Game or Sim?

[Guest MrBitsy]

Strange view.PS1 is not being developed and is about to be surpassed by the PMDG 747, with the benefit of good outside views. Professional pilots are using FS at home to train for their sim check rides.I have just spent 3 hours watching an ATR72 DVD. I can fly the same procedures using the Flight 1 ATR72, developed in conjunction with the real manufacturer. I get real weather from the Internet, plan the flight using the real weather data, load fuel and balance the aircraft, plan the flight using real world charts and use actual flight manuals for procedures to fly.I have instruments that mimic every function of their real world counterparts. I can even use the real world operating manuals to learn how to operate them!I am currently doing the exams for a private pilots course, to be taken in Florida in November. I have UK scenery installed that enables me to plan the flight as I would for a real flight. I have the real world weather too, so when I get into the simulator I can fly the flight as I would in the real world, timing my nave points and seeing them out the window! I use a real world flight computer too (wizz wheel).~No way is FS a game.Ray Keattch

[mgh 89]

I don't think it matters what it's called or on wehat shelves it's found on.The Compact Oxford Dictionary definitions are:GAME"noun 1 an activity engaged in for amusement. 2 a form of competitive activity or sport played according to rules. 3 a complete episode or period of play, ending in a final result. 4 a single portion of play, forming a scoring unit within a game. 5 (games) a meeting for sporting contests. 6 the equipment used in playing a board game, computer game, etc. 7 a type of activity or business regarded as a game. 8 a secret plan or trick. 9 wild mammals or birds hunted for sport or food."SIMULATE"verb imitate or reproduce the appearance, character, or conditions of. Derivatives: simulant noun simulation noun"So it could be either. I think of a game as being a competitive activity with a result, ie a game of chess, football, tennis, etc. so I regard FS as a simulation.

[Murmur 3,944]

>I have just been involved in a very lengthy discussion with>regard to the question is MSFS a simulator or a game.Well, they don't exclude each other :)Actually, here's the answer:"The only difference between men and boys, is the price of their toys."

[Erv Moore 21]

Like others, it is a sim for me. My flight sim computer is rigged for sim only - do not touch including Grand Kidoos. I also enjoy flying the newly released Falcon 4.0.ErvASUS P4C 8000-E Deluxe, P4 3.0,Win XP Home Editions Service Pack IIATI Radeon 9700 Pro 128 MB2ea Corsair 512 MB DDR400 PC3200 Double DataAntec SL400 W 12V ATX Power SupplySeagate 40 GB 7200 RPM

[Guest Jimbofly]

It's simple.Battlefield 1942, flying the B-52: Game.FS9: Simulator.It simulates with a reasonable level of accuracy actual flight. If you use high-fidelity addons such as the PMDG 737-800 or the RealAir SF-260 then it's even more realistic.And people who argue it's a game, care to elaborate a little. Just saying "it's a game because I said so" isn't really taken seriously by anyone.James

[Guest Gordius]

>Easy one this is..........................>>>If your reality sliders are all fully left, it's a game. If>they are fully right, it's a Sim.Uh oh. Picture this ... I buy my first computer. I see FS9 while I am there and buy that too. I install it and start going through the lessons. While going through the lessons a thing keeps popping up telling me to press B or . or P or ... Sliders to the laft and most things there are unticked. FS9 is simulating and I am learning. An ice cream is always an ice cream with or without the flake ;-)>>Dave T. .........On the lovely warm Devon Riviera and active>'FlightSim User's Group' member at>http://www.flightsimgrpuk.free-online.co.uk/Hi were you the chap in Blackpool last year? Good to see you. I think I know what you mean by the riviera I'm from Plymouth myself. Now that I have your site again maybe i'll say hi properly.OOOPS off topic :-wave Andrew Brownhttp://www.gordiusfs.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

[Guest Zevious Zoquis]

Care to elaborate on that 70-80% number? From what I understand from reading various articles over the past year or so, several of the top payware add-on planes get remarkably close to the levels of detail found in full motion training simulators (minus the full motion of course). Have you tried any of the PMDG or Flight1 stuff and if so, what flaws/innacuracies in something like the ATR accounts for the 20-30% fidelity gap you refer to and which commercially available sim does it better? Just wondering.Even in its defualt state I'd say it's a sim just like Falcon4 is a sim and IL2 is a sim and Grand Prix Legends is a sim. They are games too of course, and theres nothing wrong with that.

