The New Faster, Leaner Next Generation Flight Simulator SIM-Posium is Now Available for Your Input

[HiFlyer 9,361]

Here's a Faster Leaner Nexgen Flightsim from a company with serious resources behind them

 

http://www.flightarcade.com/missions/tin

 

I would prefer this. The graphics need work, but I prefer the soul that went into it. Yet another one of those amazing one person efforts from somebody who didn't know the dream he had was probably hopeless.  :unsure:

 

[JSkorna 137]

Here's a Faster Leaner Nexgen Flightsim from a company with serious resources behind them
 
http://www.flightarc...om/missions/tin

 

Nope. No AI Traffic, ATC, or seasons. I was getting 60 FPS though!

[flyforever 267]

What we're forgetting is the emotional value for some programmers. There's no question that some would rather work for less on something that they love( perhaps flight sims) than earn more for something that they hate.  Passion is a funny thing, and at times it comes free.

 

Some great freeware is done out of passion--despite the fact that they could have sold it for money.

tony

[Glynn 405]

 

 

Nope. No AI Traffic, ATC, or seasons. I was getting 60 FPS though!

 

It may get them quicker than XP10 will

[srborick 0]

 

 

Thats your view Stephen but I see it the other way round.  I reckon the NGFS SIM-Posium has everything do with your credibility since you set it up to announce your next-gen-flightsim project, and you even outlined the pay structure for those who would be working on the project.  

 

As you pointed out... it's a point of view.... but let's get one thing clear... it's not my next gen flightsim project... I don't have a project... I have an idea and a thought that all of us could work on a project together.... the SIM-Posium was built to discuss the feasibility of a community driven flight simulator conceived and derived by the community. This should be a community next gen flightsim project. 

 

If you want to consider my credibility... think me as the guy who has been a member of the flight simulator community for several years (although a quiet one) and had read all the comments made by the community regarding their wishes to have a flight simulator based upon their needs. I simply... supposed the community would come together, so I built and funded a website for that purposes. In other words... I was willing to "put up or shut up".

 

Stephen B.

 

 

In reality your site and its members are a small part of the worldwide flightsim community -including of course AVSIM -which has been putting forward ideas for a new flight-sim for years. 

 

Yes... and until someone suggest bringing those ideas together to formulate a plan... that's all they ever will be... ideas.

 

Stephen B.

[Luke 782]

 

 

I would ask... where are your statistics to back up your comments? Have you taken the time to research CrowdSourcing Software Development... or are you shooting from the hip?

 

Crowd sourcing any form of development is merely how you get the money in on the front-end. You're confusing that with how you spend the money on the way out, which is what I'm talking about. A different way of gathering funds doesn't change the rules on identifying, obtaining and retaining talent.

 

 

There are numerous sources available that would debunk the stigma that individuals of talent are only available within the confines of multi-million dollar corporations or freelance work is inferior to the work performed by someone making $100k per month.

 

I don't disagree. My point is that you're not going to automatically find these people by looking in countries with lower costs of living. That arbitrage was identified and eliminated around a decade ago. I asked you specifically if you have worked with offshore teams because I've spent the past decade doing so. They compete on price, not value - and when you do so the customers get exactly what they pay for - and a little less. The best ones left for the US a decade ago.

 

Are there some folks, less experienced or well-known, who can provide first-rate work for a second-rate salary? Sure. I guarantee they exist, just like I guarantee that there's a six digit combination that will solve ALL of your funding woes next week. (And if not next week, the week after.) It's not hard to recognize it exists - it is VERY hard to identify it.

 

You can hand wave away a lot of things. You are enthusiastic and passionate, and you've received a strong negative reaction that causes you to dig in and defend your passions. My suggestion remains - either solve a portion of the problem by building a scenery or a terrain mesh, or identify a FlightGear fork to solve one major issue. Get experience in the field, understand the problems and be able to talk to SMEs with some level of credibility.

 

Cheers!

 

Luke

[Lorby_SI 2,042]

I estimate that FSX consists of about 20 MB equivalent lines of source code of the total of some total 70 GB on disk.  Assuming a typical working year is about 1700 hr per year, each member of the team would have to develop about 20,000,000 / (20 * 1700) =  580 fully developed, integrated, and debugged lines of source code per hour.

 

On average a programmer's salary in London  is about £35,000.  The actual cost of employment is about twice that, say £70,000,  to allow for the costs running the business, plus ,of course,  profit.

 

The UK government adds a "optimism bias" to all its estimates for work. This is the difference between a project was initially estimated to cost and what it actually cost. The starting value is between 54% and 200% for projects that are concerned with the provision of equipment and/or development of software and systems.

 

We should be careful about estimates.

    

 

 

Come on Gerry, you don't type every single line of code anymore. That is what frameworks are for, to save you the effort. As you say, be careful with estimates.

 

I like to think of this as an integration project more than a complete redevelopment really. Much in my own interest I admit. There are tons of data already available, geographic references, mesh, object models, sceneries, you name it. Try to be compatible or at least plan for a migration path. Why should everything have to be developed from scratch? As FSX has been mentioned frequently, AFAIK that one is an implementation on a larger framework behind it (ESP). I commend LM for P3D, for their very wise decision to use a wellknown and stable technology base.

