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

[TooWings 17]

You did not, however you quoted another who used the word "uneasy..."

synonyms:

worried, anxious, troubled, disturbed, agitated, rattled, nervous, tense, overwrought, edgy, jumpy, apprehensive, restless, discomfited, perturbed, fearful, uncomfortable, unsettled, jittery, antsy, trepidatious, afraid

 

'Uneasy' often denotes a calm intuitive distrust of a situation, person or product, while being "afraid" is a state of physical and mental anxiety in which a person will often feel physically threatened, for example: while walking through a rough neighbourhood alone at night.  It therefore doesnt make sense to imply that I'm 'afraid' of the nexgenwebsite ..which after all is just a series of zeros and ones on a server somewhere hundreds of miles away. 

So 'uneasy'? yes. 'Jittery' or 'afraid', I'm afraid not  ;-)

[WarpD 824]

Why are people uneasy?

 

It's a simple process... I'll try to explain it:

 

"Hey I have a new website where you can go and talk to people about your favorite topic! Come sign up on my new website!"

 

"I already have a website where I can talk to people about my favorite topic. Why do I need to sign up on your website?"

 

"My website is cool! It comes with a free widget demo only available to those who sign up for my website!"

 

"Uh, so your website, which is brand new and has almost no membership traffic gets access to a free widget demo. That is the reason to discuss my favorite topic on your website instead the one I already use?"

 

Now... really... does that make sense to go that route? It is what is being asked and is why some are leery of doing it. It just doesn't make sense at all, other than the person who wants everyone to sign up on their website has something to gain. Web traffic isn't free and considering the bandwidth that AVSIM requires, I don't think the OP is quite ready to bankroll a free access website for all to discuss the potential of a new sim. So, what's not being disclosed?

 

I too question the motives. Nothing is free.

[HiFlyer 9,363]

 

 

Sure thing. But I think its also about trying to get the balance right and not being too pushy or controlling.

 

I think it takes quite a few unique factors to make a successful site, but perhaps foremost amongst them, though possibly equal at the top of the chain with ease of navigation is atmosphere. The site admin (and his moderators if any) must constantly tread the fine line between maintaining order and behaviors that can be seen as dictatorial.

 

I want to give the site a fair chance while it attempts to find its balance of both format and voice, but it's also good to keep in mind that it's rare to get a second chance to make a first impression. 

[n4gix 4,949]

Ed, in all fairness the SimPosium website is focused on a single topic with multiple sub-levels of content discussion.

 

AVSIM on the other had is devoted to a multitude of products and topics, with multiple sub-levels of content discussion.

 

It's apparent that this thread is rapidly spinning out of control. It would be nice if folks who have nothing constructive to add to the discussion exercise their right to remain silent... :ph34r:

[TooWings 17]

 

 

It's apparent that this thread is rapidly spinning out of control

 

Simply apply rudder and stick to counteract the spin ;-)

[srborick 0]

Well Sunday morning, my time, and I see that in a few hours things have spun out of control... again.

 

Nearly every opposition written here could easily be explained if one would only take the time to actually visit the SIM-Posium and actually "Read" the 4 articles. It's very apparent that those in opposition have not done that.... and skimming over the Articles... does not help you to fully understand the intent of the SIM-Posium.

 

I rather doubt that those in Opposition have actually fully read the threads here on AVSIM as doing so would also provide a great deal of information as to what the SIM-Posium is and what it isn't.

 

Unfortunately... I believe that you who are in opposition actually may be correct... there doesn't appear to be the interest in a community driven next generation flight simulator that I had hoped. I don't know how much of that is possibly the direct results of the Opposition on this forum if indeed the threads here have had a direct impact at all.

 

If there has been an appearance of heavy handiness on my part, I sincerely apologies... I have spent the majority of my time on AVSIM and the 50 some odd posts that I've created in an attempt to refute the opposition statements that have been posted on these threads.

 

I'd like to reiterate one thing... and hopefully the majority of you will understand the positive of what I'm about to state and will begin to understand the influence that one individual can have in regards to a next generation flight simulator, let alone an entire community.

 

Perhaps the reason that UNIGINE Sim has not approached a large audience as AVSIM is simply because no one here at AVSIM has approached UNIGINE Sim and asked if they would be willing to have their 3D Engine analyzed for the purpose of creating a next generation flight simulator. As someone who is willing to fight for the cause of promoting the progression of consumer oriented flight simulation towards a bright future which includes the use of newer technologies... I did approach UNIGINE Sim on behalf of the flight simulator community. Below is the original email that I sent to UNIGINE Sim which ultimately resulted in letting the SIM-Posium have access to not only Tech Demos that are not readily available to the general public, but also access to the UNIGINE 3D Engine itself for evaluation purposes.

 

Now...  I've already asked this, but I'll ask again... if one person can get a major 3D Engine developer to willingly provide proprietary demos and access to a community of dedicated individuals who are interested in the future of consumer oriented flight simulation... can you imagine what 100,000 or more people could do if we pulled together?

 

This email was sent prior to the opening of the NGFS SIM-Posium in anticipation of the flight simulation community unifying itself to a common cause.

 

Hello, 

My name is Stephen Borick and I am in the process of creating an on-line symposium for the purpose of discussing the future of consumer flight simulation and the feasibility of crowdfunding a Next Generation Flight Simulator (NGFS). You can find the work in progress here -  

 

http://nexgenflightsim.com

 

The launch of the website is scheduled for early to mid April 2015 and the symposium is to last no more than a total of 6 months from the day the site is launched.

 

One of the key goals of the symposium is to determine the platform that would be used for the development of the NGFS. 

 

If you take a quick look at the Home/Intro page of the site you will notice that UNIGINE Sim is one of three featured 3D Engines that are used to demonstrate the distinct difference that a well developed 3D Engine has over older engines such as those used in currently available consumer flight simulators.

 

Through my own preliminary research, UNIGINE Sim would be the engine of choice for very obvious reasons, as it provides many of the features that we would want to implement into a new flight simulator, without the need for in house development as well as the obvious interest that Unigine has in the continued development of the engine. There is little doubt in my mind that the consumer flight simulator community will come to that same conclusion.

 

I have two purposes for this email. 

 

It is doubtful that you would want to provide an unknown number of evaluation kits without first understanding the purpose for those kits. It is the intent of the symposium to come away with a clear development strategy for a next generation flight simulator and part of that strategy is of course the engine.

 

- What would be the criteria regarding the distribution of your evaluation kits that we would have to meet? 

- Is there the possibility of being able to distribute the UNIGINE Sim Reference Manual to those members of the symposium whose expertise would qualify for such access?

 

The second purpose for this email is to inquire about the technical demo referred to as UNIGINE Rescue Helicopter Demo and it's availability. It's apparent that it's not easily accessible by the public, however... is it possible that the demo could be made available to such an on-line event as our symposium? 

 

If the Rescue Helicopter Demo is not accessible, is there the possibility of allowing our own developers to create a demo using the evaluation kit? If yes, would we be able to distribute that demo to the registered members of the symposium?

 

As a side note, and something to think about... the symposium is designed for one purpose and that is to gather the formidable flight simulator community in a similar fashion that Chris Roberts and David Braben have done for their respective projects. 

 

As you know, Microsoft discontinued Flight Simulator sometime ago and although Lockheed Martin and now Dovetail have access to the Microsoft ESP, the engine has, been surpassed by newer technologies. 

 

A new dynasty in consumer flight simulation will not be established on the foundation of old technologies. Only by utilizing such an ongoing developed engines such as UNIGINE Sim can a long and productive future be established. 

 

I believe that a long term future for consumer flight simulation is possible. As long as a forward thinking flight simulation production team is coupled with an equally forward thinking 3D engine production team. If that happens the same results as we have seen with Elite Dangerous and Star Citizens can happen. 

 

Looking forward to hearing from you,

 

Stephen Borick

 

NGFS SIM-Posium

[srborick 0]

I too question the motives. Nothing is free.

 

In this case it is... 

