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

[arsenal82 120]

NO DLC !!

 

a flightsim without a public SDK will never be a sim !

[tf51d 284]

So for DTG: Off the top of my head:

 

1) Steam in-game store, built into the sim. Unattended installs. Some assurance of basic quality control.

So long as the sim is still open to external 3rd party addon installations

 

2) 64bit, if not now that on future versions.

Agree

 

3) Limited to no backwards compatibility.  Start fresh, Start new,

64 bit will pretty much necessitate this,  On the other hand, why do you want to reinvent the wheel, It wouldn't be a bad thing to keep what works, so long as it doesn't limit further advancement..

 

4) Possibility of crash damage on planes whose parent companies allow it.

If you want to turn the sim more into a game. This is not necessary  for more serious simmers. Plus it's very unlikely any real world aircraft manufacturer or airline would permit it, if DTG wanted to us their product names in the sim

 

5) If using FLIGHT-derived technology, then take wide advantage of the mission creation capabilities, which were very extensive.

FSX already has this capability, with even more capabilities then FLIGHT. This is not FLIGHT derived technology, it's more FSX. and again this makes it more a game not a sim, but would not be bad as it wasn't in FSX, so long as it doesn't take any of the sim qualities or features away.

 

6) Keep new users very firmly in mind: Something like the TS2015 train academy would help a lot of people.

FSX already has this, and I agree should be included in a new sim,  there is a whole slew of pilot training scenarios/lessons built right into it out of the box.

 

7) World coverage would be attractive, but limited areas with higher quality would probably not be an issue with new audiences, depending on the price of the individual DLC's

World coverage with the ability to overlay with more detailed scenery is a necessity, why would you want to take away something we already have? This was one of the biggest reason FLIGHT Failed, why do you want to repeat the sins of the past?

 

8) The ability to design an in-game Avatar to represent you. The avatar would be able to interact in various ways with the environment (do walk-arounds, etc) and would also be your personal representation in social interactions with other players. Social interaction should be an important part of the multiplayer experience.

If you want to turn it more into a game.

 

9) The Aerocache idea in FLIGHT was not something I was even largely interested in, and the whole idea sounded boring to me. To my surprise, however it became a huge attraction to a wide range of players to the point that ways were found to continue adding them after the sim was shut down. Consider building on them, and ways of enhancing the idea even further.

If you want to turn it more into a game.

 

10) Consider real lighting and night lighting, rather than FSX style lights, with painted lights on the ground. Something more similar to X-plane.

Agree, so long as performance doesn't suffer..

 

11) Consider allowing dog fighting, even if its in segregated "matches" for willing participants. Think of it as a type of laser-tag. New users in FLIGHT often did such things using their imaginations only since the game itself did not really support the activity, and it would be cool to have things that could break up occasional boredom, for non-technical users.

That's more applicable for a separate combat sim, although I wouldn't be apposed to it so long as it didn't take away from other areas of the sim.

 

12) Sharing of cockpits, shared activities. (should be fairly self explanatory and there should be lots of ways to implement the idea) Players should be able to see each others avatars, here.

Agree, though as I mentioned above I don't believe Avatars is necessary.

 

13) Flat ribbon roads should go away. In fact as much of legacy FSX should go away as is financially reasonable, especially in the graphics department. Clouds should switch to volumetric, And the more versatile Flight landclass system should be emplaced with modifications to make it more versatile. Buildings should drop the overall gray color-scheme, and adapt something more cheerful like Orbx tends to do. The world is not grey!

Any scenery improvements of course would be welcome, so long as they don't negatively affect performance too much.

 

14) DTG tends to include extensive content creation tools in its products, and I encourage this strongly in any new sim. The Steam workshop is an important venue for new and creative content from users, and the tools used by DTG itself should be made available so that even regular users are empowered in a way that they have not been for quite some time.

Included Developer tools are always welcome!!

 

15) Career mode. This is really where some fun could happen, if done creatively. Perhaps you could have multiple careers as hinted at it FLIGHT but unfortunately never followed up. Perhaps you are running a tour company, and need to dash from spot to spot to pick up passengers on time with the passengers critiquing your flying. (Crazy taxi?) there are a million possible scenarios. 

Depending on how this is done, could be a good thing, if made realistically like VA's try to achieve and not too gamey.

