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

[dave2013 1,191]

 

 

Higher resolution textures, apparently better memory management..... For those of us that kept track, the loss of all that tech with the cancellation of FLIGHT was a tragedy. I can't help but be happy that the flight simulation community might get another crack at those advancements.

 

I was actually just about to post yet another feature that I'd like to see in a new sim: higher resolution textures.  However, without greatly improved memory management or 64-bit code, anything larger than 1024x1024 won't be practical.

 

I'm hoping that DTG is actually following this thread, so I'm just going to keep posting about improvements and features that I'd like to see in a new sim.

 

Dave

[JSilva 42]

These are what I like to see in the new Flight Sim:

DX12 Support (when Windows 10 comes by).

The earth's poles are useable without any issues (FSX is the first with a round earth but still has bugs (don't know if its fixed in FSX-SE or P3D v2.5)).

Realistic Vectors and Meshes (in 2015, accurate data should be easier to get compared to a decade ago).

Sloped Runways (I remember P3D may add sloped runways in the near future so it could be possible, especially Las Vegas McCarren Airport).

An SDK (important for third party development).

Improved ATC (SIDs and STARs support).

Realistic Texturing for the ground and airports (airports have better texturing, has some double yellow lines in the edge of the taxiway).

Volumetric Clouds and better weathering (P3D v2 already has this and the engine is based on MS Flight which has some of these effects).

Better Precipitation (rain and snow drops don't look too big and an effect on the windows).

Double or Triple Jetway support (Bigger planes such as the 777, 747, A380, etc uses two or three jetways).

Better Jetway mechanics and models (FSX jetways look too generic and when the jetway's raised or lowered, the wheels are sunken or floating).

More Anti-Aliasing and Shadows (features can be TXAA support, FXAA and Soft Shadows).

[Pastaiolo 1,690]

Have you a link to that page?

 

 

The page is the usual

 

https://www.facebook.com/fsxinsider

 

But the answer was given to me by Martin i believe, some months ago by now. Guess you'll have to trust me on this

Or you have to dig back in.

[Ray Proudfoot 9,217]

The reason the whole series of Flight Simulator from Microsoft was so successful is because Aces knew their limitations. They gave us very good standard scenery, reasonable aircraft and a workable weather engine. The ATC was rudimentary but probably okay for the beginner.

 

Where it excelled however was allowing third party experts to enhance airports, ground terrain, aircraft and just about every other aspect of it. There was an SDK so the addon market was enormous. It was 95% of the pyramid with FS sitting right at the top. One without the other was pointless for all serious enthusiasts.

 

It's important to me that 3rd party developers can develop and sell me addons without the need to do it via Steam or Dovetail. From what I have read you are asking developers to accept a paltry amount for each sale. If they don't make enough money they simply won't produce the quality addons the simulator needs. The alternative is to hike their price but that would make it too expensive for many.

 

Whilst I would be interested in a new simulator I probably wouldn't buy it if 3rd party software (the oxygen of FS) was only available via DLC.

[mgh 89]

But the answer was given to me by Martin i believe, some months ago by now. Guess you'll have to trust me on this

 

I'd prefer what DTG actually said in its job advert - which doesn't mention Flight..

 

Microsoft to exclusively develop and publish all-new flight products based on Microsoft's genre defining flight technology and will distribute the multi-award winning Microsoft Flight Simulator X: Gold Edition - See more at: http://www.dovetailgames.com/vacancies/2014/sep/15/senior-producer#sthash.UuBM85cJ.dpuf

 

[HiFlyer 9,502]

At 4:35 "Based on Microsoft Flight Technology."

 

Make of it what you will, people.

 

[Pastaiolo 1,690]

Thanks for coming in with that HiFlyer, at least on that they don't need to trust me or you

[codechris 9]

A move to 64 bit, does require a changes in variables such as size of data types and especially pointers (infact pointers could be the biggest issue), but with 32 to 64 bit development changes, at first you can run the code in 64bit and see what errors are produces, then work from there. It should be pointed out though you can then get issues from this and thus have to re-write more, to deal with the fact you're dealing with bigger numbers There can be a lot of changes, depending on how the variables have been written. However, use of GPU, or not, and multi-threading doesn't really have a lot to do with that. They are not linked as such.