 

I created and am now funding the site for one purpose and that is the discussion of a next generation flight simulator in one formal arena... rather than having discussions spread across the world wide web and amounting to little or nothing.

 

The effort is to join together as a community and to "Brainstorm" how we can create something special in the way of flight simulation.

 

As I specifically mentioned in one of the Articles... that apparently not many are interested in reading... "the SIM-Posium was built for the flight simulator community..." I'm simply here to keep the lights on.

 

So... does the flight simulator community want to select a group of qualified individuals to take charge of and have complete access and control of the entire SIM-Posium website? By all means... please do. It's your website.

 

We already have an individual here on the AVSIM forums who is an expert in UI... bring him over, redesign the entire site for easier accessibility by everyone.

 

Don't like how things are being run over at the SIM-Posium... that's fine... gather a group of qualified individuals and run it better... after all... it's your SIM-Posium.

 

The SIM-Posium is available for a minimum of 6 months, if at the end of 6 months the interest just isn't there... certainly you'd be able to understand my reluctance to continue financing the website.

 

I invite all of you... to take the SIM-Posium into your own hands... and do with it as you will. It's survival or it's demise is in your hands... Whether or not, we as a community can come together to discuss and possibly find the means to create a next generation flight simulator... is totally up to you. 

 

I would hope that we could.

 

Stephen Borick

[flyforever 267]

Stephen,

 

First, I applaud your enthusiasm with which you're trying to get a movement going. The thing to keep in mind is that the 100000 potential users are already there, ready to purchase the next great flight sim. The problem is that a flight sim can sell 100, 000 copies but requires millions of lines of complex code, while a 1,000,000 users- shoot- them- up game requires considerably less effort to produce.  It's clear that Microsoft and other highly talented developers put in a lot of time and money-- all to the conclusion that a niche product has a limited market potential.  This is why we should be putting our collective voices and efforts toward ensuring that Steam and PD3 and xplane continue to improve the product that is already available.  It's pure mathematics:  to start from scratch takes millions of dollars; to start from their current point takes less money while money is coming in. A 3d graphics engine is not necessarily a flight sim.

 

Frankly, I am encouraged by the fact that there's so much activity going on. The Flight Sim con in the US in June is a good indication that things are going well for a small hobby like ours.

 

tony

[HiFlyer 9,363]

 A little more persistence, a little more effort, and what seemed hopeless failure may turn to glorious success. There is no failure except in no longer trying. There is no defeat except from within, no really insurmountable barrier save our own inherent weakness of purpose.

 

Quote from somebody, somewhere.  :mellow: 

 

I really have not the foggiest clue if this has even the smallest chance of success. Judging by past reaction's, this will be buried beneath a wave of skepticism, but all I can think is that if somebody is willing to try, why not let them do so, unhindered?

 

The unanswered question seems to be: What do we have to lose exactly? What are the undesirable consequences of trying?

[srborick 0]

 

 

The thing to keep in mind is that the 100000 potential users are already there, ready to purchase the next great flight sim. The problem is that a flight sim can sell 100, 000 copies but requires millions of lines of complex code, while a 1,000,000 users- shoot- them- up game requires considerably less effort to produce. 

 

Let's say you have only 100,000 interested individuals who are members of the flight simulator community who want the next great flight simulator (that would be the minimal estimate), but let's also say that there are another 100,000 individuals who are not currently involved in flight simulation but would be very interested in purchasing a next generation flight simulator that provided higher fidelity than let's say, FSX, P3D, X-Plane, etc. because it used a new 3D engine to create that simulator. OK... as you said... it's a numbers game... 200,000 people (minimum) each investing $50 each to see a well thought out project come to fruition. That's $10,000,000.00 raised for that project (minimum). 

 

Alright... let's say for argument sake that $10,000,000.00 isn't enough to build the flight simulator of everyone's dreams, but it's enough to build a foundation of one that can be released and enjoyed by everyone and then... can be continually built upon for years to come.

 

The resources available for creating a next generation flight simulator is "World Wide", we don't necessarily need to rely on the highest paid programmers out there, it just isn't necessary. And let's not forget about CrowdSourcing or telecommuting, or telecommunications, etc. etc.

