DTG: What would you like to see in a new Flight Simulator?

[HiFlyer 9,360]

I don't think DTG discourages third parties. I just think they tend to buy stuff from third parties, or maybe, like they are apparently doing with Orbx, strike some sort of deal with them. It might not look quite like what happens now, but I'm not sure some of the doom and gloom I've seen has all that much to warrant it. Again, thinking that a future ecosystem must mimic the current one seems both counterintuitive and counterproductive given that in the real world, DTG needs to make some money out of this.

 

Else, why do it at all?

[gizmosellsbunnys 106]

Dovetail known to sell lots of DLC with train simulator and they have needle to thread here for them to strike the right balance will be difficult to achieve for company that size. They will need players like Orbx, A2A, Carenado to help with building a sim engine, and open SDK is essitenal and they make it too closed it will fail. Dovetail will need to provide itself a revenue stream with this endeavor ideas like subscription model will fail as will being only provider aircraft and scenery. Dovetail new player in the market and Xplane and P3D know the limitations of what they can do with flight sims. It's like building transcontinental railroad for the first time mistakes are gonna be made along development and contingency plans are needed. The flight sim market is risky venture for a company this size.

[propsfan 52]

So lets assume for a moment that with the DLC model so obviously making a lot of money for a lot of companies, that it will apply to the new Flight based sim from DTG. The question then becomes how it would/will apply.

 

If Flight had had all regions of the world available separately for sale when it launched, would it have succeeded? I think probably yes. It stands to reason then that this would be the most likely scenario for the new sim. Sell the regions as DLC, you buy the core sim plus a region or multiple regions with the rest of the world you haven't bought being water. I think this would work for them. I only fly in Europe so I would only need Europe, I'd be perfectly happy with that.

 

If it takes off then third party devs would have no choice but to accept the restrictive terms on offer to develop for the new sim unless they want to sell only to an ever diminishing market for FSX. Of course P3d is the elephant in that room. If/when they go 64bit and if DTG go with the DLC model then devs have an avenue and each sim will go it's own way, one marketed to us and the pros that use LM's sim as a platform for whatever it is they use it for and the other to the masses through steam. I think all of the simmers on here could live with that prospect.

[joandreas 3]

So lets assume for a moment that with the DLC model so obviously making a lot of money for a lot of companies, that it will apply to the new Flight based sim from DTG. The question then becomes how it would/will apply.

 

If Flight had had all regions of the world available separately for sale when it launched, would it have succeeded? I think probably yes. It stands to reason then that this would be the most likely scenario for the new sim. Sell the regions as DLC, you buy the core sim plus a region or multiple regions with the rest of the world you haven't bought being water. I think this would work for them. I only fly in Europe so I would only need Europe, I'd be perfectly happy with that.

 

If it takes off then third party devs would have no choice but to accept the restrictive terms on offer to develop for the new sim unless they want to sell only to an ever diminishing market for FSX. Of course P3d is the elephant in that room. If/when they go 64bit and if DTG go with the DLC model then devs have an avenue and each sim will go it's own way, one marketed to us and the pros that use LM's sim as a platform for whatever it is they use it for and the other to the masses through steam. I think all of the simmers on here could live with that prospect.

All regions would not help much if planes for sale is made arcade(simple start, no systems to control)

[propsfan 52]

All regions would not help much if planes for sale is made arcade(simple start, no systems to control)

 

What leads you to believe they would be?

[dave2013 1,130]

If indeed DTG does develop a new flight simulator, it doesn't necessarily have to be a complete departure from the FSX overall model.  FSX is actually an extraordinarily good platform if you stop to think about it. It includes a base round earth model with terrain mesh, landclass, vector-type scenery, and a scenery region classification which provides some additional variation, ~25,000 airports, 3-d vegetation and buildings, ai aircraft traffic, air traffic control, ground vehicle traffic, weather, lots of default aircraft, decent flight dynamics, etc.  Pretty darn good for under a hundred dollars.

 

DTG could simply take the FSX model and make it a 64-bit program, rewrite the graphics engine, fix the bugs, and add features that so many of us have asked for over the years. They could offer the base simulator for a reasonable price and then make certain features, like ATC(much improved of course), downloadable content that one has to pay extra for.

 

Perhaps Microsoft Flight had a better model, but I never bought Flight so I don't know anything about it.

 

The point is that a lot of work has already been done over the past 30 years, so there's no need to reinvent the wheel.  Take what works and improve it and build upon it.  This seems to me a better strategy than spending immense amounts of time and money trying to design a brand new flight simulator from scratch.

 

Dave

[KingGhidorah 209]

I honestly think that if there is a platform to be built upon, the model should be DCS, not FSX. As a long time FSX person, it is absolutely extraordinary what they've created over in that one.

[mgh 89]

I honestly think that if there is a platform to be built upon, the model should be DCS, not FSX. As a long time FSX person, it is absolutely extraordinary what they've created over in that one.

 

But DTG has been  perfectly consistent about what' it's planning:

 

 We also recently signed a global licensing deal with Microsoft to exclusively develop and publish all-new flight products based on Microsoft's genre defining flight technology - See more at: http://www.dovetailgames.com/vacancies/2014/sep/15/lead-artist#sthash.PIydTMVf.dpuf

[KingGhidorah 209]

Well, yes, Gerry, but my comment was made in a more general sense about the kinds of things that I would like to see in a future flight simulation.