 

So while writing in 64 bit would be a great benefit, and I expect break all the add-ons as they would need to go through similar changes, it may bare more fruit to work on the graphics code in terms of GPU off-loading, and working on multi-threading and using all cores better then it does already. From what I know, which isn't a great deal, FSX doesn't exploit multicore as well as modern applications. However that itself is a whole other issue. Both issues are huge, we're looking at 12-24 months development time, ALONG with everything else at an educated guess. And they are expecting release in 2016? I really question if either are achievable within the next release. If you included the fixes P3D have put in, if they put similar fixes in.

 

It really depends what Flight Technology is. 64 bit? I think it's 32bit, does it exploit modern hardware better? A good guess would be yes, since it's newer game. I guess they are probably only educated guesses we can make at this point. But, I can say that while they use FSX code in steam edition, it's probably very difficult, if not impossible for Dove Tail to prevent people installing software as they like, as we do now. They can have exclusivities such as with Orbx 90 days early for FS:SE then everyone else after, but they can't prevent. But, they could potentially prevent that with DFS and they control the DLC's and prevent users from installing 3rd party software. I don't know if they would, just a thought that occurred to me. I guess that's a fear I have

[HiFlyer 9,502]

It really depends what Flight Technology is. 64 bit? I think it's 32bit

 

Its 32bit and DX9 if I remember correctly.

 

does it exploit modern hardware better?

 

Yes, though there were sometimes denials of that which as an actual user I ignored as I could see the improvement myself. Plus some doing the denying seemed to me to have vested interests; repeating disproved rumors even after being repeatedly corrected. One of the most persistent being that the radios didn't work.

 

they could potentially prevent that with DFS and they control the DLC's and prevent users from installing 3rd party software. I don't know if they would, just a thought that occurred to me. I guess that's a fear I have

 

It's something that many in the trainsim community once predicted as well. But it never happened. In fact, trainsim has fairly robust content creation tools as part of the package. And i've purchased and installed 3rd party addons such as: http://www.armstrongpowerhouse.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=81

 

They could change that policy, but historically, they've been fairly open.

[codechris 9]

Its something that many in the trainsim community once predicted as well. But it never happened. In fact, trainsim has fairly robust content creation tools as part of the package.

 

I didn't know that, though I only have a few hours with it. I just don't find it as engaging as my PMDG's or the A2A's. Partly I guess because it's trains not planes, and partly I start getting annoyed I cant play with everything in the cab like I can in my NGX. The kid in me I guess. I do think, and I'm arguing against myself here I realise, but many attack Dovesim for the cost of all the DLC's, but if you added up all the add-ons for FSX it would be, I'd expect, tens or hundreds of thousands. It's just very easy to see on Steam to TS DLC's. I was impressed by their Faversham to Kings Cross high speed link DLC. I lived at one of the stations in Kent and commuted to London for many years and can vouch for it's detail on scenery. The south London route too, I also lived near one of the stops on that and went to London Bridge everyday. That was accurate And the steam work shop has kept both it fresh with new missions. Maybe there is so much freeware and external 3rd parties for FS, it's easy to ignore those for Train Sim. Maybe there is less money in TS? Or we're just all sinicle!

 

The video above was good, I hadn't seen that. I hope they can pull something out the bag. Competition can only be a good thing. Makes me wonder how bothered Lockheed are about money from P3D from simmers. Maybe they like getting paid for people beta testing their software before they sell on a commercial basis. That's an amusing thought

[HiFlyer 9,502]

Actually, if you factor in all the (frequent) steam sales, it's cheaper even than that. I've actually thought thats one reason why some third parties might be leery of steam. They dont want to find their stuff on sale for $9.99!!

 

Things like that could be very destabilizing to the current ecosystem.

[jjjallen 37]

It is still amazing what the FSX platform has given us so far!

 

Development-wise, today it is trivial to write async code unlike the past.  Code written today could easily have no blocking - ever!

 

Regards

jja

[Mossyfly47 18]

These are what I like to see in the new Flight Sim:

DX12 Support (when Windows 10 comes by).

The earth's poles are useable without any issues (FSX is the first with a round earth but still has bugs (don't know if its fixed in FSX-SE or P3D v2.5)).

Realistic Vectors and Meshes (in 2015, accurate data should be easier to get compared to a decade ago).

Sloped Runways (I remember P3D may add sloped runways in the near future so it could be possible, especially Las Vegas McCarren Airport).

An SDK (important for third party development).

Improved ATC (SIDs and STARs support).

Realistic Texturing for the ground and airports (airports have better texturing, has some double yellow lines in the edge of the taxiway).

Volumetric Clouds and better weathering (P3D v2 already has this and the engine is based on MS Flight which has some of these effects).

Better Precipitation (rain and snow drops don't look too big and an effect on the windows).

Double or Triple Jetway support (Bigger planes such as the 777, 747, A380, etc uses two or three jetways).

Better Jetway mechanics and models (FSX jetways look too generic and when the jetway's raised or lowered, the wheels are sunken or floating).

More Anti-Aliasing and Shadows (features can be TXAA support, FXAA and Soft Shadows).

i want to see somone connect and reconnect the fuel filler hehe

[gizmosellsbunnys 106]

The next flight sim needs to bring in new users and system depth that Xplane or FSX may take backseat at first, but I believe dovetail gonna have to take though choices and some will revolt go back to P3D or Xplane. Complex Weather systems, checklists, systems depth probably something I would not prioritize at first, I would slowly add in with time.

 

This is entertainment product, therefore, can't be set it up like P3d or Xplane product at first. Always small hardcore group I ignore those users and reach to more pragmatic and realist users to help out build flight sim engine. The thing for me is SDK kit the the rest is side show. I can live with FSX plus and also be okay with missing buildings at airports if SDK kit allows modications and Lego bricks to DIY your own airfield at first.

[Wobbie 948]

I agree with Giznosellsbunnys! We MUST remember that whatever will come out of Dovetail is an entertainment product ie a game, as we all know that Dovetail is a gaming company & Steam is a gaming distributor. Steam's market, captive as it is, but with flight gamers/simmers now joining them.

 

Dovetail has done amazing marketing by taking a 9 year old game & tweaking it for us. It has become a teaser or any future release. They have captivated & captured us, as seen by the numerous forum postings of how FSX:SE is the best thing & better than mothers milk!

 

So, I think we all must take a step back & realise that what will probably come out of this is a new flight game, based on a yet unconfirmed flight (small 'F') engine form Microsoft. This could be anything, FSX, FS9 or even Combat Flight Sim. We just do not know yet!

 

Dovetail's market is existing hardcore gamers, newbie gamers, train gamers & fishermen, & I think that any new flying game could probably be aimed at existing gamers & also to get newbies into their flying games. An obvious plan would be DLC's to make installing & add-ons easy to install, also uncomplicated as not to scare the new guys off or to bore them.

 

We tend to forget that Microsoft marketed 2x versions of FSX. One for entertainent & the other as a commercial or, dare I say it, a professional version.

 

So we have choices, as do the developers. What to they develop for? Remember, developing add-ons has got a cost value! Some do still develop, believe it or not, for FS9 still. So there is FSX, FSX:SE, P3D & now some future game coming out.

Obviously, nothing is perfect, so will we be sitting with ALL these sims on our PC's, as the ALL have different features?

 

Methinks that the market will become very diluted.

 

Getting back to the original topic title..

 

I want a sim that I can learn with, have fun with, fly drive, sail whatever with (yup, I have this already within FS9 & P3D), & most of all, it must be immersive. 32bit or 64bit? Sigh! We know that if & when a 64bit sim comes out, most add-ons will not work.

 

I want a sim that will teach me & to entertain me, without spending more time tweaking than flying & without going to the forums to complain, to wish or to say my sim is better than yours!