Dovetail Games Presentation @ FlightSimCon 2016

[Jimm 437]

I have yet to touch DTG Flight School, mainly because I've been using other sims.  I feel like DTG is late to the party.  Since so much has been established already, what does DTG have to offer that hasn't already been experienced or seen?  Sure, they're moving towards 64-bit, but X-Plane already got the jump on that.  I don't know, i guess I'm waiting for the proverbial train to crash when their full flight sim emerges.  From what I have taken from what was said in the video, there is an attitude of "I can do this better", but how much better does it need to be?  He says that DTG listens, but the proof will be in the pudding when the time comes.  Flight School is out, with mixed reactions, and I've seen people state things similar to what I have been thinking: "Is this what flight simulator will be like?" or "they still have a lot more to do".  Criticisms like this are coming from those who are already established in the community.  The fanfare, teases and lead-ups to the release of Flight School, are probably a bit of a downfall to making it popular.  People had expectations, words around the campfire of what to expect and when those things didn't emerge, there was negativity.

 

All in all, I will remain cautious.  DTG has big dreams, but a long road to travel.  Having to coordinate their ideas, thoughts, design, development with 3rd party developers has to be a headache, not to mention trying to please the community.  While they have always been of the mind that FS was intended for those who have little to know prior flight sim experience, they are treading into heavily travelled waters by the rest of the user base.  There's well established competition right now and they need to really bring in something major to emerge on top.

[shivers9 1,174]

OK...I am not a fan of this project if it can even be called a project. I can not believe that this guy showed up at a flight sim show and gave a presentation on something that does not even exist. Flight School is nothing more than a rehash of older content from FSX. I am actually wondering why MS has not brought a legal action for stealing their content. Now the new Flight Sim that we all talk about. At this point it appears to be Vaporware. I watched the entire hour of dribble about no knowledge of flight skills, no knowledge of flight sim design, no knowledge of weather, and then the best shot he had was that he has one....that's 1 friend  that is excited about flight school. He is going to make up for these short cummings by "finding the magic" that is if he can get over his fear of flying. I was expecting at the end of this mess to hear "The operators are standing by to sign up now. But Wait; call in the next 4 minutes and we will double your order for the new flight sim ( that's two complete orders of vaporware for the price of one!) that we are thinking about one day maybe. Just pay additional shipping and handling. Please allow 8 to 12 years for delivery. Offer may not be valid where sane thinking people live.

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

I would say it is less than Vaporware.. at best it is a stated intention to develop something.

 

When he says that they have already added the "technology" and now they are just trying to figure out what level of "Magic" they need to add to make this a winner,  I cannot help wondering what blind alleys LM must be going down, trying to add "technology" to make P3D run smoothly and look great..

[TheFlightSimGuy 514]

OK...I am not a fan of this project if it can even be called a project. I can not believe that this guy showed up at a flight sim show and gave a presentation on something that does not even exist. Flight School is nothing more than a rehash of older content from FSX. I am actually wondering why MS has not brought a legal action for stealing their content. Now the new Flight Sim that we all talk about. At this point it appears to be Vaporware. I watched the entire hour of dribble about no knowledge of flight skills, no knowledge of flight sim design, no knowledge of weather, and then the best shot he had was that he has one....that's 1 friend  that is excited about flight school. He is going to make up for these short cummings by "finding the magic" that is if he can get over his fear of flying. I was expecting at the end of this mess to hear "The operators are standing by to sign up now. But Wait; call in the next 4 minutes and we will double your order for the new flight sim ( that's two complete orders of vaporware for the price of one!) that we are thinking about one day maybe. Just pay additional shipping and handling. Please allow 8 to 12 years for delivery. Offer may not be valid where sane thinking people live.

 

Microsoft probably isnt suing them because they bought the license for their sims and technology from them lol. And do you think all the guys at ACES, ORBX, etc all fly planes? Do you think half of the devs at Lockheed fly? Hell, 70% of this "virtual aviation enthisiast" community hasn't even flown a real plane. 

 

I personally will wait to see what the flight simulator offers before I pass any judgments. But maybe thats just me being logical. 

[shivers9 1,174]

 

 

I personally will wait to see what the flight simulator offers before I pass any judgments. But maybe thats just me being logical. 

LOL 70% eh?? Is that a solid number from a survey that you are thinking about doing some time in the future? I never saw thoses results published and I have been around since Commador 64 and Sub Logic days...just like the one that was on display at the Simcon. I don't think it is all that logical to use a made up number to prove how logical you are. So when you do decide to do the survey sometime in the future put me down for yes....I has ever flown a real plane  (maybe you meant to say "have never") Logicaly speaking of course!!

[Parping Couplet 117]

Seems that majority of users would disagree with your assessment with 43 positive "Critic" reviews, 3 mixed, and 0 negative. Even the cynical user reviews are scoring it at a 7.8:

 

http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/f1-2010

 

Well that's where I think you've totally missed my point. Yes, the F1 titles were very popular with console gamers and the like, but profoundly, and I do mean profoundly, unpopular with hardcore simmers. The difference, if you will, between a game and sim. That's where the concern stems from.

 

But, as I've already stated, the guy deserves a second chance. However, I for one will be sitting on the fence until the verdict is out.

[vololiberista 205]

 Hell, 70% of this "virtual aviation enthisiast" community hasn't even flown a real plane. 

 

 

68. 35675152% actually!

