I've just run the UnigineSim tech demo that Stephen put the legwork in to get access to. It's beyond anything current flightsimmers have ever seen. It's simply amazing! It literally is everything that a flightsimmer wants now and pays big money to get but doesn't get. This is so far beyond the best that the other sims have to offer it makes laughing stocks of them.

I've been simming since FS98, have tried all of them and spent many thousands to never get anywhere even close to this. I would drop $100 or more quite frankly in a heartbeat without a second thought to see this realized into a full sim.

You all owe it to yourselves to get over the needless negativity and try it for yourselves. I think many minds would change!

Jim, well said! Someone once remarked that our hobby has become fragmented, & there was much distress.

 

However, I think that, at last, we have choices to make. There is so much out there now to satisfy any enthusiast's hobby needs. From gaming to simming.

 

We have a saying.. "Whatever floats your boat!" Well, with Milton & teams HMS Bounty & Erwin's Pirate ship, never a true word was uttered in jest! :p0503:

 

 

This is so far beyond the best that the other sims have to offer it makes laughing stocks of them.

 

How is the ATC, AI Traffic, and the flight model?

 

Or do you mean that the scenery looks great?

I've just run the UnigineSim tech demo that Stephen put the legwork in to get access to. It's beyond anything current flightsimmers have ever seen. It's simply amazing! It literally is everything that a flightsimmer wants now and pays big money to get but doesn't get. This is so far beyond the best that the other sims have to offer it makes laughing stocks of them.

I've been simming since FS98, have tried all of them and spent many thousands to never get anywhere even close to this. I would drop $100 or more quite frankly in a heartbeat without a second thought to see this realized into a full sim.

You all owe it to yourselves to get over the needless negativity and try it for yourselves. I think many minds would change!

 

I'll give it a try in the evening... 

 

And to all ney-sayers out there... a little possitive thinking will get you a long way, just give it a try and find out if supporting something - sometimes, isn't the better solution......

 

And here comes a little story for you:

 

A small little bird falls out of it's nest...... so it sits in the grass and tweets for his live.... nearly freezing to death....  along comes a cow, hears the the little bird tweeting and asks what's wrong? So the little bird answers that it fell out of the nest and now is freezing , the cow - trying to help the little bird, turns around and craps on it...... well now the little bird is a little stinky -  how ever, it at least feels warm again - and so keeps on tweeting for his parents..... a little later a cat comes along, hears the little bird tweeting and fetches it out of the cows dropping.........

 

and the moral of the story........ Not everybody who craps on you is your enemy - and anybody getting you out of ###### is not necessarily your friend....

 

kind regards

 

 

From gaming to simming.

 

There you go again, somehow in your mind making a division between the two.

They dropped the idea long before P3D appeared. They dropped the idea because the financial outlay was not worth the potential income.

 

And I think they were right. I also think the community en masse has a certain worldview that precluded looking at the problem from other angles. I've said before that I don't believe a pure flight sim could make it either.

 

So dont make a pure flight sim! Branch out. Form a bigger tent. Step back slightly from the cockpit, and consider ways around the problem.

 

I've mentioned before the possibility of a multi-sim to very mixed reactions. In a community that is usually all planes, all the time, the idea can border on blasphemy, but I think its pretty much an article of faith that the known community is unlikely to have either the funding power to complete a "pure" flightsim project on its own, nor the numbers to support the cost of building it in the first place... On its own.

 

All of our current engines have a uniformly plane-centric design, and that's proven not to be enough. There's also the issue that the technically dense type of simulation favored by many, tends to eschew an easy on-ramp for beginners, and instead tends to cater mostly to established long term users, possibly stifling incoming users who might have an interest, but not at the level the community is currently at. 

 

Time to try something different. Or...... not.

How is the ATC, AI Traffic, and the flight model?

 

Or do you mean that the scenery looks great?

 

It's very easy for you to find out Jim. Maybe after you do you'll actually have something positive to say or maybe you'll just stay true to form.

And I think they were right. I also think the community en masse has a certain worldview that precluded looking at the problem from other angles. I've said before that I don't believe a pure flight sim could make it either.