[HighTowers 1,434]

Well a whole lot is covered. no need to relist. But I will emphasize the simulator aspect being a simulator and not more leaning to game like.

 

I dont understand why some are asking for 3PDs to be excluded. Its what makes things competitive and brings variety. It also gives them jobs that theyve had for years.  Getting DTG to do all these things is insurmountable and would take years. This needs the work of an entire community, of user AND 3PD feedback and implementing and fixing what didnt work or worked poorly before like ATC, AI and core weather.  Work on a very solid core engine , with the right expansions so we tailor our sims to who we are as we fly.  I like more of the hardcore aspect of it, but someone else might like it to be more of a simplistic variety. I just hope this is not severely DLC driven. MS had this issue with some 3pds where they wanted to take a whole lot of profit from addons it didnt make it worth it. If this is the way it will go, then P3D will continue to improve and lead.

 

Not one single FSX addon should be compatible otherwise you are bringing in the old. This should be brand new taking advantage of all the latest hardware and graphics engines.

 

DTG you asked, now you are getting flooded with responses. Question is how much do you listen to. Wish you all the best and if it sticks to being a relatively realistic sim as opposed to a game, then I will be a potential buyer.

[rhumbaflappy 113]

What do we want? A robust simulation. An open SDK (most would pay a bit more for it). And using the technology developed for Flight would most probably help. An FSX-like whole world with a few detailed airports thrown in for a start. Plenty of room for addon content, both from Dovetail and from 3rd parties. Multi-player.

 

FSX plus. That's what simmers want. FSX with issues resolved. Ask what's wrong with FSX, and try to address that, and you'd have a great sim.

 

And no, we don't need backward compatibility; just the means to go forward.

 

Dick

[fullmetal02 23]

What's needed is an open platform for all kinds of simming. Whether it's car, train, boat, airplane or bike.

 

The only true method would be to have a base platform where developers from console, steam and pc could use as their base world. Currently pc developers use the Unreal, Unity, Cry (world) engines and then sell the licenses to content creators.

 

So I'm talking two things. The first an engine (ESP) that will power the sim platform, and then secondly the chassis (FSX) and leather seats(pmdg, carenado,flightbeam) to make it work. Hopefully you get my rough analogies...

 

This would power simming for the next 20 years. And maybe my idea is too big, but for simming to survive someone has to make a rather hefty investment now. Otherwise we will be flying a 64 bit fsx, wondering why no one has developed a new sim 10 years down the line.

 

So DTG could profit from the bigger gaming/sim markets to keep afloat, while us niche flight sim users continue to push for newer tech. Because honestly if flight sim were a viable market, there would be multiple offerings from more developers.

[roroma 2]

 

 

What's needed is an open platform for all kinds of simming. Whether it's car, train, boat, airplane or bike.

 

I have to disagree with that. First off, that would be a HUGE simulation, and most people wouldn't use half the features if all they care about is one type of simulation (for example, I couldn't care less about train simulator, car simulator, whatever. I love flying. I do it in real life but I can't fly airliners without being an airline pilot, so simulation allows me to focus on ONE area. At the same time, there is enough flexibility that I can do GA flying too). Second, there'd be a wide breadth of things you could do in that simulation but with practically no depth. The reason that simulators exist is so that you can focus on one thing and do it as realistically as possible. That's why there's more than one type of simulator. Third - why would we need a "world simulator"? We live in the real world, so why simulate everything? Focusing on one thing allows detail, not just an eye-candy game (which a world sim, in my opinion, would ultimately turn into). Fourth - performance. 

 

That's just my opinion and hope that DTG does not go down the "world simulator" route. I mean why have a "fishing simulator" (which DTG has made) and flight sim on the same platform?

[fullmetal02 23]

Well P3D is used as an aviation simulator and can be used for marine purposes as well. I'm a pilot as well, and simulators can be used for a number of purposes, including IFR, procedural, military and recreation, as we have seen by a number of releases including Flight. Theres room for a lot of uses in a world sim. The data and the technology may be at a point where this could be possible.

 

Scalability could be a key feature of a platform. We need something that will move us to the next 15 years. Otherwise we will be stuck with xplane and a 64 bit fsx running code that will give us less performance with each hardware upgrade.

[gizmosellsbunnys 106]

I have to disagree with that. First off, that would be a HUGE simulation, and most people wouldn't use half the features if all they care about is one type of simulation (for example, I couldn't care less about train simulator, car simulator, whatever. I love flying. I do it in real life but I can't fly airliners without being an airline pilot, so simulation allows me to focus on ONE area. At the same time, there is enough flexibility that I can do GA flying too). Second, there'd be a wide breadth of things you could do in that simulation but with practically no depth. The reason that simulators exist is so that you can focus on one thing and do it as realistically as possible. That's why there's more than one type of simulator. Third - why would we need a "world simulator"? We live in the real world, so why simulate everything? Focusing on one thing allows detail, not just an eye-candy game (which a world sim, in my opinion, would ultimately turn into). Fourth - performance.

 

That's just my opinion and hope that DTG does not go down the "world simulator" route. I mean why have a "fishing simulator" (which DTG has made) and flight sim on the same platform?

Think long term of course makes most sense but short term think getting good base replacement of FSX should be the goal for now. Build the good footings that what the sim does need everything right away, and a flight sim base engine should be goal for now, like nav data setup like Xplane so it easier to update practical items for now. Very likely Microsoft flight engine will be its base.