Also, mentioning ATC. Others, and maybe I have in the past, stated that something must have this feature. Well no, actually. If you could create a new sim, but ATC has to left out from day one, you know, that's pretty acceptable. To some not, but to others yes (I've never used it). And this is true with all products. You state what you want in a huge list, try and reach that, but of course some gets cut. That's what happens in all game development. Even application development. You have to start somewhere. You can then say, for example, ATC will be coming in version 2, 12 months down the line.

 

As have been stated, it doesn't have to have ALL the features of what we currently have, and especially do all of them better. It has to be better, yes, but a list of everything that everyone wants...no

In actuality... the list of included features depends solely on the number of people who believe in the project and are willing to participate by providing their ideas, talents, and yes monies.

 

The larger the movement, the greater the opportunity for included features.

 

Stephen B. 

And any actual effort would demand unprecedented transparency. 

And any actual effort would demand unprecedented transparency. 

 

Agreed...

 

I'm looking into a way that we can incorporate Google Spreadsheets (or something similar) that would allow us to post ideas/features as they are input into the various threads. 

 

When we have a number of features we'll also start a polling system so we can get a clear and transparent consensus of the community. 

 

Any other suggestions would be welcomed.

 

Stephen B.

Stephen, that graphic you posted showing how the UNIGINE Sim world is built up is exactly the same as how the FSX/P3D world is built up.

 

Stephen have you been Simming very long?  just curious

 

 

it doesn't have to have ALL the features of what we currently have, and especially do all of them better

 

Then what's the point ?

To improve what we have, but "improve" doesn't mean have everything.

 

Let's take another example; you want to release a new web server that works in a far quicker way then anything on the market. On first release it doesn't have all the features as other web servers, but it's faster and lighter. People use it, it builds over time to start introducing those features.

 

This is pretty much true of most if not all applications. If you're stating that every new application, that is successful, has EVERY feature that is not only included, but is as good or better then existing products, then I have to suggest you are not aware of computer applications as a whole. And I don't mean any disrespect by saying that

 

 

ATC will be coming in version 2, 12 months down the line

 

Good luck finding someone expert enough to program an ATC module in 12 months, especially a programmer well versed in both FAA and ICAO phraseology and procedures.

The four that we are lucky enough to have for FSX/P3D were developed over many years, the newest of which, ProATC has been in development on and off since 2005, the others are even older

It was an example. I was giving an example to how it might work. Not to be taken literally.

 

Also next time, if you're going to quote me and call me out on something, at least have the common decency to quote the full sentence

 

 You have to start somewhere. You can then say, for example, ATC will be coming in version 2, 12 months down the line.

 

 

Looks a lot different when you quote the whole thing, doesn't it?

Stephen, that graphic you posted showing how the UNIGINE Sim world is built up is exactly the same as how the FSX/P3D world is built up.

 

Then lets try something a little more.... out of the box. The point being made is that the tech has advanced, and civilian simulation has been largely left behind, where once upon a time, it defined the cutting edge.  http://forum.outerra.com/FMX/presentation/

Devon, we have a much better chance of getting the Sim we want by backing Outerra.

From what I can see it is almost there, and how long has it taken them to get even this far ?

 

I cannot see why we need to start from scratch when those guys have done such amazing work.

Stephen, that graphic you posted showing how the UNIGINE Sim world is built up is exactly the same as how the FSX/P3D world is built up.

 

Stephen have you been Simming very long?  just curious

 

 

 

Then what's the point ?

 

First... you'll notice I defined the graphic as a brief description... and to then...  imagine if we actually took the time to discover, in depth, the engines possibilities.

 

If any one chose to take that time, to discover... in depth, the engines possibilities... they would learn that the process is not exactly the same. There may be similarities, but the results are vastly different.

 

_______________________________________________________________________

 

I've been flying simulators since the SUBLogic days. 

 

Stephen B.

Devon, we have a much better chance of getting the Sim we want by backing Outerra.

From what I can see it is almost there, and how long has it taken them to get even this far ?

 

I cannot see why we need to start from scratch when those guys have done such amazing work.

 

That might indeed be a possible conclusion, but for this effort, it's only fair and logical that all possibilities be looked at. For me Outerra is tasty, but the final consensus of the community after weighing all of the available information might well point elsewhere.

Glynn, have you run the UnigineSim tech demo? Until you do you won't really have an understanding of what's possible bearing in mind that it's a tech demo only. The basic code for creating a flightsim world is there already as it's a flightsim tech demo. So a lot of what needs to be done can be accomplished now which means not really starting from scratch but expanding on what's already there. Have a look at it if you've not yet just to see what you think then.

I cannot see why we need to start from scratch when those guys have done such amazing work.

 

I've been following Outerra for several years and I like what they've done and I would like to see it progress to a full blown flight simulator. Outerra Anteworld is a great tech demo and certainly shows the potential of what could be achieved.

 

However... it doesn't provide the fidelity that I would expect from any next generation flight simulator. One only needs to visit Yosemite National Park or the Grand Canyon in Anteworld to see what I'm referring to.

 

The level of fidelity within the Port Angeles Tech Demo from UNIGINE Sim shows what I would expect to see in a next generation flight simulator. 

 

Stephen B

Devon, we have a much better chance of getting the Sim we want by backing Outerra.

From what I can see it is almost there, and how long has it taken them to get even this far ?

 

I cannot see why we need to start from scratch when those guys have done such amazing work.

 

Nobody is saying start from scratch. Infact the ideas proposed are to use an engine such as UNIGINE, and build on that