expect it, I consider it totally superfluous. I appreciate however ripples/waves on

waters - they add to pilot's ability to judge distances as all human-made structures,

road traffic do.

 

So in other words you personally like cartoonish eye candy such as rippled water and

road traffic, but dislike animated people and swaying trees...even though trees (and people) would also allow pilots to judge distance..and indeed wind conditions.

 

Boeing Bird Strike training information for pilots....

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/2011_q3/4/

 

FSX - 2015

Choose your eye candy. (Bears allow the pilot to judge distance between himself and the sprint to the plane ;-)

 

[HawkDsl 50]

adding damage, crash effects, engine fires, etc would be a snap... FPS games do this kind of thing all the time. Resources?  It's not that big a deal to even use that word. Gfx, and modeling have come a loooooooog way sense 2006.

[Matthew Kane 1,343]

Haha this crash modeling convo keeps going in circles........

 

 

 

adding damage, crash effects, engine fires, etc would be a snap... FPS games do this kind of thing all the time. Resources?

 

Also their is a reason why most FPS games don't have the rights to use real cars from manufactures or logo's etc. On the rare occasion you can get licencing to use a vehicle and this is very rare. Far Cry 2 was allowed to use Jeep in that video game but you can't use vehicles without permission.

 

Imagine GTA5 using real cars and logo's and the litigation that would have come out of that one. I even recall New York City Council proposing to sue GTA4 because it was a little too similar to New York City.

 

If a manufacturer is not happy with the way you are using their product in a video game you bet you would end up in court. 

[gizmosellsbunnys 106]

Agree, be legal issues not really feature worth pursuing damage modeling because they are not essential to flying aircraft in normal conditions. It's gonna take years to replace fsx as people's expectations are different in 2015 than in 2005. New approach is needed as the needs of IFR flyer is very different than treetop orbx vfr flyer. Realty is we are looking long wait for fsx replacement and P3d and Xplane will be future go too for a longtime.

[TooWings 17]

And Larry would probably agree that icy runway (sloped runway, grass runways, gravel runways) would be super nice to have. That's far cry however from 'damage modelling'.

 

And yet the very nature of sloped, icy or dirt runways is that they increase the risk of gear damage, tyre bursts and veering into verges. But dont worry, we are quite safe in FSX and can land on such surfaces in all weather conditions..with not a scratch.

 

.

[TooWings 17]

If a manufacturer is not happy with the way you are using their product in a video game you bet you would end up in court.

 

The 'Bird-strike' feature in X-Plane means that aircraft can have their windshields severely damaged by birds as in real life. You'd therefore expect aircraft manufacturers to have been in court by now arguing that such graphic and gory depictions of their damaged aircraft (with cracked and bloodied windshields) should not be featured in X-plane.  But so far..not a whisper.  >

 

http://www.x-plane.com/mobile/challenges/bird-strike/

 

And call the Airbus lawyers! ;-) ..>

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7s62FHwyZ0#t=3m0s

 

.

[simmerhead 885]

For P3D (or FSX when and if it gets up to speed) I'd like to see the following:

• 64 bit.

64-bit is probably the only thing that I'd consider a revolution, but I would also like to see the following:

• 4 x better resolution in the landclass sysstem.
• 4 x more land classes.
• Ability to rotate direction of landclass textures.
• Better landclass graphics.
• Better ATC vectoring for landings.
• Editable navaid, SID/STAR database that can be easily upgraded/edited.
• Automatic upgrade/path install from within the sim.
• Integration of FSUIPC and Traffic Optimizer.
• More realistic general flight model (no more flying on rails). 
• Better water textures.
• Microvegetation as default landclass autogen (grass, rocks, flowers etc.).
• Sloped runways.
• 4 x more default autogen objects.
• Vechicle/Aircraft/Repaint/AI manager and autoinstaller with drag and drop functionality.
• Editable AI route/flightplan database.
• Integrated DLC market/shop.
• Better SDK with idiot proof/user friendly tools.
• Integated Instant Scenery type tool in SDK.
• 4 x more autogen textures and super easy building creator (like the one used to created houses in The Sims).
• EULA that prohibits EULA restrictions for freeware. "By creating freeware with SDK you hereby agree that all freeware shall remain free, editable and redistributable for anyone, by anyone".

