Introducing Flight Sim World!

[HiFlyer 9,372]

19 minutes ago, fshobby said:

Ah. I was including their history with RC sims. Anyway, Aerofly FS development did start 10 years ago: http://www.ipacs.de/about-us.html

Thats fair enough. I would actually consider the two more equivalent for comparison though if Dovetail had also taken the time to create their own modern engine from scratch.

Instead, considering they are essentially building on decades of previous effort instead, (which also incorporates the work of other companies like Orbx and A2A) I find myself more attracted at the moment with what Ipacs have accomplished with much smaller resources.

In my mind, the next gen sims right now are X-Plane and Aerofly FS 2 with Flightsim World as "Enhanced last gen"

I'm also very curious about what LM has up its sleeves, since they are also doing enhanced last gen, but with a significant head start..

[fs4fun 366]

Remarkable thing about this genre that the new, modern sim (AF2) is 10 years into its development. X-plane is 20+ years and the MSFS line is now over 37 years. Takes a long time to make a flight sim, so I guess us flight simmers are condemned to lag behind the technology curve.

I can understand why DTG would want to start with an existing platform. If they started from scratch, they'd be doing early access in about 5 years. With the code they are using, it's not so much like building on what they have, it's more like buying an old house, then going room by room, gutting and then remodeling each room. So far, they've only fixed up parts of the basement and painted the exterior, so we still see the same old house for the most part. Hopefully they keep going and eventually the whole thing gets remodeled.

I can see the sense in thinking DTG should have used Flight as the basis of the new sim. It might have taken longer to get to the first release, but likely a better foundation.

My larger worry about DTG is that they don't get the hobby element of flight sim, and they are building a closed game (outside of favored third parties), not an open platform.  A closed game is not going to have the legs that previous releases of MSFS have had, but maybe their objectives are not so long term, which would explain why they have taken some shortcuts such as choosing to use FSX over Flight.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, fshobby said:

Ah. I was including their history with RC sims. Anyway, Aerofly FS development did start 10 years ago: http://www.ipacs.de/about-us.html

Ok. But as far as I know they sort of restarted with version 2, using a new core system. I'd have to check that though. And btw even though I love Aerofly FS 2 I do agree with those who say it is lacking options and progressing too slow. I have never said it is the perfect sim at this moment. But if it gets supported more I do believe it is the sim with by far the most promise. And headroom, when it comes to performance.

[HiFlyer 9,372]

1 hour ago, J van E said:

 

5 hours ago, fshobby said:

Ah. I was including their history with RC sims. Anyway, Aerofly FS development did start 10 years ago: http://www.ipacs.de/about-us.html

Ok. But as far as I know they sort of restarted with version 2, using a new core system.

 

This is true, but I was trying not to get into one of those conversations that lead to increasingly split hairs, or a whose sim is better thing.

However, yes they essentially started over. Aerofly FS1 as we know, had no systems modeling of any sort. No glass cockpits, no night lighting, It had no world coordinate system (it was a flat earth) It had no navaids, no clickable cockpits, No SDK, No autopilot, no cities of any sort.... it was also directX 9 32bit whereas FS2 is OpenGL 64 bit.

And ATC is on the way.

That's an incredible amount of work for a really tiny team in four years, not to mention the creation of a tablet version!

 

[CFIJose 5,485]

As an experienced flightsim enthusiast, CFII, and avid add-on buyer, I say that it's commendable of DTG to create a 64bit version of FSX, but it's a disgrace that they failed to understand why FSX succeeded for so many years.

If DTG FSW is to succeed it will need the support of add-on developers and the flightsim community.

Congrats on updating FSX to 64bit. What are you going to do now?

[Pugilist2 880]

I really think DTG will make FSW into a decent sim/game in the long run, but agree it needs the support of add-on developers and the community to succeed. 

I'll bet we start seeing A2A's aircraft soon available on Steam as DLC.

[RatRace 4]

7 hours ago, fshobby said:

I can see the sense in thinking DTG should have used Flight as the basis of the new sim. It might have taken longer to get to the first release, but likely a better foundation.

Like a broken record I keep repeating this whenever and wherever I can: IMHO DTG dug their onw grave when they decided to use the MS FSX platform instead of the MS Flight one.

It is certainly nice to have Carenado-like aircraft out-of-the-box, and the raindrops keep reminding me of my all time favourite sim, Flight Unlimited, but Orbx or no Orbx, I hate the FSW scenery just as much as I hate the FSX one (basically, because the scenery engines are the same of course). 

Nothing more than my two cents.

 

 

[HiFlyer 9,372]

57 minutes ago, RatRace said:

 IMHO DTG dug their onw grave when they decided to use the MS FSX platform instead of the MS Flight one.

Well, from a pure business standpoint, it's probably a very defensible decision. I assumed they would use FLIGHT as well, but I was utterly wrong, and I think that's because I naively assumed that by them taking the trouble of purchasing the rights to Microsoft technology, their optimal path was FLIGHT as a jumping off point into maximum innovation.

When it became clear that they were instead using the FSX engine, my thinking changed to believe that it was more about following the easiest path to getting something out the door quickly, and that's pretty much where my thinking is now, barring new developments.

Plus, it seems increasingly clear that a main goal was to firmly grasp the financial reins of the FSX ecosystem. (again logical from their viewpoint)

But in this, it feels to me more like a sea change in how the money is divided up, rather than a true step forwards for sim technology.

I fly Flight Sim World and see FSX under new ownership, which for now, gets a shrug from me.

No "Wows!" yet.

 

[SamYeager 245]

15 hours ago, RatRace said:

Like a broken record I keep repeating this whenever and wherever I can: IMHO DTG dug their onw grave when they decided to use the MS FSX platform instead of the MS Flight one.

Whilst I too wish that DTG had used the Flight code as the basis for FSW I'm not sure how many posting here understand that the Flight code is a reworking of the existing FSX code, just as P3D is a reworking of the FSX/ESP code and FSW is a reworking of the FSX code.

[RatRace 4]

2 hours ago, SamYeager said:

Whilst I too wish that DTG had used the Flight code as the basis for FSW I'm not sure how many posting here understand that the Flight code is a reworking of the existing FSX code, just as P3D is a reworking of the FSX/ESP code and FSW is a reworking of the FSX code.

Oh, but I am very much aware that MS Flight was not a revolutionary new sim !

But still, it was IMHO a significant improvement over the existing FSX code, certainly in terms of scenery and even flight models. Which makes it all the more incomprehensible that DTG would revert to the original FSX code.

Oh well, all water under the bridge now. 

 

 

Edited May 21, 2017 by RatRace

[Alphafoxsierra 166]

On 5/19/2017 at 7:12 PM, rodeback said:

But IS there or will there be an SDK, so that those who want and can, can build there own airplanes and/or scenery?

We haven't quite got to formulating a plan of action for aircraft and scenery freeware creation but it is on our list! We definitely will support freeware one way or another, but haven't made a firm decision about the SDK. In the meantime, we have released the Pro Mission Tool as part of the initial FSW offering with Steam Workshop functionality coming later this summer. 

[fs4fun 366]

13 minutes ago, DTG_Aimee said:

In the meantime, we have released the Pro Mission Tool as part of the initial FSW offering with Steam Workshop functionality coming later this summer. 

Thanks Aimee, and by the way if you haven't see the other thread, nobody seems to be able to find the mission editor in the steam tools library.
 

[Alphafoxsierra 166]

Just now, fshobby said:

Thanks Aimee, and by the way if you haven't see the other thread, nobody seems to be able to find the mission editor in the steam tools library.
 

Thanks for letting me know. I'm on it!

[JSilva 42]

Can you answer about Simconnect. According to Aerosoft, there doesn't seem to be any Simconnect client at the moment. http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/123266-flight-sim-world-and-aerosoft/

There does seem to be a dll for Simconnect (one in the main folder and the other in x86), but what about the Simconnect client installer? Can you describe more in detail?

Edited May 21, 2017 by JSilva

[fenelis 1]

It is quite true that what we have been facing is a sort of disappointment. Event the ones who made positive or constructive comments are aware of this fact as well yet they have a bunch of hope or expectation that DTG team will improve the simulator. I am absolutely certain that should the FSX/ESP codes have been made available to the sim community we would then have the best simulator on the earth, satisfying all our needs, handling the things from the viewpoint we share, without being totally money-oriented and most importantly listening to and collaborating with the sim community, thoughts and suggestions of whom should not be underestimated.