 

16) Make the walkaround matter. Hey! there's a cat hidden in the wing of your glider!  B) One of your tires is flat! there's an access panel dangling!

If this could be done, without too much hit on performance, and done realistically, I'm all for it!

 

17) Random events. A tire just blew. A bird just totalled your engine! Can you make it to the ground safely. Things like this can be completely random events, or specific missions, or both.

See 16.

 

18) If there are military planes, then remember the original FSX missions and give a nod to those. Allow jets to drop sandbag or flour bombs at designated targets, even moving targets.

See 11.

 

19) Make the Interface very friendly and versatile. Perhaps even allow the user to distribute screens across multiple monitors as easily as possible. Make sure fonts change accordingly at any resolution.

Also set GUI settings to match those current systems at time of release are capable of, with future expandability though settings in a config file.

 

20) VR modes, natively support oculus and other emerging tech.

Agree

 

21) Very customizable camera and viewpoint options, and multiple camera modes. (see War Thunder)

FSX already has this, both out of the box and through 3rd party addons (ie: EZDOK) although could be more user friendly

 

22) Nullify or encrypt or whatever the basic sim innards! Get the users out of there and keep them out. Nobody should have any reason to be messing with the CFG if the developers have done things right. It just creates a support nightmare. Put a big old "default settings" button where anyone can find it. In fact, have the sim analyze the system and offer some recommended defaults.

Disagree, these modifications has allowed the expandability of the sims capability to keep up with the future hardware advances. I do agree though a default reset in the GUI would be nice in case things did get screwy!

 

23) Not only allow but support and encourage other activities within the sim. Boating, etc.

If it didn't affect the primary flightsim features.

 

24) Lots and lots of Steam Achievements.

Gimmicky and gamey.  (Unless you actually get something for them )

 

25) Airshows, aerobatics, air races etc. I liked FLIGHTS air shows, but the scenery kind of let things down a bit and it was all kind of

flat. Where were the crowds!?

This could be done with Missions. FSX/Acceleration already has races/airshow scenarios. Having actual crowds, again would depend on the performance penalty.

 

26) Dramatic weather. Lighting should light up the ground around the strike and white out the sky for an instant, if it's close. make us feel the threat! Will there ever be a creditable tornado or hurricane in a sim? Up the sample rate of the sounds and eliminate repetition as much as possible. Nothing sadder than hearing the same tiny rain sound-loop repeat endlessly while you are flying. Clouds over cities should be lit up by the reflected light from below.... In other words a real and modern lighting system.

Improvements welcome, ASN already handles Hurricanes well, Tornados though would be a challenge.

 

27) Something that uses existing data from OSM and others to finally recreate a recognizable world below the aircraft. In reality, the MS landclass system is pretty obsolete and should be retired. I'm just not sure that anything based on "Microsoft Flight Technology has the ability to step that , so consider this one "blue sky"

I prefer data more like is used in the UTX series, but a tighter land class would be nice.

 

28) God-rays!   (Don't forget that DX12 support)

Agree

 

29) DTG, ask this question in other places! Reddit comes to mind, as well as other types of sites. Get a wider view! 

 

30) Easter eggs!

 

31) On second thought DTG, unless you like drama, squash any thoughts of backwards compatibility. I know having all those years of potential DLC sitting out there is beautiful, but backwards compatibility is likely to bring more angst, pricing resentment, shovelware, and general mayhem than it can possibly be worth.

 

Stick to your pattern of a good casual base that invites a wide variety of user-types. This market-segment is already "covered" and is more than capable of providing additional content for more sophisticated users. 

 

More to come!!!

 

 

[n4gix 4,947]

Seriously Tom, please don't quote an entire post to add only a few lines of text, especially buried in the quote. ^_^

[tf51d 284]

Seriously Tom, please don't quote an entire post to add only a few lines of text, especially buried in the quote. ^_^

I normally don't (If you read my other posts, you'll see that), but in this case I was responding  to each one of his points.

[HiFlyer 9,358]

1) Tessellation (guess that might be part of DX12 and modern graphics)

 

2) Don't be afraid of Physx havok and other things to make life simpler. No need to reinvent the wheel. (Think FLIGHT used Havok)

 

3) Higher resolution mesh as standard. Required for DLC coming through the official store.

 

4) Stay with Speedtree if still using the FLIGHT engine.

