Ignoring all discussion on nextgenerationalamazingsandboxwhatever sims... Because serious discussion and all that nonsense...

 

And focusing on a really cool city simulator, which is what I thought this topic was about when I showed up.  I've been playing city simulators for what seems like forever, and Skylines is pretty much the best I've played yet. Although pretty much built as a 'what SimCity lacks, we shall have' game, the inclusion of modding has created tons of potential and community around it.

 

There's a few times here and there where it feels a mite generic, but it's quite an enjoyable way to spend several (dozen) hours. :rolleyes:

It looks amazing to me. But what I was really thinking of was how easy these modern programs push zillions of polygons without breaking a sweat, whereas if I go anywhere near a big city in our favorite sims of choice.... wham!

 

What i've really wanted to do for years is find something where I can just fly through a beautiful depiction of real life and not worry about any of that. I want to crank things up until I am totally immersed, and just.......fly. 

 

Then, when I get bored, do other stuff, too, in that same beautiful world! 

Ignoring all discussion on nextgenerationalamazingsandboxwhatever sims... Because serious discussion and all that nonsense...

 

And focusing on a really cool city simulator, which is what I thought this topic was about when I showed up.  I've been playing city simulators for what seems like forever, and Skylines is pretty much the best I've played yet. Although pretty much built as a 'what SimCity lacks, we shall have' game, the inclusion of modding has created tons of potential and community around it.

 

There's a few times here and there where it feels a mite generic, but it's quite an enjoyable way to spend several (dozen) hours. :rolleyes:

 

I hear you on that one, and it after the complete let down of the new Sim City, Cities is brilliant and what it does

 

It looks amazing to me. But what I was really thinking of was how easy these modern programs push zillions of polygons without breaking a sweat, whereas if I go anywhere near a big city in our favorite sims of choice.... wham!

 

 

The FSX engine is old, it has very basic multi-threaded code at it's core. The poor thing struggles to cope. Now, will Dovetail Flight Simulator, stated to release next year, gives us something good? Have to wait and see

 

 

Environment is brilliant, looks are amazing. But you think all the cars represented in there accurately depict the real life version of the cars they are modelling? The flying was not close to real, at all. But it doesn't need to be. It's not the point of the game. I guess the tennis simulation was accurate as well, or golf for that matter

 

I think that we might be saying the same thing in different ways. No, the planes in GTA don't exactly depict the real planes, but that's a choice of the designers, not necessarily a limitation of the technology. They could have made other choices if that made financial sense, and these modern engines are made to allow licensees to do whatever they like: from pure arcade to something more serious. The freedom is there, it's just whether it makes sense to use it in that way.

 

I dont think it would be that hard to switch up and make Grand Turismo using the unreal engine. Any harder than it would be to make DTG's new train sim. The area where we break down is at exactly what point of complexity does a game become a sim, and the answer to me is that the question is meaningless, because yesterday's groundbreaking sims are todays games. The dividing line is up to the individual, really.

I do see you're point. Rockstar made the flight model arcade, but did add some difficulty involving the air pushing the plane around etc. And they chose to put lots of effort in others areas, accurate flight modelling was not one of them, but they could have, if they wanted.

 

But, accurate driving or flying modelling is not part of the RAGE engine, nor is guns (they used the OSS Bullet engine, which isn't used in any serious gun sims). There would be a large amount of effort in which to do that. They would then need to license that out, and I don't think the RAGE engine is used outside of Rockstar.

 

I personally  (and I'm not saying I am correct or anything) that game vs sim is an important aspect. For me anyway. The latest car driving sims do show potentially that big titles can be sims (Project Cars, Asetto Corsa et al) but driving games are big anyway. Train, Plane, Boat sims...they are a neice markets. Now, Euro Truck Sim is quite big, but in my view we compare that against other sims. And there is a rumble in the ETS world that ETS isn't that much of a sim as it lacks sim aspects.

 

Now I would love to see an overall sim engine that can do everything, and gives a common ground that many people can dive in to. I just don't think that when we pull in a game like GTA5, that had around $200 million on development for a very tiny part of the world, representing a not very realistic aspect of the true world (driving et al) that we're going to go that any time soon. GTA is a major cash cow, $1billion in 4 days. SCS who make Euro Truck are a tiny outfit, probably bigger then the flight sim world, and they are not exactly hiring developer left right and centre. Maybe that's the cynical man in me, but I think we're a long way off. ###### it, I'm excited about PMDG 747v2, a second version of something already made

Ahhhhhh!! A tubeliner guy! 

 

Well no...... GTA5 is not gonna cut it for ya" 

You know it's funny, 11 years ago, the last time I used flight sims, I stuck to GA almost exclusively. Then I stopped, life got in the way, spent my time at either work or in clubs and as life slowed and going out every weekend started to take it's toll, I built a new PC and got back in to it. That was 14 months ago, and I've never flown anything other then tuberliners since. Only time I've loaded something else up is either the default chopper or micoplane and that is only to test the new scenery I've installed is working correctly!

I consider tubeliner flyers, especially the PMDG type, to be a niche within a niche. The needs of that market are so specific and demanding that I can't imagine a newcomer trying successfully to muscle in there, and certainly I can't see any new sims even dreaming about matching that level of detail.

 

If that is your interest, I think FSX derivatives and maybe X-plane are going to be the only alternatives for years to come.  :unsure:

 

 

I'll happily eat my words on this and concede I'm wrong, but at this junction, I'm not seeing anything that can give me the army sim of ARMA, the truck driving of ETS, the flight sim of FSX/P3D and the train sim of Train Simulator, in one package.

 

That's where Microsoft was going with the underlying FSX/ESP engine. TrainSim 2 was built using an upgraded version, and Prepar3D (an ESP descendant) has bathymetry support allowing one to cruise around in a minisub. I doubt adding better support for cars and trucks would have been very difficult. Modelling bullet physics might not have been a high priority though.

That's where Microsoft was going with the underlying FSX/ESP engine. TrainSim 2 was built using an upgraded version, and Prepar3D (an ESP descendant) has bathymetry support allowing one to cruise around in a minisub. I doubt adding better support for cars and trucks would have been very difficult. Modelling bullet physics might not have been a high priority though.

 

FLIGHT used the Havok physics library, and its collisions and other things were super accurate. Enough so that you could actually clip trees and branches and it would detect the severity of the hit and make the plane react accordingly. (remembers bouncing embarrassingly between buildings)

 

Havok, PhysX, bullet, JSBSIM....... unlike when FSX was created there are numerous off the shelf solutions so game designers don't have to start from scratch. FLIGHT even punted and used Speedtree for its foliage.

 

They probably could have made cars, and even trains (?) work, but FSX scenery, except maybe Orbx stuff, would make a very primitive driving experience I think. Though I've heard recently of very nice boat.

 

On the other hand............ Modders gotta mod. 

 

 

Environment is brilliant, looks are amazing. But you think all the cars represented in there accurately depict the real life version of the cars they are modelling?

 

To a certain extent, yes...including crash damage modelling.  The vehicles can of course also be custom modded in the PC version.

 

 

 

The flying was not close to real, at all

 

I disagree. Unlike in FSX etc the 'pilot' was able to walk to the plane and enter it, then taxi and take-off -then experience turbulence and the threat of hitting birds and cracking his windshield, or hit pylons or other planes on the ground or in the air; He could then make a landing which, if hard enough could break his landing gear damage other parts of the plane. unlike in FSX etc where there is little or no crash detection realism and the plane simply passes through any obstacle it touches such as ghost cars, fences and buildings etc ..or else the FSX game ends in a static 'crash' screen.

 

So flying in GTA-5 is quite realistic in the sense that the pilot is flying in an intercative 'world' and landscape where he can then exit his aircraft and walk, drive or  sky-dive etc.  Sure other racing and flying games do a better job in some areas, but they are a closed virtual world where the user cannot exit their vehicle or plane then walk or drive around a city and interact with ai humans and animals and environment, then takeoff again in a helicopter for example. ......

 

I'm going to say that I think to Codechris, realism is going mean things like completeness and accuracy of instrumentation and sophisticated avionics modeling, as well as detailed depiction of all forces acting on the plane, etc.

 

Then there will be working navaids, radios........ the list could probably go on and on.

 

In that sense GTA has no "realistic" depiction of flight, I believe primarily because the developers know the the largest component of main audience couldn't care less, and would find much of that boring and superfluous to the main goal. Having fun.

 

Which does not mean that motivated enthusiasts (or even the company itself) could not get in there and add things.........

I think to Codechris, realism is going mean things like completeness and accuracy of instrumentation and sophisticated avionics modeling, as well as detailed depiction of all forces acting on the plane, etc

 

Sure. But I was speaking more in terms of GTA's amazing 'spirit of flight' immersion and its barn-storming 'just for fun' attitude which ,lets face it, good old FSX was always short of.  Even if you throw a ton of addons at FSX it will still be lukewarm in that department IMO.   Like you I've always wanted to fly free in a detailed and realistic virtual world ..and flying low through valleys in a jet or copter held a special appeal.  MSFS or X-Plane never generated that fun 'spirit of flight' factor for me, but funnily enough Aerosoft FS and GTA-5 do.. 

 

Heck you dont even need an aircraft to experience the thrill of flight in GTA-5....  ;-)

 

https://youtu.be/AraUPkJte9U?t=57

 

.

Sure. But I was speaking more in terms of GTA's amazing 'spirit of flight' immersion and its barn-storming 'just for fun' attitude which ,lets face it, good old FSX was always short of.  Even if you throw a ton of addons at FSX it will still be lukewarm in that department IMO.   Like you I've always wanted to fly free in a detailed and realistic virtual world ..and flying low through valleys in a jet or copter held a special appeal.  MSFS or X-Plane never generated that fun 'spirit of flight' factor for me, but funnily enough Aerosoft FS and GTA-5 do.. 

 

Heck you dont even need an aircraft to experience the thrill of flight in GTA-5....  ;-)

 

https://youtu.be/AraUPkJte9U?t=57

 

.

 

I agree at least partially, which is why I believe many of the more casual people eventually wandered off.

 

DTG will undoubtedly spare no effort to make its new sim fun and accessible, not having the slightest interest at all in climbing a mountain of sophistication and pulling up the ladder behind it as can sometimes seem to be the case. I suspect that there'll be a little grumbling at that, but I also believe even the most die-hard stratosphere aficionadoTM will not fail to be charmed by quick loading times, modern graphics and a system that doesn't demand you spend half your time beneath the hood messing with the sims innards.

 

Freed from being part time sim mechanics, maybe people will relax more, and even get back to simple joyful zooming occasionally. Maybe even fly beneath a bridge or two. (then he woke up) 

 

Remember when people did lots of joke videos, and it was all just good clean fun? Before we got all serious and started doing long videos looking at a wing while clouds went by?  ^_^

 

 

Madden, Elmo, and Arnold......

Remember when people did lots of joke videos, and it was all just good clean fun?

 

Ha. Yes.... I remember it well.  In fact I lost years of my life making comedy flightsim videos in FS9 etc.