[ahuimanu 50]

Where does one begin and the other end?Wikipedia sez:Game: "A game is a recreational activity involving one or more players. This can be defined by A) a goal that the players try to reach, :( some set of rules that determines what the players can or can not do. Games are played primarily for entertainment or enjoyment, but may also serve an educational or simulational role."-OR-Simulation: "A simulation is an imitation of some real device or state of affairs. Simulation attempts to represent certain features of the behavior of a physical or abstract system by the behavior of another system.Simulation is used in many contexts, including the modeling of natural systems, and human systems to gain insight into the operation of those systems; and simulation in technology and safety engineering where the goal is to test some real-world practical scenario. Simulation, using a simulator or otherwise experimenting with a fictitious situation can show the eventual real effects of some possible conditions."

[jacsantos 0]

Its neither....Its an expandable interactive multimedia aviation learning centre!!!

[Guest guyjr]

>Andrew, if I'm not mistaken, FS is now at a level of>sophistication where part of your real/world IFR flight>training can be undertaken on a computer and can qualify as>such; 10 hours, if I recall. I'm not a pilot, so someone will>probably correct me; but if I'm right, that makes it a sim!Here's my quick take - it's an Entertaining Simulation. :-)As far as the real-world IFR training, MSFS is not listed as an approved PCATD (Personal Computer Aircraft Training Device) by the FAA, so it cannot be used to log time toward a rating or certificate. However, I'd just like to note that my instructor was quite impressed two years ago when I completed my IFR checkride with just about the minimum number of required hours (both in the simulator I used at the flight school as well as real hours in the plane under the hood / in IMC). We both credit it to a _lot_ of "extra-cirricular" FS2002 time, and I also credit it to just playing a lot of video games in general that require good hand-eye coordination. My theory is that all those hours spent in front of the TV playing PS2 games helps build the scanning skills you need when flying in the clouds.--Guy

[Staffan 12]

>Care to elaborate on that 70-80% number? From what I>understand from reading various articles over the past year or>so, several of the top payware add-on planes get remarkably>close to the levels of detail found in full motion training>simulators (minus the full motion of course). Have you tried>any of the PMDG or Flight1 stuff and if so, what>flaws/innacuracies in something like the ATR accounts for the>20-30% fidelity gap you refer to and which commercially>available sim does it better? Just wondering.>>Even in its defualt state I'd say it's a sim just like Falcon4>is a sim and IL2 is a sim and Grand Prix Legends is a sim. >They are games too of course, and theres nothing wrong with>that.Hi,First, I hope you are joking, when you claim that even as a default it is a simulator. :-rollI have been simming since FS4, and have been developing panels since FS95. And I have at no occasion felt that as a default it is a simulator. I would call it more as a "Flying Adventure Game".What I am talking about is the general default structure of the title. Microsoft left out many parameters in the SDKs inorder for the developers not beeing able to program with 100% accuracy.This debate really should be all about if FS9 is a simulator or game as it is from the shelf. Not what various developers are able to make it to.Because if you add all addons there is, ofcourse it is possible to make it more towards the simulator genre. But that is not how the majority of simmers use FS9. The majority have no idea of that there are addons available.One example is that four of my working collegues who have been simming for quite a while, didn

[Mike T 208]