[Matthew Kane 1,343]

The 'Bird-strike' feature in X-Plane means that aircraft can have their windshields severely damaged by birds as in real life.

 

they obviously don't have an issue with it (showing a cracked windshield does not structurally change an aircraft). It is easy to show glare, icing or cracks on a windshield as you are just changing an image file....I have said already their is a limit to what you can do with other peoples products in video games, this is why this conversation keeps going in circles.

[TooWings 17]

they obviously don't have an issue with it ..

 

Obviously not. ;-   Nor do they seem to mind their aircraft engines becoming structurally damaged and smoking after a bird-strike.....

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIF1pEm1tpU#t=0m2s

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQrqZrVx6iQ#t=0m1s

 

.I have said already their is a limit to what you can do with other peoples products in video games, this is why this conversation keeps going in circles.

 

Don't you like circles? ;-)

 

.

[Matthew Kane 1,343]

Obviously not. ;-   Nor do they seem to mind their aircraft engines becoming structurally damaged and smoking after a bird-strike.....

 

 

 

The person that added those effects modified FSX at their pleasure and are not trying to sell it .....You seem to be missing out on that point. 

 

It all comes down to the licencing agreements between the Manufacturer of the aircraft when you wish to use a model of that aircraft in your software that you intend to sell.  If you are not selling it then that is a big difference.

 

Just like I could take a plastic model of a Boeing and stick fireworks in it and blow it up in my backyard. That is not a problem.

 

The movie Flight with Denzel Washington is a perfect example of the producers not getting permission to use a real aircraft in the making of that film. Obviously Boeing or Airbus had an issue with showing their products in the film in that manner. So they had to create a generic aircraft for that film as well as a fake airline.

 

See the difference now??? When you are selling something or selling tickets to your movie is when you need permission from a manufacturer to licence their product in your software or movie or anything else that visually represents their product.

 

 

 

Also notice in this page the Boeing Officially LIcensed Product banner...This is because PMDG has a licence agreement with Boeing to use their product in the software they are selling, you bet that had to agree to Boeing's terms and conditions to be able to make that deal:

http://www.pmdgsimulations.com/pages/product/FSX/777LRF.html

[HawkDsl 50]

You'd therefore expect aircraft manufacturers to have been in court by now

 

Yea, that was a bit of a reach.. but when your trying to win an argument, all bets and logic are off. Any manufacture who would waste time taking a little garage team to court for how things are depicted in a sim, would likely end up in jail themselves... for wasting the judge's/court time. FSX right now has damage and random failures already in the sim that would effect all AC, regardless of who made it. "For training purposes and flight simulation in all conditions"..  To my knowledge, no one is marketing a "Poorly built death machine by manufacture X". Failures and damage are conditions for simulation, not a statement on the manufacturing company.

 

Nothing anyone is asking for is a big deal these days... I don't get the worries some are having about "too much features".. must be FSX slider shell shock. 

[TooWings 17]

The person that added those effects modified FSX at their pleasure and are not trying to sell it .....You seem to be missing out on that point.

 

But as I've said before ..X-Plane already comes with bird-strike damage modelling built in (physical and visible damage to wind-shields and engines) yet we dont see court cases involving the aircraft companies suing X-Plane for 'damages' ;-) 

 

Also, your claim that car manufacturers don't allow depictions of their cars being damaged in video games doesnt stand up since there are plenty of games that do, and every 'real-life' make of car is depicted.

 

Or put it another way. If the following video clip was of FSX then we'd see static cartoon-like 'crash' screens instead of life-like damage from hard impacts. >>

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29e7KNUch54#t=0m21s

 

Note the structural damage to the Porche ..including a wheel flying off.

 

Porche etc arent going to go to court over this depiction of damage to their expensive cars. Obviously they are fine with it. 

.

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

Changing the direction of the thread, I think the time for 64-bit has come.  I don't think that it will bring much performance improvement but I do think it will bring other benefits that will, in time, become huge...largely because of the increase in VAS.  VAS is becoming an issue, even for a GA flyer like me.  Scenery developers keep pushing the limits, making their scenery nicer and nicer but they're hampered.  Going to 64-bit will remove the current limit and enable them to do much more, making far more stunning sceneries/graphics. 

 

And that does nothing to speak to the many other potential benefits of going to 64-bit.

[yorgosGK 7]

All I want to see is 64 bit.