[Paraffin 2,197]

And do you think all the guys at ACES, ORBX, etc all fly planes? Do you think half of the devs at Lockheed fly? Hell, 70% of this "virtual aviation enthisiast" community hasn't even flown a real plane. 

 

It's not so much whether someone has a pilot's license. I do think it's valid to wonder whether someone totally new to the world of aviation, and who in fact has had to overcome a fear of flying in small GA planes, is the right person to be Creative Director for a brand new, full-featured flight sim. I'm keeping an open mind, but I also think it may be no coincidence that the new DTG flight sim will include a logging feature that only kicks in when you've done training lessons. It's an "outside in" approach, which is probably good from the marketing perspective of attracting newbies to flight sims. The problem is that us old-timer are looking for more of an "inside out" approach, starting with the deeper aspects of simulation. 

 

Of course, having an experienced pilot at the helm of a sim design team isn't always a guarantee that the sim community gets what it wants either. Look at X-Plane... basically it's Austin's personal hobby sim, so he can practice procedures when he's not flying his own plane (that's an exaggeration, but I think there's some truth in it). We get the features Austin cares about, like better turboprop modeling now that he owns a private plane of that type. 

 

Still, it's probably better than having the feature list driven purely by a marketing dept. I don't think we'd have things in X-Plane like in-flight icing or bird strikes if it wasn't something a real pilot understood as a hazard. Now if Austin would just do a little more flying in crappy weather...

[fs4fun 366]

The 70% number is from the avsim survey?

 

http://www.avsim.com/topic/458969-2014-demographic-results-released/?p=3146738

[Jimm 437]

Of course the number of aviation enthusiasts is high.  Conduct a survey of truckers vs enthusiasts for EuroTruck Simulator or train engineers for Train Simulator 2016?  How many in the transportation field, who do it for a living, want to immediately come home and simulate what they do in real life as often as an enthusiast?  Me being on the enthusiast side of things, I want to learn it out of curiosity, despite that deep ache to actually fly, but I don't have the bucks to own my own plane.  Having a simulator helps to learn and have fun, without that pesky problem of crashing and liability.

 

DTG Flight School is an affordable first step for young folks who have the desire to learn, to do so to a point where if they want to stick with it, then they can pursue the real life avenue.  The way I see it, DTG is trying to corner the transportation sim market, or at least, boost their portfolio.  I say if they have the time, funds and resources to do it, then let them.  Anyone else who has been in the sim world long enough knows what to use right now and as I said before, if DTG comes up with something revolutionary, then maybe I'll take a second look.

[n4gix 4,947]

I am actually wondering why MS has not brought a legal action for stealing their content.

I cannot for the life of me believe anyone would write the above. It's been common knowledge for several years that both L-M and DTG have licensed the rights to use the FSX source files...

[Jimm 437]

I cannot for the life of me believe anyone would write the above. It's been common knowledge for several years that both L-M and DTG have licensed the rights to use the FSX source files...

Yeah, that's a good one. 

[fs4fun 366]

I cannot for the life of me believe anyone would write the above. It's been common knowledge for several years that both L-M and DTG have licensed the rights to use the FSX source files...

 

Didn't surprise me, since the preceding sentence was also totally false.

[JSilva 42]

I cannot for the life of me believe anyone would write the above. It's been common knowledge for several years that both L-M and DTG have licensed the rights to use the FSX source files...

This made my day.

[torium 207]

 I feel like DTG is late to the party.  Since so much has been established already, what does DTG have to offer that hasn't already been experienced or seen?

 

In my previous post (#15) you can watch a video (Developer Panel Discussion @ FlightSimCon 2016).

Listen carefully to the first question (14:00 on the timeline) - and the developer's reply.

 

As an example, John Venema (Orbx) earlier this year said:

"What Orbx has been doing over the past decade is making our own 'FSX 11' by expanding past the 128-class barrier with hundreds of new classes. However this required us to hack FSX/P3D and that's why FTX Central exists.

 

What we have now with DTG's new sims is virtually unlimited land classes defined and engineered by Orbx so that a decade's worth of R&D is now boiled into a new sim as part of its core. That gives us a fantastic foundation to build upon without the previous restrictions we always had to code around.

 

Additionally there will be a lot of new tech in the visualization engine including new HDR, light scattering and other lighting enhancements."

 

I really do not understand why this is bad news. If the sim community are satisfied with existing simulators - that's great.

I have also been around since Commador 64 and Sub Logic days - but I really hope Dovetail carries out the vision they have for a new updated simulator-platform. I can't see that today's flight simulators is fully developed. I see a huge improvement potential for the future:

 

Dovetail: "I need to make this very clear, our focus for Flight Sim first and foremost is building the game engine that runs the sim. .... if the actually game engine is not solid then you are just building on bad foundations. Our focus is on getting the underlying game engine to where we want to be first."

 

Exactly. Make sure the foundation is solid. 

 

Dovetail: "Our biggest limitation is time. ....we want to get the new sim out some time before 2050."

 

Yes, in 2050 I maybe use other wings. So do not waste your time to produce high quality aircraft and terrain etc.. (3rd part developers can take care of that part of the development). Instead use all resources to get the platform solid and future-oriented.

 

Dovetail: "We are building a platform which can be continually expanded. We view it almost like an OS. The key word here is "platform."

 

Just imagine what possibilities an optimized flight simulator "operating system" (platform) can provide the developers of terrain, aircraft, weather, etc. (A2A, Orbx, REX etc.).

 

Dovetail say they will give us a new platform - not a new FSX, P3D or X-Plane. Do you understand the difference?  :smile: