It is coming to PC. Nobody has actually stated that realism will take back stage in AeroFly 2. Airliners make short "positioning" hops between relatively close airports all of the time. How is this done? Flight simulators don't need to be capable of simulating ten hour intercontinental flights to be realistic.

It is coming to PC. Nobody has actually stated that realism will take back stage in AeroFly 2. Airliners make short "positioning" hops between relatively close airports all of the time. How is this done? Flight simulators don't need to be capable of simulating ten hour intercontinental flights to be realistic.

 

Very true.  I use Aerowinx PSX for training in small circuits around my LPPT, or some airport with nasty weather.

 

The longest flights I make in either p3d, x-plane or psx are from Madrid to Lisboa :-)

I ment no insult, I ment that as in look how far ahead of FSX and prepar3d aerofly 1 is graphics wise. I can't imagine how far ahead 2 will be. This could be the replacement we've been waiting many years for.

 

No insult taken, you did the right thing correcting me since i was wrong

 

After all the experiences with blurries, it's kind of nice to see those videos on youtube in aerofly where they are just flying around and everything looks photoreal on the ground without loadings

Version 1 is available on Steam. Why shouldn't you have to pay for Version 2 ?

 

Well they could have expanded on version 1 like they promised initially. Instead updates just stopped coming and the $9.99 mobile version actually overtook the PC version in terms of features.

Well they could have expanded on version 1 like they promised initially. Instead updates just stopped coming and the $9.99 mobile version actually overtook the PC version in terms of features.

 

How do they make money to pay for the development of the new features though? In fact, how does any primary developer make any money in this market when DLC is nearly an evil word?  :unsure:

How do they make money to pay for the development of the new features though? In fact, how does any primary developer make any money in this market when DLC is nearly an evil word?  :unsure:

 

Especially when some people don't seem to want to pay for additional features.

It is coming to PC. Nobody has actually stated that realism will take back stage in AeroFly 2. Airliners make short "positioning" hops between relatively close airports all of the time. How is this done? Flight simulators don't need to be capable of simulating ten hour intercontinental flights to be realistic.

 

Very true.  I use Aerowinx PSX for training in small circuits around my LPPT, or some airport with nasty weather.

 

The longest flights I make in either p3d, x-plane or psx are from Madrid to Lisboa :-)

Flight simulators in the 21st century, after we have had the whole earth included since FS5.1 (1996), have that standard to move forward with. PSX, FSX, and XP10 all have the capability of simulating a typical 4-14 hour 747-400 flight. It is not typical for a pilot to spend an entire career at KMWH doing circuits or for them to do positioning hops for an entire career. So, when a core simulator is developed here in this stage of home based flight simulation (about 35 years of development!), and home PC's, why would we accept anything less than a whole world with users able to simulate their first time flying a trike and progressing to a 16 hour 777-200LR flight with even the circuit breakers all simulated? You can do your positioning hops, and I can do my 16 hour flights in a complete simulator. But, only you could be happy with Aerofly 2, what about me and scores of others? See how one sided it becomes with the limitations? But w/o limitations everybody can be happy and this should be the standard we all call for in 2015/16. 

 

This is a true fact: there will always be more PMDG customers than Aerofly 2 customers. PMDG makes progress toward greater things to make our simulation more realistic, Aerofly 2 reminds us of 1990.

 

I'm not saying I expect just any company to develop a complete "simulator" (key word) with "circuit breaker" details, I'm saying we should be expecting "circuit breaker" details 35 years later, not this "part of California" stuff with 747's, this is so 1990's. Flight Unlimited 3 is actually better because it was released about 10 years into flight simulation development, progress of the time.         

Not every sim has to be a Porsche. (or a swiss army knife!)

 

Sometimes people just want a nice little bicycle to ride, and that should have its place as well.

 

And if a bicycle is a threat to a porsche, then porsche needs to stop a bit and think about why that might be, and what need it is that they're not fulfilling for just regular folk.

Flight simulators in the 21st century, after we have had the whole earth included since FS5.1 (1996), have that standard to move forward with. PSX, FSX, and XP10 all have the capability of simulating a typical 4-14 hour 747-400 flight. It is not typical for a pilot to spend an entire career at KMWH doing circuits or for them to do positioning hops for an entire career. So, when a core simulator is developed here in this stage of home based flight simulation (about 35 years of development!), and home PC's, why would we accept anything less than a whole world with users able to simulate their first time flying a trike and progressing to a 16 hour 777-200LR flight with even the circuit breakers all simulated? You can do your positioning hops, and I can do my 16 hour flights in a complete simulator. But, only you could be happy with Aerofly 2, what about me and scores of others? See how one sided it becomes with the limitations? But w/o limitations everybody can be happy and this should be the standard we all call for in 2015/16. 

 

This is a true fact: there will always be more PMDG customers than Aerofly 2 customers. PMDG makes progress toward greater things to make our simulation more realistic, Aerofly 2 reminds us of 1990.

 

I'm not saying I expect just any company to develop a complete "simulator" (key word) with "circuit breaker" details, I'm saying we should be expecting "circuit breaker" details 35 years later, not this "part of California" stuff with 747's, this is so 1990's. Flight Unlimited 3 is actually better because it was released about 10 years into flight simulation development, progress of the time.

 

The problem with the current sims is they look dated and MSFS based sims oom like crazy

This may fill the bill:

 

http://nexgenflightsim.com/wordpress/

Flight simulators in the 21st century, after we have had the whole earth included since FS5.1 (1996), have that standard to move forward with. PSX, FSX, and XP10 all have the capability of simulating a typical 4-14 hour 747-400 flight. It is not typical for a pilot to spend an entire career at KMWH doing circuits or for them to do positioning hops for an entire career. So, when a core simulator is developed here in this stage of home based flight simulation (about 35 years of development!), and home PC's, why would we accept anything less than a whole world with users able to simulate their first time flying a trike and progressing to a 16 hour 777-200LR flight with even the circuit breakers all simulated? You can do your positioning hops, and I can do my 16 hour flights in a complete simulator. But, only you could be happy with Aerofly 2, what about me and scores of others? See how one sided it becomes with the limitations? But w/o limitations everybody can be happy and this should be the standard we all call for in 2015/16.     

 

Again, Aerofly 2 IS a whole world simulator, but it will have detailed regions modeled separately. At release this will include California and Vegas with more regions to follow. Similar to the DCS model. 

 

This may fill the bill:

 

http://nexgenflightsim.com/wordpress/

 

That is not and can not be a whole world simulator. They decided to use Unigine 2 which cannot model a "round earth". It is simply a concept at this point, nothing more. 

Again, Aerofly 2 IS a whole world simulator, but it will have detailed regions modeled separately. At release this will include California and Vegas with more regions to follow. Similar to the DCS model. 

 

 

 

yea your great grandchildren will have the whole world, and the last bit of scenery could be the Falkland Islands priced at $143.00 based on a cost of living est. hahaha 

Not every sim has to be a Porsche. (or a swiss army knife!)

 

Sometimes people just want a nice little bicycle to ride, and that should have its place as well.

 

And if a bicycle is a threat to a porsche, then porsche needs to stop a bit and think about why that might be, and what need it is that they're not fulfilling for just regular folk.

 

This analogy does not really apply. But for the sake of a civil debate; you can do the same things in FSX and Aerofly, you cannot do the same things in a car and a bike. But anyway if you were given a choice today you would take a car over a bike if that was the only possible choice as a permanent vehicle. I take a stance of asking simmers to require companies to keep a high level of realism (choosing the car over the bike  so to speak). Not every flight simmer lives in CA and NV and most simmers like to fly in their home country at least some time, and lots of them even prefer their home airport. Companies that develop a model of geographic limitations in a flight sim are actually borderline suicidal because we already have the whole round world in FSX/P3D. This round world was fought for, for so many years and now we have it, but now we are going backwards to the limitations of geographic areas.

 

To illustrate, Dovetail's Train Sim has a very tiny portion (compared to reality) of railways and Trains available as DLC and there is a $5,000+ price tag for it all. If they offered the whole world it could cost billions to download all the DLC. Dovetail at the present rate of expansion will not cover the world until the year 6056. What of the users in Central America who will likely never get a chance to drive a train in their home country unless they try to make the route themselves. Just a few years ago MS was going to release train sim 2 and it was going  to include all the railways of the globe, with a price tag likely to be about $60. Why has this DLC robbery happened?....blindness to history and some marketing strategy that has fooled most people into thinking this is a good thing, but in reality its all of us being offered to pay much more for less and most just do it. I cant wait to see if DTG's attempts this DLC robbery with its upcoming flight sim, and I will laugh if they try to DLC us to death just like I'm laughing at Aerofly 2 presently. 

 

Look at the first version of Aerofly and research how popular it actually is. I would much rather fly using Flight Assignment ATP.  

 

 Aerofly 2 is no threat to the continued success of even FS9 because it will take too long for Aerofly 2 to even compete with FS9. But if regular folks wanna play pilot on their android no problem. It would be so much better for companies to "begin" development with the base features of FSX/P3D then start developing a new flight simulator with *added* features. If the company cant afford to do that, then stay home until it can, but don't go backward, because we will all suffer the consequences, yes even regular folks....not everybody lives in Hawaii and flies a Icon A5 so MS Flight died and the regular folks were sad.   

 

I take a stance of asking simmers to require companies to keep a high level of realism

 

People are diverse and have diverse needs and tastes. Flight simulation isn't a monoculture, and one size doesn't fit all.

 

I will laugh if they try to DLC us to death just like I'm laughing at Aerofly 2 presently.

 

And Aerofly is probably laughing all the way to the bank. They have multiple successful products that have kept their company afloat for years (with high ratings on Steam) and have branched into tablets while also expressing an interest on consoles. Keep in mind Aerofly 1 was successful enough warrant an Aerofly 2. That doesn't happen if there's no market.

 

not everybody lives in Hawaii and flies a Icon A5 so MS Flight died and the regular folks were sad.   

 

And not every company is large enough (Not even Microsoft) to spend AAA dollars on niche titles with marginal ROI, so Aces went away and enthusiasts were sad.......

 

How one spins a story depends on one's preconceptions.

This analogy does not really apply. But for the sake of a civil debate; you can do the same things in FSX and Aerofly, you cannot do the same things in a car and a bike. But anyway if you were given a choice today you would take a car over a bike if that was the only possible choice as a permanent vehicle. I take a stance of asking simmers to require companies to keep a high level of realism (choosing the car over the bike  so to speak). Not every flight simmer lives in CA and NV and most simmers like to fly in their home country at least some time, and lots of them even prefer their home airport. Companies that develop a model of geographic limitations in a flight sim are actually borderline suicidal because we already have the whole round world in FSX/P3D. This round world was fought for, for so many years and now we have it, but now we are going backwards to the limitations of geographic areas.

 

To illustrate, Dovetail's Train Sim has a very tiny portion (compared to reality) of railways and Trains available as DLC and there is a $5,000+ price tag for it all. If they offered the whole world it could cost billions to download all the DLC. Dovetail at the present rate of expansion will not cover the world until the year 6056. What of the users in Central America who will likely never get a chance to drive a train in their home country unless they try to make the route themselves. Just a few years ago MS was going to release train sim 2 and it was going  to include all the railways of the globe, with a price tag likely to be about $60. Why has this DLC robbery happened?....blindness to history and some marketing strategy that has fooled most people into thinking this is a good thing, but in reality its all of us being offered to pay much more for less and most just do it. I cant wait to see if DTG's attempts this DLC robbery with its upcoming flight sim, and I will laugh if they try to DLC us to death just like I'm laughing at Aerofly 2 presently. 

 

Look at the first version of Aerofly and research how popular it actually is. I would much rather fly using Flight Assignment ATP.  

 

 Aerofly 2 is no threat to the continued success of even FS9 because it will take too long for Aerofly 2 to even compete with FS9. But if regular folks wanna play pilot on their android no problem. It would be so much better for companies to "begin" development with the base features of FSX/P3D then start developing a new flight simulator with *added* features. If the company cant afford to do that, then stay home until it can, but don't go backward, because we will all suffer the consequences, yes even regular folks....not everybody lives in Hawaii and flies a Icon A5 so MS Flight died and the regular folks were sad.

 

What's the difference in DLC and buying payware addons. I'm sure you could spend a few hundred thousand buying all the addons for FSX. I'm really into graphics and flight physics as they make it the most realistic to me. I'm a real world pilot and honestly most of your time in a real plane is just sitting there looking around so I'd love to have a sim that looks like aerofly. I actually quit using FS until orbx started releasing stuff because it was so visually boring and unrealistic.