sightseer

the sim - game dichotomy

Recommended Posts

I've been flying XPlane more lately and I like the way it doesn't argue with me.  I choose aircraft, location, time and weather and then I'm in the cockpit ready to go.  Its clean and not in the way.  It doesn't congratulate me when I land because it knows that the landing itself is congratulations.

I've been driving American Truck Sim a lot lately.  Its a game but it doesn't get in your way somehow.  You start and you drive and you look at maps and you can take a job or not.  You can free drive or you can take a job.

FSW seems to be caught in between game and sim.  It starts like a game but then its a sim for the most part.

I am hoping that there is a way that FSW can be both game and sim and get out of my way whichever direction I choose.  If there weren't so many 'Start' buttons maybe.  After you set up for your flight it should just put you in the cockpit.  walkarounds could be an option in the setup flight dialog.  and I really would like for the 'congratulations you've landed' messages and the gaminess behind that to go away.  It didn't bother me at first but it does now.

I'm still routing for FSW because we need as many sims as possible imo but I do think there is a better way to be what it wants to be - a sim-game.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

The old discussion....It is what you want it to be.

For me subjectively perceived a simulator is just a genre of a game. It can be "gamey" or "real world simulated". Depends what are you doing. I don`t see any difference between x-plane, FSX, P3D, FSW, or even MS Flight. All of them are flight simulators, some with more procedure/real world simulation, some more arcade.

Some say if you use it for training it is a simulator, if you use it for fun it is a game.

 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think once the SDK rolls out and DTG keeps getting feedback and responding to us like they do, you will see that. I imagine that part of the strategy has to be to bring in new simmers to the genre. I have accepted the fact that things are different now from when I started simming. I'm into the whole Steam thing, World of Tanks, Warthunder and such. They have captured my imagination. Hopefully DTG can bring a mix of the new way and the old way. I would hate to see Flight Simming die out. I can't get my Grandson to use X Plane 11 because he sees no point in it. My son won't fly X plane because he says he doesn't care to fly, just shoot down stuff like in Warthunder. Get the right balance and you may see a new generation of simmers, otherwise it will be only persons that want to learn how to fly. Just my 2 cents or 1/4 pound...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like thinking of my FSX, FSW and AFS2 as games. To me calling them simulators gives an impression that they are real life related and that could lead to fatal overconfidence for budding real life pilots.There is no substitute for reality. Just imagine a scenario where the pilots of a 747 are incapacitated and the call comes for anyone who can fly a plane ...... YOU have 200 hours in a game/simulator..... it is up to you :biggrin:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't free flight one of the first options? It's faster to get to a free flight than in FSX. I don't remember any "Congratulations!" I see flight hours added in the log. Flight hours is actually a thing for real life pilots, so I don't see the gaminess there. This is the same code base as FSX. If you think FSX is a sim than this is too.

(And when I land in X-Plane I notice the wheels magically sticking to the ground with no bouncing (I'm not that good at landing every time), tires screeching when taxiing, and the lack of seasons or environment.)
 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares what it's called pick the one that tickles your fancy and go with it. Not everyone wants a hardcore sim or a game and I think that's why FSX was so successful because it was both. Does it really matter if you enjoy it?

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Heimi said:

The old discussion....It is what you want it to be.

For me subjectively perceived a simulator is just a genre of a game. It can be "gamey" or "real world simulated". Depends what are you doing. I don`t see any difference between x-plane, FSX, P3D, FSW, or even MS Flight. All of them are flight simulators, some with more procedure/real world simulation, some more arcade.

Some say if you use it for training it is a simulator, if you use it for fun it is a game.

 

you speak the truth .... In consideration of "arcade" vs "sim" -  once in the sim there is no real difference between the current flight simulations 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once in the sim it is a sim.  I said that.  Im not crazy about the interface between starting FSW and getting in the cockpit.  I feel it could be better.  I brought up ATS because its more of a game than FSW but yet it feels less gamey somehow.  I'm trying to figure out why FSW FEELS more gamelike and I believe it has to do with messages like "you must land at an airport for it to count" or "Congratulations, you've landed (or successfully completed the flight - whatever it says)"  and it does say those things.  Its part of the dialog. In ATS there is a 'drive' button and once you hit it, you are in the cab of your truck and its up to you to think about where you are and what you want to do and you bring up maps and look at possible jobs or maybe you just start your truck and drive.  It does say" Excellent" when you successfully deliver a cargo but that's about it.  I really don't know why FSW's interface bothers me lately but it does and it does not have to be that way just to bring in new people.  In fact it may deter new people.  The very opening screen with its choices are fine.  I select 'free flight' and then I select all my other choices.  That's good.  It then has a button you press and then it shows your plane from external view and you press another button and finally you are in the cockpit.  I feel they should eliminate one of the two start buttons after you setup a flight.  and they should eliminate the 'you must land at an airport' message.  and they should eliminate the 'congratulations, you've completed the flight' message.

The interface feels clunky to me and I think it could be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One man’s sim is another man’s game…and vice versa.

DTG is the last hope of any DEV taking a serious stab at advancing a flight sim to a whole new level; with a dedicated team making frequent updates and partnering with the best in the industry to offer major features in the core sim.

You didn’t get this level of innovation & progress with LR or LM in such a short time frame, and you only see a little more effort from these two DEVs because of DTG’s presence in the field.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, FlyBaby said:

DTG is the last hope of any DEV taking a serious stab at advancing a flight sim to a whole new level;

But if FSW is a success (and it deserves to be!) I hope DTG will be the first of many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FlyBaby said:

DTG is the last hope of any DEV taking a serious stab at advancing a flight sim to a whole new level; with a dedicated team making frequent updates and partnering with the best in the industry to offer major features in the core sim.

 

 

No I don't think so.  AFS2, XPlane and the upcoming Remex deadstick simulator could all be platforms of the future.

Dovetail needs to improve what it has - especially the ground scenery at this point.  Stephen Hood said they would be better at communicating but Ive asked Cryss a few times about the TrueSky update that disappeared and I still haven't gotten an answer.  If they can't do it then I think they should make it possible for FSX/P3D skies and clouds to work correctly and not hard code the sky.

I want them to succeed and I can wait because there are new offerings on the horizon.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, FlyBaby said:

One man’s sim is another man’s game…and vice versa.

DTG is the last hope of any DEV taking a serious stab at advancing a flight sim to a whole new level; with a dedicated team making frequent updates and partnering with the best in the industry to offer major features in the core sim.

You didn’t get this level of innovation & progress with LR or LM in such a short time frame, and you only see a little more effort from these two DEVs because of DTG’s presence in the field.

Yeah, DTG is my only hope to bring something really innovative to the scene (look what they did to the clouds). I say that based on what Stephen Hood says, not based on the current state of FSW.

If DTG brings to FSW everything Stephen hood has been envisioning, I'm sure we will have a really good flight sim. 

I'm not saying P3D or X-plane aren't good, but their developers are focusing in things I don't think will bring a major sense of innovation to our hobby.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, sightseer said:

 

No I don't think so.  AFS2, XPlane and the upcoming Remex deadstick simulator could all be platforms of the future.

Dovetail needs to improve what it has - especially the ground scenery at this point.  Stephen Hood said they would be better at communicating but Ive asked Cryss a few times about the TrueSky update that disappeared and I still haven't gotten an answer.  If they can't do it then I think they should make it possible for FSX/P3D skies and clouds to work correctly and not hard code the sky.

I want them to succeed and I can wait because there are new offerings on the horizon.

So where have these other DEVs really "advanced" their sims in the past 2 years? If you cant answer that, then there goes their future.

XPlane - has been in this business for over a "decade" with very little progress considering this time scale. Dynamic lighting is nice, until you get that cutoff in the near-distance. And lets not talk about their clouds. We are now living their future.

AFS2 - has vast flat lands including buildings etc, and now Orbx bite sized dlc. I hope this isn't the future, because you will need to spend $1,000s for decent world coverage.

Remex deadstick - If folk are impatient with DTG's progress...well, we will be in the year 2025 before this company gets to GA planes, Airliners and a world environment to fly in. And how much more advanced will DTG be by then?

DTG's progress, innovation, and commitment has not been matched by anyone else in this field...they are teaching a very old dog new tricks...withstanding a very pessimistic and impatient consumer base that doesn't appreciate the investment required to be the best.

 

 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/30/2017 at 9:49 AM, FlyBaby said:

So where have these other DEVs really "advanced" their sims in the past 2 years? If you cant answer that, then there goes their future.

XPlane - has been in this business for over a "decade" with very little progress considering this time scale. Dynamic lighting is nice, until you get that cutoff in the near-distance. And lets not talk about their clouds. We are now living their future.

AFS2 - has vast flat lands including buildings etc, and now Orbx bite sized dlc. I hope this isn't the future, because you will need to spend $1,000s for decent world coverage.

Remex deadstick - If folk are impatient with DTG's progress...well, we will be in the year 2025 before this company gets to GA planes, Airliners and a world environment to fly in. And how much more advanced will DTG be by then?

DTG's progress, innovation, and commitment has not been matched by anyone else in this field...they are teaching a very old dog new tricks...withstanding a very pessimistic and impatient consumer base that doesn't appreciate the investment required to be the best.

 

 

 

I don't fully agree with your statements regarding X-plane

Strangely you left out P3D(EULA arguments aside) and combat sims like DCS, ROF and IL-2

Dovetail is a bit late to the game but they are making progress and IMO it  looks good, but few developers are biting on DFS - which is death in the long term of survival of that product.

The same could be said of DCS but there is no combat sim to match ED's  fidelity , period. 1C gets it and they are always pushing content for their platform.

1C, ED have implemented VR and LM partially on P3D. DFS is very lacking in hardware support, which is a strike against them.

P3D and DFS will always be compared because of their lineage, restrictions aside. LM is winning that battle , regardless of distinctions between game/sim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Slayer said:

I don't fully agree with your statements regarding X-plane

Strangely you left out P3D(EULA arguments aside) and combat sims like DCS, ROF and IL-2

Dovetail is a bit late to the game but they are making progress and IMO it  looks good, but few developers are biting on DFS - which is death in the long term of survival of that product.

The same could be said of DCS but there is no combat sim to match ED's  fidelity , period. 1C gets it and they are always pushing content for their platform.

1C, ED have implemented VR and LM partially on P3D. DFS is very lacking in hardware support, which is a strike against them.

P3D and DFS will always be compared because of their lineage, restrictions aside. LM is winning that battle , regardless of distinctions between game/sim.

About the developers joining the sim, the real test to that will be when the SDK is out this month. For now there's no way to tell the acceptance as the only few developers were selected by Dovetail to help testing and building the SDK.

P3D is winning? In which aspect? If you think P3D has more add-ons and it feels more "complete", I will have to agree with you, but remember it has more than 7 years of development, It woud be impossible to catch up in a year, and as I said above, we will know 3rd parties acceptance after SDK is out. If the big ones join with DTG, FSW will evolve faster. Orbx already stated they are waiting the SDK to start looking to the platform. Let's what others will join.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe they all have their place in the present flight simulation scene, each for it's good ( or sometimes bad... ) reasons :-)

I have pretty muche moved from "civil" flight simulation games to war flight simulation games, first in 2012 by the hand of DCS World when a friend showed me the detail of implementation of the P51d, and latter, told by that same friend that I should try IL2 Battle of, I did the same...

Sometimes I ask myself why these days I can spend so much time playing either DCS or IL2, and can't practically use X-Plane, Aerowinx PSX, ELITE v9, sometimes a monthly license of P3D, very few times AEFS, and a bit more FSW, but truth is that among all this sims in my complex neural network, which tends to act more in the line of sim catharse ( read uninstall... ) because I can't easily support more than one sim of the same type at the same type in my PC and always try to find "The One", FSW became among the civil flightsims the one I am placing wider expectations on, and actually the one that gave me more joy playing. (*)

Yes it's the same core flight dynamics model that I also have in FSX / P3D, and yes both X-Plane and even Aerofly FS offer some interesting variations ( although in the end, net result, each of them by distinct reasons fail to please me :-/ )....

I ask myself when I watch FSW videos, what really attracts me in that sim, and I believe the answer is rather simple:

.) It's also 64 bit ( this has became the new trend / mandatory requirement !

.) It has great sky graphics, and might get a plausible fully featured weather engine.

.) It is built in turn of the concept of missions! Ah! That's it !!! Those missions remind me a LOT of my good old MS FLIGHT, whose failure represented also the failure of my belief in Flight Simulation in 2011 / 2012...

FSW can offer great default aircraft and even visuals ( scenery and weather ) for an acceptable price, and DTG is adding content to it in the form of nice missions that are interesting to fly, even didactic!  They are also welcoming 3pds, and 3pds ( at least FSLabs which is a known "study sim" dev ) are mentioning starting developing for their platform.

If I was to re-install a civil sim right now (*) it would certainly be FSW, if not for other reason, at least to enjoy the great Alaska Missions Pack I've been watching in the youtubes.

 

(*) 2 sims are sort of canonical for me - ELITE IFR and Condorsoaring, this last one about to get v2 available, maybe before 2017 Christmas !  As a glider pilot IRL, Condor can be very useful when the weather, and the $$$ in my pocket are worst than the METARs / TAFs / NOTAMs....

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gentlemen, all the discussion and comparison between FSW and P3D, XP, AEFS and the rest is somewhat futile - in the wider gaming world, PC-based flight sims have had their day and the modern popular flight sims are all Android and iOS based. OK, the PC gaming platform does have a certain retro appeal at the moment, and an elitist appeal due to the hassle and crippling expense of building a PC gaming platform which performs as well as an off-the-shelf PS4 or XBox - but these fads don't usually last.

For a more relevant comparison to a truly modern flight sim, take a look at https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.fungames.flightpilot&hl=en_GB

Flight Pilot Simulator 3D is a FREE Android and iOS-based sim which has been downloaded between 10 and 50 million times, with a free-flight mode, DLC and of course all the usual user-created mods and cheats. The graphics are superb, the dynamics are fluid and smooth. It's only one of dozens of flight sim titles for Android and iOS, all with downloads in the millions, which range from arcade-style to sim-style as we know it. Just read up on the features for yourself and then check out the 'Similar' games listed on the right.

The above sim contains most of the basic features of all the other Android & iOS flight sims, and is a good place to start if you're REALLY interested in what it would take to lure modern gamers from their mobiles back to their PC's with a new flight sim. You might even begin to understand why X-Plane doesn't have seasons or ATC, and why Aerofly FS doesn't model the whole world...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't need 'em Ray, that's the point - your iPhone IS your flight yoke so you can play these sims anywhere, anytime - and millions do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One must not forget hardware. A complete sim, even 64 bit, requires the best of the best of hardware, which until recently barely kept up with the sims' requirements.

I have a pretty powerful pc, but depending on the aircraft or graphic settings, sometimes my fps are in the teens.

And so I am asked to lower the graphic settings. So what good is it for a developer to innovate if the hardware cannot keep up.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, flyforever said:

So what good is it for a developer to innovate if the hardware cannot keep up.

A good point and that's exactly what happened to us with FSX back in 2006. Flight sim development for PC's fell by the wayside after that debacle, the mainstream moved elsewhere and onwards. It's one of the reasons why modern 'serious' sims like Infinite Flight (thanks for the link to that, Francesco!) are developed for mobile and sell at a fraction of the cost of a PC-based sim. If like me, you have a Smart TV with Android, you can even download and play these on TV too...

It's just no use anyone trying to compare any current PC flight sim to FSX, because those days and that type of sim are long gone. In FSX, once you've learned how to fly the plane and how to navigate with the various instruments, there's nothing else to do or achieve. By modern standards that's a complete waste of time and money. Any modern sim which only offers a few tutorials is doomed, so everyone here needs to stop comparing FSW to P3D, XP etc., and start looking at the mainstream flight sims. FSW has everything we expect from a flight sim such as seasons, ATC, real weather (soon!), but it also needs everything the mobile simmers expect from a flight sim too.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Slayer said:

I don't fully agree with your statements regarding X-plane

Strangely you left out P3D(EULA arguments aside) and combat sims like DCS, ROF and IL-2

Dovetail is a bit late to the game but they are making progress and IMO it  looks good, but few developers are biting on DFS - which is death in the long term of survival of that product.

The same could be said of DCS but there is no combat sim to match ED's  fidelity , period. 1C gets it and they are always pushing content for their platform.

1C, ED have implemented VR and LM partially on P3D. DFS is very lacking in hardware support, which is a strike against them.

P3D and DFS will always be compared because of their lineage, restrictions aside. LM is winning that battle , regardless of distinctions between game/sim.

We can certainly agree to disagree.

I did not leave out P3D etc. My earlier response (...if you read carefully before posting...) was to @sightseer and, therefore, I specifically addressed the "3" sims that he mentioned in "his" post concerning possible platforms of the "future". And that side argument relating to P3D...has no place in this thread, so why did you even bother to mention it at all...if it is truly an argument that you intended to leave aside?  

P3D, DCS and all of the rest that you mentioned have not made any major advancements in all of their iterations over the past 5 years. DTG isn't late to the game. They simply see an opportunity to offer an experience that none of the above have been able to do thus far. To me, that DTG came along "just in time" to advance a hobby that had no clear direction.

People either 1) see DTGs value and what they have to bring to the table, 2) don't see it, or 3) refuse to see it. Much of the criticism towards DTG seem to stem from those who simply refuse to see it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, A32xx said:

 

A good point and that's exactly what happened to us with FSX back in 2006. Flight sim development for PC's fell by the wayside after that debacle, the mainstream moved elsewhere and onwards. It's one of the reasons why modern 'serious' sims like Infinite Flight (thanks for the link to that, Francesco!) are developed for mobile and sell at a fraction of the cost of a PC-based sim. If like me, you have a Smart TV with Android, you can even download and play these on TV too...

It's just no use anyone trying to compare any current PC flight sim to FSX, because those days and that type of sim are long gone. In FSX, once you've learned how to fly the plane and how to navigate with the various instruments, there's nothing else to do or achieve. By modern standards that's a complete waste of time and money. Any modern sim which only offers a few tutorials is doomed, so everyone here needs to stop comparing FSW to P3D, XP etc., and start looking at the mainstream flight sims. FSW has everything we expect from a flight sim such as seasons, ATC, real weather (soon!), but it also needs everything the mobile simmers expect from a flight sim too.

The mobile genre has its place...lightweight, easily accessible, cheap etc. DEVs can also reach a broader audience and make more $$$ in the mobile market as well.

However, there is an audience that is dedicated to getting as close to "their sense" of the real thing as possible. Those who heavily invest in sim cockpits and hardware won't be totally satisfied with today's mobile solution.

The mobile market has car sims as well, but there will be those who will shell out more $$$ for Assetto Corsa, IRacing etc on the PC platform and the beefy systems to run these sims,

The mobile market has train sims as well, but there will be those who will shell out more $$$ for Train Simulator etc. on the PC platform and the beefy systems to run these sims,

So, the PC sim space is still a viable platform for flight enthusiasts. I for one, would not be satisfied with what mobile has to offer for planes, trains and automobiles.

Just like we have choices of TV dinners, home cook meals, fast food, and gourmet dining, there will be a consumer base to support the PC platform in the future.

 

 

  • Upvote 3

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