Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
UKflyer

Aerofly NY

Recommended Posts

Guest

Nice. But almost completely flat suburbs with low res graphics and hardly any autogen, traffic baked into the roads, no moving water, aircrafts with hardly anything working... it's a nice flying game for ten minutes now and then but that's it. It still has a long way to go, if it ever gets there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, it's no flightsim yet, but still a great sightseeing sim :)


Simmerhead - Making the virtual skies unsafe since 1987! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmmmm...... The textures go as high as 1 meter per Pixel, which as far as I know is about as good as photoscenery gets.


We are all connected..... To each other, biologically...... To the Earth, chemically...... To the rest of the Universe atomically.
 
Devons rig
Intel Core i5 13600K @ 5.1GHz / G.SKILL Trident Z5 RGB Series Ram 32GB / GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4070 Ti GAMING OC 12G Graphics Card / Sound Blaster Z / Meta Quest 2 VR Headset / Klipsch® Promedia 2.1 Computer Speakers / ASUS ROG SWIFT PG279Q ‑ 27" IPS LED Monitor ‑ QHD / 1x Samsung SSD 850 EVO 500GB / 2x Samsung SSD 860 EVO 1TB /  1x Samsung - 970 EVO Plus 2TB NVMe /  1x Samsung 980 NVMe 1TB / 2 other regular hd's with up to 10 terabyte capacity / Windows 11 Pro 64-bit / Gigabyte Z790 Aorus Elite AX Motherboard LGA 1700 DDR5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW ! 


Always in our hearts AVQ1. Andre Roy. 

Air Traffic Controller New York TRACON

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to be negative.

It looks good and all, but without support of 3rd party and tons of freeware this thing will never take off.

XP and FSX in all of his versions lives from that.

 

How many DLCs do I have to buy to fly the whole of North America and Europe?

Not going to happen.

 

Bad concept in my opinion, at least for airline flyers, maybe satisfactory for bush pilots, but no autogen kills the emergence when flying low and slow?  


Most of what is said on the Internet may be the same thing they shovel on the regular basis at the local barn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note........

 

We already have FSX/P3D/X-Plane for global flights (and DTG FS coming soon). We do not need another one. AeroFly FS2 is something different, and (IMO) a very welcome alternative. Let's give IPACS a chance to deliver the full package before writing it off as a failure.

  • Upvote 3

Christopher Low

UK2000 Beta Tester

FSBetaTesters3.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AeroflyFS is good fun for short flights but for me it's not yet a serious full-fledged flight simulator that I spend any more than a few minutes in. That's not to say that I don't think it doesn't have a bright future, it almost certainly does and I'll be buying the DLC to show my support

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice. But almost completely flat suburbs with low res graphics and hardly any autogen, traffic baked into the roads, no moving water, aircrafts with hardly anything working... it's a nice flying game for ten minutes now and then but that's it. It still has a long way to go, if it ever gets there.

 

Suburbs are far from being completely flat. I just flew over Teterboro, Newark, La Guardia and JFK area at Ultra High res and I can guarantee you that the scenery detail there is much higher than your system can currently support there under ESP using a conservative resolution. Obviously they had to use a lower level of detail outside Manhattan and NYC area, but this was expected given the extreme building density of the area. We are talking about an area of 789 km² (only New York, excluding New Jersey). Reproducing it entirely, with all buildings, roads and details not only would impact the performance dramatically on any system, it would also require years of work. It would make no sense.

 

 

it's a nice flying game for ten minutes now and then but that's it. It still has a long way to go, if it ever gets there.

 

Aerofly FS2 is still an Early Access, remember. What we are measuring here is performance and potential. FSX, P3D and even X-Plane have years of development and optimization behind, trying to compare them to the current state of Aerofly is unfair at the very least. Take into account that at least one major developer announced (or at least suggested so) they would support this platform in 2017. Hopefully others will follow. In my humble opinion, Aerofly FS2 not only passed the New York test, it passed it brilliantly. We're talking about an area where nobody of us seriously dares to fly under ESP, at least not without OOMs and a lot of frustration.

 

AeroflyFS is good fun for short flights but for me it's not yet a serious full-fledged flight simulator that I spend any more than a few minutes in. That's not to say that I don't think it doesn't have a bright future, it almost certainly does and I'll be buying the DLC to show my support

 

My two cents. The best way we have to support its future is buying it as it is now. Developers will come as soon as the user base will grow. Obviously, we can't expect tons of addons immediately. Developers only invest money and time when there is a reasonable amount of prospects.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Reproducing it entirely, with all buildings, roads and details not only would impact the performance dramatically on any system, it would also require years of work. It would make no sense.

 

Agree on the performance, but it needn't take years of work. They could perhaps add some sort of autogen or even use OpenStreetMap or many of the freely usable government sources to get buildings (e.g. I was able to create a scenery for the state of Massachusetts by using freely available GIS data (and this is every single building, road and forest in about 2 weeks of work). For a VFR flight simulator, I don't believe just aerial imagery and a detailed city is going to cut it anymore and unfortuatenly it needs more.