 

My personal view is that this project is very much doable and maybe with less effort than is so dramatically flaunted. But the key question is, who will care? It is all fine and dandy always pointing to 'the community' and the 'increased interest" a superior flight simulator will (again) generate. But in my world the sad fact is, that aviation in general does not hold the fascination in the general public it once did. And I somehow doubt this will change in the long run. Taking a look at the sales numbers of some popular software titles and what content they represent, makes me seriously scratch my head in amazement (despair?)

[srborick 0]

As you pointed out... it's a point of view.... but let's get one thing clear... it's not my next gen flightsim project... I don't have a project... I have an idea and a thought that all of us could work on a project together.... the SIM-Posium was built to discuss the feasibility of a community driven flight simulator conceived and derived by the community. This should be a community next gen flightsim project. 

 

If you want to consider my credibility... think of me as the guy who has been a member of the flight simulator community for several years (although a quiet one) and had read all the comments made by the community regarding their wishes to have a flight simulator based upon their needs. I simply... supposed the community would come together, so I built and funded a website for that purpose. In other words... I was willing to "put up or shut up". I think that might say a little bit about my credentials.

 

Stephen B.

 

 

 

Yes... and until someone suggest bringing those ideas together to formulate a plan... that's all they ever will be... ideas.

 

Stephen B.

 

 

My personal view is that this project is very much doable and maybe with less effort than is so dramatically flaunted. But the key question is, who will care? It is all fine and dandy always pointing to 'the community' and the 'increased interest" a superior flight simulator will (again) generate. But in my world the sad fact is, that aviation in general does not hold the fascination in the general public it once did. And I somehow doubt this will change in the long run. Taking a look at the sales numbers of some popular software titles and what content they represent, makes me seriously scratch my head in amazement (dispair?)

 

I'm beginning to understand that fact as well. The project is very much doable, there really isn't anything that should stop us from achieving the creation of a next generation flight simulator... except for one factor.... Not enough people care anymore.

 

Stephen B.

[propsfan 52]

Am I wrong or is the preceding exactly the kind of higher level conversation Stephen was hoping to spark? :smile: Is this how stuff gets worked out? I don't know. I mean that, I really don't. It just seems like the beginning of how stuff might get worked out to me is all. I like this thread, it's fun here!

[Lorby_SI 2,042]

and had read all the comments made by the community regarding their wishes to have a flight simulator based upon their needs.

 

'The community'? Or were these gripes that a few individuals voiced about some detail they do not find in the sim or disagree with? (Bugs or technological shortcomings aside for a moment)

 

Don't mix up common misconceptions on the internet with what people actually, really  want.

[mgh 89]

 

 

Come on Gerry, you don't type every single line of code anymore.

 

Then how many SLOC do you estimate are needed for a new flight simulator?

[propsfan 52]

Then how many SLOC do you estimate are needed for a new flight simulator?

 

Would that not largely depend on the engine it's written atop? Again, I don't know, I'm just asking.

'The community'? Or were these gripes that a few individuals voiced about some detail they do not find in the sim or disagree with? (Bugs or technological shortcomings aside for a moment)

 

Don't mix up common misconceptions on the internet with what people actually, really  want.

 

How would we know what anyone really wants? Other than having some brave soul start a website to ask, is there another better path? What is it? Again with the proviso, I don't know, I'm actually asking.

[Lorby_SI 2,042]

Then how many SLOC do you estimate are needed for a new flight simulator?

 

How should I know? There is not even a specification for it, is there? Or decision on the technology? I don't do function point analysis on things that have not been described yet.

 

My estimate is based on a couple of things:

1. personal experience with projects of about the same size and complexity. But I come from enterprise development, not consumer, so I could be wrong.

2. The OP's idea of starting off with an initially functional flightsim, where not all the bells and whistles are in place

3. The idea of getting together the right people who actually want to do this and place stock in it.

4. The (alleged) size of the ACES, XP and the P3D teams and how long it took them to develop a sim incarnation.

 

Can this estimate be wrong? Of course it can, and by a large margin too.

In this project and at this stage, one would be very naive to get any kind of money together and then just state "this is it, let's go" and expect it to last 'till the end.

[HiFlyer 9,361]

 

 

But the key question is, who will care? It is all fine and dandy always pointing to 'the community' and the 'increased interest" a superior flight simulator will (again) generate. But in my world the sad fact is, that aviation in general does not hold the fascination in the general public it once did. And I somehow doubt this will change in the long run. Taking a look at the sales numbers of some popular software titles and what content they represent, makes me seriously scratch my head in amazement (despair?)

 

So at the risk if kicking my own dead horse, this is why I've believed that simply a flight simulator will just not cut it in today's market. People crave variety, different things to see and do and try. All planes all the time at this point, is a proven low-draw concept, and trying the same thing repeatedly and hoping for a different result is not logical.

 

(Kicks horse, sees a twitch.... shrugs)

 

Its why I keep suggesting something that's more than just a flight sim. Something that can expand into other genres and draw a wider audience.

[WarpD 824]

Outsourcing (hiring 'teams' from other countries) doesn't work quite as brilliantly as you might think.  I speak from professional experience.  It typically ends up costing more than budgeted because there is typically a great deal of rework required for completion and usability.