I hope Aero fly gets more support. Now I'm a huge Prepared fan but I would really like to see Aerofly get a chance from developers it has the potential to become a really good sim in my mind

It sure does, but AFS2 has very limiting functionality at present. When a more complete flight model, weather, AI, ATC, water etc. is introduced, how will it then perform?

 

I think getting third party developers onboard is very difficult at present. There's just too many platforms available, and while FSX is still king of the hill, Prepar3D is a close second with X-Plane 11 at a distand third place. And who knows what DTG is cooking. Then there's Preapr3D's 64 bit version on the horizon, which will add even more confusion among developers and customers. Aerofly FS 2 will have to get some real progress soon if they are to keep up. All we need now is for Outerra to launch a flight sim

I would really like to see Aerofly get a chance from developers it has the potential to become a really good sim in my mind

 

If it's not a global sim, there is little scope for big potential

If it's not a global sim, there is little scope for big potential

In principle it is global (contrary to AFS1). However, by default they only provide high-definition images plus airpoirts for the South Western US plus a (cheap) payware Addon pack for Switzerland. The rest is there and you can actually fly there, but it's only filled with extremely low resolutions images and no airports at all. The idea is these areas should be filled by 3rd parties and themselves with time. As far as I know IPACS is working on more region packs.

 

Kind regards, Michael

Erich, I think you are underestimating the number of simemrs that don't focus all their attention on tubeliners. In fact, I will argue that they are a small minority of those who have purchased FSX, X-Plane, Prepar3D and Aerofly FS over the years. A2A, RealAir, Milviz, Carenado and a few others have stayed in the game for a long time wihtout making commercial jetliners.

pmb, on 12 Dec 2016 - 1:34 PM, said:

. As far as I know IPACS is working on more region packs.

Oh okay - then there is hope.

simmerhead, on 12 Dec 2016 - 1:35 PM, said:

Erich, I think you are underestimating the number of simemrs that don't focus all their attention on tubeliners. In fact, I will argue that they are a small minority of those who have purchased FSX, X-Plane, Prepar3D and Aerofly FS over the years. A2A, RealAir, Milviz, Carenado and a few others have stayed in the game for a long time wihtout making commercial jetliners.

I know what you're saying. In fact I was exclusively a GA flyer for many years until about 2 years ago and I've got most of the aircraft from all the favourite devs you've mentioned. But I have never liked the idea of regional only sims.  The idea of flying into a 'wall' in a fligthsim is ridiculous - and regional only sims ultimately become VERY expensive in order to build out a world model - which is also one of the reasons that 'Flight' failed - even though it was a much more efficient and better performing/looking sim.

 

I guess I've just moved on and wanted more of a challenge. I also can't afford to run two sims - because once I start on a sim, I'll want everything for it. P3D costs me a small fortune already.

Yes there is often the mistaken assumption made that when someone asks for full detailed world a la fully loaded global prepar3d they must be a tubeliner driver.

I fly the ngx around Europe but I also fly lots of vfr in the a2a spit. In fact doing a long slow round the world with some guys from there.

For me a sim needs to be global because I want to 'explore' and face real weather as I do it.

Regional just doesn't cut it. I only tolerate dcs because of the ww2 potential. If I'm limited to smaller areas then it holds much less interest unless the flight model and systems are of very high quality i.e. Dcs.

 

Chris

Erich, again I think you're in the minority being an addon packrat. I've bought two addons this year, and I'm a fairly active simmer.

 

I think Flight failed for more than their lack of global coverage, although that was certainly part of it. People were waiting for FS11, and got an aerocache game with unappealing aircraft. It totally lacked appeal for gamers and hard core simemrs alike and gained a just a tiny fan base. And the scenery was far from spectacular, so few would waste money on buying Alaska, and those cockpitless aircraft... That Howard fella' really ran that ship aground at full speed.  

 

 

Chris, I used to be an explorer as well. In fact, I'm more of a virtual explorer than a virtual aviator at heart (the simulator is a bit boring comapred to real life flying). But flying over generic autogen and landclass gives me little satisfaction as it is so incredibly unrealistic/innacurate geographically. That being said, there is plenty that could be done to increase the realism of a landclass driven simulator. If one could increse the numbers of landclass types and the resolution of the landclass grid, and at the same time allow for more variation of the autogen itself, one would come a long way, but still, not something that gives me the sensation of "having been there". Aerofly FS 2 however has given me really good knowledge of how California looks like from above. I think I'd manage pretty well as a GA pilot over there after using the sim. ORBX Southern California just don't give me that intimate knowledge of how the buildings around the airport look in real life - essential when flying VFR in my book.  

 

 

Erich, again I think you're in the minority being an addon packrat.

 

I am a bit of an addon slag, but I don't many other vices - so I consider that a healthy option.  :smile:

 

Don't get me wrong, I hope AF2 does succeed - it certainly LOOKS good - but right now, it's not my bag until it brings more to the table - alot more.

A sim that isn't global reminds me of one of those PS2 games, basically a toy. For some, that's all they need apparently.