 

5) Update the water to realistic 3D (see Triton & silverlining)

 

6) Fix graphical anomalies near the earth's poles

 

7) Avoid making an FSX clone unless you want to be in instant competition with FSX itself (with nearly a decade of addons) as well as X-plane P3D and Flightgear. Surprise Us! Try new things!

 

8) Procedural effects like random snow accumulation, etc.

 

9) Cooperative only campaigns/missions as well as regular

 

10) Sim automatically starts where the last use of the simulator closed Ie, same situation, airport etc. (though this may cause some hilarity. In FLIGHT users would come back to find a plane had moved due to wind, or being on an incline, etc)

 

11) G-force effects. Narrowed vision, etc, in high stress maneuvers.

 

12) Dynamics of water landings: The bouncing, use of wavetops to get airborne, taking waves into account while landing.....

 

13) 3d cockpits only.

 

More Later!!

[Murmur 3,941]

4) Possibility of crash damage on planes whose parent companies allow it.

If you want to turn the sim more into a game. This is not necessary  for more serious simmers. Plus it's very unlikely any real world aircraft manufacturer or airline would permit it, if DTG wanted to us their product names in the sim

 

Flight sims like the three Flight Unlimited series, Condor Soaring and all military flight sims, all of them model crash damage. They're all very serious flight sims for "serious simmers" (what a self-important term) and modeling crash damage does not turn them into more of game. On the contrary, I'd say.

[Wobbie 938]

I like HiFlyer's ideas, mostly.. :smile:

 

re the damage issue... If I recall, could you not add a line into the aircraft.cfg such as 'damage=1' or something like that?

 

Yup, it's going to be interesting to see where DTG will go, & if they ( a games distributor) will target serious simmers. 

 

I could have fun with an 'all-in-one' sim, with cars, boats 'n planes. Could make for serious missions.

[TooWings 17]

 

 

modeling crash damage does not turn them into more of game. On the contrary, I'd say.

 

I totally agree 100%.  The former being slanted toward realism.

[Wobbie 938]

So, are we asking for a more realistic sim or a more immersive one. We cannot have both.

[HiFlyer 9,358]

So, are we asking for a more realistic sim or a more immersive one. We cannot have both.

 

For me, there is no real reason why not. Simply have features that can be turned on and off. if somebody doesn't like damage and its available, turn it off. Otherwise, leave it on. The problems only occur when somebody decides that there is only one "proper" solution.

 

I like HiFlyer's ideas, mostly.. :smile:

 

Its actually less important to me that any single idea I offer actually be implemented, than that all users of all sorts have the right to make their own contributions, unmolested. There is nobody whose opinions matter any more than anybody else's, here.

[Wobbie 938]

How about an immersive sim for the masses (& obviously new 'flyers), with the realism added in in the form of DLC's? Not everyone wants all the switches.

Oh! don't we have that already?

[codechris 9]

Well, that just comes down to planes, doesn't it? The default 737 doesn't cut the mustered for a lot of us, so we bought the PMDG 737...

[HiFlyer 9,358]

How about an immersive sim for the masses (& obviously new 'flyers), with the realism added in in the form of DLC's? Not everyone wants all the switches.

 

I said earlier, I think they should head for the larger share of lower-hanging fruit first, and build up a respectable user-base. Then go for all the fancy stuff.

 

Oh! don't we have that already?

 

There can be only one! Or something......... (wanders off in preoccupied daze humming something from Queen) :ph34r:

 

EDIT: If you had to choose one single thing from all the suggestions here, and have it guaranteed to be granted, what would you choose?

[tf51d 284]

 

 

Flight sims like the three Flight Unlimited series, Condor Soaring and all military flight sims, all of them model crash damage.

 

True some GA and Military aircraft may allow this, but are there any airliners in that mix? I don't think you are going to get Boeing and Airbus to sign on. At least they haven't permitted it so far.

[KingGhidorah 209]

Wobbie, what do you mean about immersive and realistic being something that one must choose between because you can't have them both? I completely disagree. I feel a lot of immersion in DCS/FSX and all the while flying study-level type aircraft which I think most would term "realistic" as far as desktop simulations go. In DCS much of that immersion/realism comes right out of the box, or relatively inexpensively, while in FSX, unfortunately many expensive addons had to be added to get there (and I don't like that). But realism and immersion are not mutually exclusive.