 

So dont make a pure flight sim! Branch out. Form a bigger tent. Step back slightly from the cockpit, and consider ways around the problem.

 

I've mentioned before the possibility of a multi-sim to very mixed reactions. In a community that is usually all planes, all the time, the idea can border on blasphemy, but I think its pretty much an article of faith that the known community is unlikely to have either the funding power to complete such a project on its own, nor the numbers to support it financially afterwards... On its own.

 

All of our current engines have a uniformly plane-centric design, and that's proven not to be enough. There's also the issue that the technically dense type of simulation favored by many, tends to eschew an easy on-ramp for beginners, and instead tends to cater mostly to established long term users, possibly stifling incoming users who might have an interest, but not at the level the community is currently at. 

 

Time to try something different. Or...... not.

 

A multisim strikes me as very possible actually having seen the tech demo. Not such a mad idea at all.

 

 

It's very easy for you to find out Jim.

 

And see that they don't exist? There are other ways to find things out besides that one forum; the internet is a great resource!!

And see that they don't exist? There are other ways to find things out besides that one forum; the internet is a great resource!!

 

True to form then eh Jim? I'm not at all surprised. It's a tech demo, you do understand the difference between a tech demo and a fully fledged sim yes?

You referred the "tech demo" as to the next best thing since sliced bread and better than anything we have ever used before, and I was just wondering what part of the flight sim/tech demo fit that description.

How is the ATC, AI Traffic, and the flight model?

 

Well..... It is only a tech demo. Its probably a big mistake to think any new sim is going to have full FSX functionality straight out of the box. More likely is that something basic arrives and then is slowly built upon. A simple framework. After all X-plane collectively is many many years old and is still working on its ATC as well as AI, and FSX in its current form is a result of many years of modifications from literally hundreds of different sources.

For Gods sake Jim have a look at it, you might find some shred of vision, optimism and hope still left in you. What have you got to lose?

I stand by my enthusiastic comment, it is better at a base level than anything we've got. Is it everything Jim Skorna wants? No, it's not but it could be Jim, that's the whole point.

I have no desire to back and forth with you Jim, it's a waste of my time. If you want to, get it and have a look at what might be. If you don't, don't

And to all ney-sayers out there... a little possitive thinking will get you a long way

 

I suggest we stop classifying AVSIM members who have their doubts about the NexGenFlightsim as somehow being 'sniping' 'ney-sayers' with a 'glass half empty' outlook.. We are equally all allowed our point of view, especially on this informal Hangar Chat forum as opposed to say a flightsim development forum on AVSIM.  So called 'negative' comments can actually act as a stabilizer to a project where the majority of members may be over-positive and over-optimistic.  For example, if my local community had listened to the views of myself and a few others we would have saved the best part of a million pounds (UK) and 7 years worth of research for a housing project that never got off the drawing board but was 'real' in many peoples' heads.

 

I'm personally all in favour of a new flightsim but have simply disliked the way Stephen has gone about pushing recruitment  via his website and AVSIM - although in fairness he has since apologised for any 'heavy-handedness' in this respect.

 

..and who knows, perhaps those 'negative' comments from some AVSIM members will drive Stephen etc to see this new simulator through to completion - if so I'd like a mention in the list of credits please for having been a spur ;-)  

Meanwhile 'watch this space'.

 

Best wishes,

 

PH

 

 

Jim have a look at it

 

As a tech demo it looks very nice.

As a tech demo what it shows is that if you spend a lot of time putting the detail into a very small map area... it can look astounding.

 

However, that doesn't even come close to covering the scope of current offerings (FSX, Prepar3D, X-Plane).

 

The really big issue isn't going to be flight dynamics, nor ATC, nor AI. It's going to be whether the high graphics detail can be done on a global scale. Care to imagine how many hours it would take to download the entire world at the detail level they put into the tech demo of Port Angeles?

 

There is also the consideration that this is a product of Russia. Russia and the west aren't exactly on good terms right now. What happens if Russia locks things down and access to said software is cut off? What if the west cuts off access? After all, most of us have no control over politics... but it still can affect us in the stupidest of ways.

 

I see lots of ifs that are negative in viewpoint, and based on statements in this thread... if it's negative... it's not welcome, at all.