 

 

 


Aerofly FS2 is still an Early Access, remember. What we are measuring here is performance and potential.

 

Yep, but I also believe this is now an excuse that lots of other games are using because they can get away with releasing buggy or unfinished software and making people pay for it. I have several games and simulators on steam that are also early access and development seems to have stopped. As long as they do what they promised and don't decide to just go with an Aerofly FS 3 then I'll be happy. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

 

 


Yep, but I also believe this is now an excuse that lots of other games are using because they can get away with releasing buggy or unfinished software and making people pay for it. I have several games and simulators on steam that are also early access and development seems to have stopped. As long as they do what they promised and don't decide to just go with an Aerofly FS 3 then I'll be happy. 

 

I find it a bit odd that they release DLC when the program itself is still early access. Usually you complete the product and then start creating DLC. I also have the idea a lot of devs are using the 'early access sticker' to make it easier to ignore bugs or complaints and to simply not finish the product at all if they don't feel like doing so anymore. Steam should have a look at the usage of this early access option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it a bit odd that they release DLC when the program itself is still early access. Usually you complete the product and then start creating DLC. I also have the idea a lot of devs are using the 'early access sticker' to make it easier to ignore bugs or complaints and to simply not finish the product at all if they don't feel like doing so anymore. Steam should have a look at the usage of this early access option.

 

IPACS is releasing update patches almost on a weekly basis since Day 1. They are working hard on their product. DLCs are fully optional and they provide fuel (read: money) for their further development. Keep in mind that IPACS is a very small group of developers, meaning a very small business. This is not ACES with their enormous budget nor they are backed by a corporation like Lockheed Martin. There are not exactly bugs in Aerofly (there are indeed, but they are being constantly fixed with any new patch based on customers' feedback). There are missing features, which is different. Again, Aerofly FS2 will not compete with worldwide simulators already established on the market. Finishing the product is easy to be said, very hard to do without the support of third-party developers and, which is more important, a reasonable user base. I do not expect they will ever fill the gap alone, but with the help of external sources this can grow in few years to a very exciting platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After "cloud computing" became the norm it seems all kinds of software is in beta or early access mode. My PC, MAC, ipad and cellphone is constantly downloading updates, so I don't think much of it anymore. I don't like it, but what are you gonna do...? We're not getting back to the days of software in big boxes, printed manuals in custom amde binders and a stacs of floppy discs. How many updates and hotfixes have we seen in Prepar3D and X-Plane? It's a never ending story, and Aerofly really is no different (sadly).


Simmerhead - Making the virtual skies unsafe since 1987! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


This is not ACES with their enormous budget nor they are backed by a corporation like Lockheed Martin

 

It's funny that you mention a huge budget or large corporation. Remember X-Plane and Laminar Research. It was mostly written by one man, Austin Meyer up till about v6, but is now just a small handful of developers and artists who work from home. Now look what they've achieved (Popularity of XP has recently skyrocketed). Never underestimate determined and passionate developers who love aviaton ;-). I was listening to an interview with Austin a few days ago and it was interesting to hear his thoughts on how being a small team without corporate influence has worked in their favour. I hope iPacs stay and work to the same principles.


 

 


Finishing the product is easy to be said, very hard to do without the support of third-party developers and, which is more important, a reasonable user base.

 

I wanted to try the SDK to see if it's possible to write a basic OSM importer for it. Currently the SDK is limited to only basic modifications and to get access you have to send them a message on why you want it, so I didn't carry on. A powerful SDK can take the sim places and in my opinion it should be a a top priority to get developers on board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny that you mention a huge budget or large corporation. Remember X-Plane and Laminar Research. It was mostly written by one man, Austin Meyer up till about v6, but is now just a small handful of developers and artists who work from home. Now look what they've achieved (Popularity of XP has recently skyrocketed). Never underestimate determined and passionate developers who love aviaton ;-). I was listening to an interview with Austin a few days ago and it was interesting to hear his thoughts on how being a small team without corporate influence has worked in their favour. I hope iPacs stay and work to the same principles.

 

Not in six months, though, Tony. It took many years before X-Plane grew to what it is now, X-Plane 11. As an X-Plane user, you probably know much better than I how much work and harsh criticism Laminar Research had to go through before users and even developers decided to consider it a s valid alternative. Aerofly FS2 is still an embryonal project.

 

 

I wanted to try the SDK to see if it's possible to write a basic OSM importer for it. Currently the SDK is limited to only basic modifications and to get access you have to send them a message on why you want it, so I didn't carry on. A powerful SDK can take the sim places and in my opinion it should be a a top priority to get developers on board.

 

Yes, I definitely agree on that. Top priority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...