 

It's feasible, it can be done.... it's just a matter of coming together, discussing it, planning it and doing it.

 

Stephen Borick 

[JSkorna 137]

200,000 people are not going to invest $50 in any type of project that may or may not see the light of day.

[HiFlyer 9,363]

200,000 people are not going to invest $50 in any type of project that may or may not see the light of day.

 

You forget Star citizen........... (which was a project also started in a defunct niche genre) http://www.cnbc.com/id/102021804

 

I think the main thing is that this effort does not have a "name" attached to it. If Avsim had announced this, people would be so excited they would need to change their underclothes! Pretty much the same for Aerosoft or Orbx. These are names and personalities people know, and they have the requisite trust to announce such a thing and be taken on faith.

 

Even Star citizen probably would not have succeeded nearly so spectacularly without the name and proven track record of Chris Roberts.

 

But who is Stephen B?

 

At base, I believe thats what this effort is really up against, and I'm not sure what the solution is. Even DTG, a known company with serious cash available and a proven programming track record was hazed unmercifully until FSX-SE was released and wonder of wonders, was not the devil.

 

All the best, Stephen, but you are going to need some serious thick skin and a boatload of determination to stick to your guns through this. I think your six month timeline is just about right to gauge the interest of this community, and I wouldn't take it even a minute past that if the interest does not materialize.

 

Good luck.

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

If you read the Articles... you'll find some of the answers to your questions...

 

The rest of your questions... I'm not really sure my answers would be satisfactory to you... such as nextgen vs nexgen... I don't understand your reasoning for asking the question since it really shouldn't be an issue... it's like asking someone why their mother named them Steve instead of Stephen.... it's just an abbreviated name.

 

As a UI designer... if you really feel that the site could use some redesigning, why not work with our System Admin... after all... it's a community website and your input would be welcomed.

 

One key to being successful is giving a good impression. Some of what I mentioned targets what people might judge you based on. The domain name abbreviation doesn't make much sense to me because "nex" isn't an accepted abbreviation of "next." It's an unpredictable domain name, is my point.

 

You already know why I can't be of much assistance as far as the website goes.

 

Let's say you have only 100,000 interested individuals who are members of the flight simulator community who want the next great flight simulator (that would be the minimal estimate), but let's also say that there are another 100,000 individuals who are not currently involved in flight simulation but would be very interested in purchasing a next generation flight simulator that provided higher fidelity than let's say, FSX, P3D, X-Plane, etc. because it used a new 3D engine to create that simulator. OK... as you said... it's a numbers game... 200,000 people (minimum) each investing $50 each to see a well thought out project come to fruition. That's $10,000,000.00 raised for that project (minimum). 

 

100,000 is MINIMAL? If there were 100,000 people willing to spend that much money in this community, us addon developers would be rich. I can promise you that this number is significantly lower...

[mgh 89]

 

 

Pretty much the same for Aerosoft...

 

Aerosoft did announce it intended to develop a new flight simuator. It then quickly realised that it wasn't possible.  How do you expect a group of amateurs to achieve that.

 

Incidentally, what practical help can you offer to the development of new flight simulator?

[HiFlyer 9,363]

Aerosoft did announce it intended to develop a new flight simuator. It then quickly realised that it wasn't possible.  How do you expect a group of amateurs to achieve that.

 

Incidentally, what practical help can you offer to the development of new flight simulator?

Whatever I am able. Can I make videos? Yes, Can I write? Yes. Can I beta test? Yes. Can I organize a group  to achieve common goals? Yes? Have I done all that in the past? Yes. Have I worked in Flight sim related focus group? Yes. Can I paint aircraft? Yes. Have I moderated/managed a website? Yes. Can I place scenery? Yes. In fact I can do whatever is available for me to do that's within my skills or that I can learn. What I can't do is habitually snipe from the sidelines.

 

Incidentally, can you point me to anything whatsoever that said Aerosoft believes a sim was not possible? Anything at all? Because I was very much there at the time, and seemed to have missed it.