Andrew:Out of the box, MSFS is a very sophisticated *game*. As such it cannot be used for *true* real world VFR in most areas, flight dynamics and weather system modeling makes *true* IFR practice very unrealistic and the cockpit layouts and lack of complexity in most aircrft make it useless as a "paper tiger".That said. With the addition of 3rd party add-ons that hyper-realistically recreate every button and switch on the flight deck to the point that it can be used with a real world flight manual, dynamic and accurate weather phonomena, live ATC that faithfully mimic the real world procedures, requirements and restrictions, along with accurate flight and fuel dynamics that allow flights to be conducted with tight tolerances to its real world counterparts make MSFS 2004 a very capable simulator. So much so that MSFS is used at airline preperation training schools, the military and by thousands of pilots worldwide. What differenciates a simulator from a game? The difference is that a simulator is not concerned with your 'entertainment'. Irrespective of your level of entertainment, a true simulator is built to tight tolerances in relation to its real world counterpart and can be used as a valuable tool to enhance and hone ones skills, vis a v, a real airplane. If you are NOT entertained, too bad: it works this way, you must follow these procedures, you are limited by these parameters, you must compensate for these issues, you must provide this data and you must respond to these variables. PERIOD. If you are not entertained, oh well, these are the requirements and there is very little room for compromise. Ask a 10,000 hour 777 captain if he thinks the airline's Level D simulator is a game when the instructor fails all his electronics, flames out an engine and oh, by the way, here is a nice microburst for ya on the approach just as your hydraulics fail. And think about it, the only difference between a Level D simualtor and a suped up version of MSFS is the fact that the LDS is on hydraulic stilts!For example, for those who just want to ALWAYS jump into a MSFS airplane and zoom off into the wild blue yonder with ne'er a manual, chart, or procedure then MSFS is an *cool* entertainment title. This is the 95% for whom Microsoft builds MSFS. AND there's nothing wrong with that. TO my 13 year old son, MSFS is a game and he would squeel with glee if I took his advice and smashed my beloved 767 into a tree at Mach 1! To that I usually respond: leave my office child or I will beat you. :-lol On the other hand, for those who load up MSFS 1/2 an hour before departure to configure a cold and dark flight deck, program the FMC, set up the flight parameters according as one would sitting on a real flight deck and have taken the time to learn thier ship and their craft to the point that they know the prestart or climb checklist from memory then MSFS ceases to be a *game*. Of course, the entertainment of FS is in the flying not in the monotony of checklists, procedures, rules, regulations, time, reading, learning, memorizing, verification or planning. IF all one does is fly then FS is a great and wonderful game that offers great potential to become a simulator. For a great many users, some days MSFS is a game and some days it is a simulator.On the other hand, if you know the MTOW of your 767 by heart, program realistic D-TOs to save your simulated airline money (and prevent noise pollution), know the difference between CATIII and CAT IIIB then (you have no life and need a girlfriend), the *game* is in utilizing the simulator and being the best at it.For me, I have no life, and Microsoft Flight Simulator is just that.Regards,Mike T.

[Johan_Dees 84]

"GAME > 9 wild mammals or birds hunted for sport or food."You see? so simple is it. FS is a simulator, since it has nothing to do with GAME, nor birds or mammals, unless you download them and place them in the simulator then you could have a game simulator.But from the shelves there isnt any GAME in it, so its wrongly advertised as Microsoft Games, and in the shops its close to misled of people.Time to sue MS for this. How dare they sell game for a PC.[/sarcarsm off]Johan[A HREF=http://jdserver.no-ip.com]Personal Server[/A]A LITTLE LESS CONVERSATION, AND A LITTLE MORE ACTION PLEASE!

[Guest Zevious Zoquis]

>>This debate really should be all about if FS9 is a simulator>or game as it is from the shelf. Not what various developers>are able to make it to.>>Staffan Ahlberg>Sweden/Stockholm/ESSAWhy?As far as the defualt being a simulator, I would suggest that whether or not you think its a good simulator doesn't matter. It obviously makes the attempt to simulate reality to a degree, and I would also suggest that while not nearly as complete as many of the add-ons we can get, the defualt 172 is certainly not that bad.

[Geofa 108]

"Logging as an ifr training device" has as much or more to do with the program working with FAA approved flight controls , being presented in a particular training environment, and going thru the approval process with the FAA paperwork than the software itself.I currently own 2 sims that are ifr approved :on top, and Ip trainer (also xplane which I think is approved). I can assure you that out of the box, MSFS has better instrumentation that match the real world instruments(even the stock 172, 182, Baron etc.),fm's, not to mention real world looks and weather, than the ASA series.The ASA Ip trainer even disables the rudders pedals during lessons, , and the weather/graphics out the window are about the same as fs3-4. In my opinion a good part of flying ifr is making good weather decisions-what a powerful training tool to load up live weather at any given time and go up virtually and have a look at what you would really face and see how that compares to the reports-just one area MS is clearly superior. Terrain clearance and avoidance is another area-MS wins again. Add customizing your own personal aircraft, or buying an add in (yes now going outside the box),real world instrumentation-some stock and some add ins and now there really is no contest.The instructing module in ASA Ip trainer is what makes this Ifr approved training program spectacular-and I would recommend (and am) any serious flyer to get this program for that! However, on all other accounts, MS, even out of the box, is a much more powerful sim . One only has to compare MS out of the box to a current approved trainer such as above and I think the argument becomes very clear! :-)http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg