Revisiting FSW...

[pmb 5,137]

35 minutes ago, pracines said:

True sky does change things up a bit, but true sky does not play well with FSW currently - (go in the clouds and the ground turns gray- very ugly). Plus its the same old themed sky over and over....ugh.

I own FSW (got it for 0 € as a Flight School user), but given I enjoy a fully stuffed Prepar3d4 I don't see any reason in actually using it aside occasional tests. The snowy terrain seen from clouds even in summer as mentioned by Paul is certainly an ugly feature which has been reported numerous times but does seem to resist improvement so far.

I'll not comment on the meander course of the Dovetail Sim which I followed (initially with much hope, btw!) from its very beginning in 2014 and which gives me a very uneasy feeling on the whole approach.

Kind regards, Michael

[pracines 823]

6 minutes ago, jcomm said:

For the many years I played MSFS, I never really enjoyed it's missions, excluding when I spent some time creating my own ones with the BAO Aircraft & Adventure Factory, by the times of FS4...

I think that you're leaving out some interesting additional features like, being 64 bit ( now apparently a pre-requisite... ), have a World database update, that for instance allows small airfields I operate into and from IRL even here in Portugal are now included in the default scenery, navaid updates at least around Europe, and the overall scenery that is for sure better than the default in FSX ...

Just for the above, I think FSW is a very good investment, and worth supporting, no ?

Just for the above? No. Investment in something with the hope that it will be worth it someday is always an option. I'm saying that it currently is not worth supporting with the many other realistic options we have had available for a very long time. When FSW fully exceeds what we have already had, then it will be worth supporting. I would never tell anybody what to support or not support, I'm just saying that for virtual aviators, FSW will get old (boring) fast for all but about 100 people in the world, while FSX-SE/ XP11/P3Dv4 have stood the test of time for millions of people.

Yes FSW has some neat features, 64bit (we should have been at 64-bit about 15 years ago) broken windscreen (for what 1 mission?), rain effects (ok, does it always rain?), database update see here: https://www.fsaerodata.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=136   

These neat features are not nearly enough, and I understand its still being developed, but just like anyone would say to me "hang in there and let DTG work on it", I say the same, "wait until they fully exceed what we already have, then buy it"....to each their own, I'm just giving another perspective.

FSW will get the opportunity to prove itself, currently its not ready to prove itself. This topic is very premature, for the reasons I give, and according to the statements made by DTG about the features that are said to be implemented in the future....we have to wait and see....as far as we know the project could get cancelled. 

[Boomer 1,619]

41 minutes ago, jcomm said:

Madona is enjoying it around here !

Pfft, she's hiding from the Secret Service she has word not allowed off.

[pracines 823]

44 minutes ago, Boomer said:

I will purchase it and if I don't like it I will blame all of you. .. lol

You should be able to get a refund if you don't run it for more than 2 hours. 

[jcomm 5,929]

20 minutes ago, pracines said:

we have to wait and see....as far as we know the project could get cancelled. 

No way can any developer cancel what "The Uninstaller" keeps installed !!! No way !

[Boomer 1,619]

28 minutes ago, pracines said:

You should be able to get a refund if you don't run it for more than 2 hours. 

On Steam, yep.

[Chock 17,769]

I regard FSW as being a bit like having made a nice casserole and shoved it in the oven. It's there, simmering away whilst I do other things, and every once in a while I can check on it and think, mmm, that's going to be nice, but one has to be careful not to burn it. There certainly is a lot to look forward to with FSW if they don't stuff it up, what with trueSKY, PBR, updated navaids, good default textures including built in Orbx stuff, built in Accufeel, interactive checklists etc.

But disregarding the things it promises for a while, currently there isn't really anything in FSW in terms of simulating a flight which you could not do in another flight sim, you could even make identical missions to what it has for your other sims if you so desired, since the mission editor included with FSW is one which is available for other sims too. So I never really see much reason to start properly tucking into FSW right now, other than to check it out once in a while to see how it is progressing.

I bought the JF PA-28 for it, to see how it was in FSW in comparison to FSX and P3D, which I also have it in. Oddly enough, it's better in both FSW and FSX-SE than it is in P3D, in FSW it has PBR texturing, the interactive checklists and Accufeel by default of course, and in FSX-SE it has AccuFeel too since I bought that for FSX-SE, but since you can't get Accufeel for P3D, it ranks third in that line up when in P3D. 

Considering I've bought all three PA-28 variants for FSX and P3D which JF make (Warrior, Arrow and Turbo Arrow), and bought it for FSW too, I was a bit PA-28'ed out by the time it also became available for XPlane 11, so that's the only sim I've not bought that add-on for, but I understand from users who have got it for XPlane 11, that it has a bit more going on in terms of simulation, so really, I think in the case of that add-on at least, the one FSW has to match is not FSX-SE or P3D, but XPlane 11 (except where ground handling is concerned, because that is absolutely sh** in XPlane). I'm sure it will, but I guess we'll see.

And so 'I guess we'll see' is kind of what I think of FSW. I do think it is worth the price of admission right now for anyone who is into flight sims, just for curiosity of nothing else, and some of those missions are fun. But the big one for me is, if they can get trueSKY polling real world weather METARS and replicating them on the fly in the simulation. If they can do that without it turning into a slideshow, then there will be no argument, it will be the best and most advanced flight sim out there and anything else it offers, such as PBR etc, will just be additional nails to bang into the coffin of other flight sims which don't step up to match that level of advancement. trueSKY on the fly with downloadable weather making it dynamic is the magic bullet it needs to make it become the go-to flight sim.

[ckyliu 1,749]

Typical isn't it, I read all this FSW positivity within a week of finally jumping ship from FSX to P3Dv4 (and paying the associated changeover costs)! I waited a long time to see which side 64 bit was going to fall and I've bet my money it's P3D for the long term; FSW seems a long way from being mature and I'm unsure it will ever catch up with P3D given the resources and headstart LM have over DTG, and existing third party developer support. I really wanted FSW to do well because I think it would have kept addon costs down for us but I really feel that ship has sailed.

I will happily be proven wrong but I think DTG just got to the party too late; I would imagine at least 50% of serious simmers are now primarily using P3D and unlikely to move across to FSW unless the changeover costs are minimal; if publishers push P3Dv4 licence holders down the repurchase route I think that will be enough keep serious simmers away from FSW unless it brings out some seriously showstopping features or exclusive content. I don't think TrueSky alone would constitute that.

[flyforever 267]

To the party too late? Let's not forget all future newcomers. If FSW proves to be FSX true 64 bit replacement for $50, newcomers will not think twice to go with FSW.  Simmers who have already a lot of money invested in legacy sims( I include P3dv4) have no reason to change. It's the newcomers that FSW appears to be attracting, given its low entry  cost.

I can assure you that if the Iphone had tried to convert those folks who were happy with their land lines, they would not be where they are.

I am suggesting a much larger market for sims, and not one that always chooses the most expensive entry.

[MadDog 353]

While I am bullish overall on the future of FSW, the main thing that concerns me about DTG is that they can be very slow to fix obvious and simple problems.  In Train Sim World (which is graphically miles ahead of any flight simulator), their Great Western Express expansion has a glitch that makes all sounds extremely quiet.  While the volume can be boosted by editing a config file, it then makes the sounds way too loud in the base "heavy haul" content.  This is the kind of issue can probably be fixed by changing a few internal parameters; but it's been nearly 3 months and still no fix.

In FSW, the lighting and lack of Anti-Aliasing continue to be problem (better than Flight School; but still too washed-out and jaggy).  I know that TrueSky is still a wip; but how much effort does it take to tweak the terrain into looking presentable?  At a minimum, they could provide a few sliders to allow the user to play around with the HDR.  Improved Anti-Aliasing should be built into the DirectX API, so it baffles me why the AA options are so limited.  While I have been impressed with the "bigger" improvements FSW has introduced, I do worry that DTG will ignore the "finer" details that separate an average sim from a really good sim.

[FlyBaby 659]

1 hour ago, Chock said:

 

And so 'I guess we'll see' is kind of what I think of FSW. I do think it is worth the price of admission right now for anyone who is into flight sims, just for curiosity of nothing else, and some of those missions are fun. But the big one for me is, if they can get trueSKY polling real world weather METARS and replicating them on the fly in the simulation. If they can do that without it turning into a slideshow, then there will be no argument, it will be the best and most advanced flight sim out there and anything else it offers, such as PBR etc, will just be additional nails to bang into the coffin of other flight sims which don't step up to match that level of advancement. trueSKY on the fly with downloadable weather making it dynamic is the magic bullet it needs to make it become the go-to flight sim.

I think that DTG will add some groundbreaking features to both the sky and ground in FSW. They are piecing together a very good picture. From missions to cold and dark start tutorials, their investment in the SDK, and the visual enhancements...DTG is putting a ton of effort behind FSW. 

They are also leaving the door open for 3rd party Devs to add their content. JV once said that FSW gives Orbyx the opportunity to do things that he could not do with other sims (could that mean LOD? performance gains?).

I am very excited to see what both DTG and 3rd party DEVs will do in 2018. 

 

[pmb 5,137]

24 minutes ago, ckyliu said:

I will happily be proven wrong but I think DTG just got to the party too late; I would imagine at least 50% of serious simmers are now primarily using P3D and unlikely to move across to FSW unless the changeover costs are minimal.

No need to imagine anything, here is a recent poll:

http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/128744-there-comes-a-time-of-the-year-aerosoft-anniversary-poll/

All bias aside, you can certainly relate Aerosoft forum users to serious simmers in a way.

Here's another one with similar results

http://www.flusi.info/forum/index.php?thread/6564-welchen-flugsimulator-nutzt-ihr-im-herbst-winter-2017-18/

Kind regards, Michael

[FlyBaby 659]

3 minutes ago, MadDog said:

While I am bullish overall on the future of FSW, the main thing that concerns me about DTG is that they can be very slow to fix obvious and simple problems.  In Train Sim World (which is graphically miles ahead of any flight simulator), their Great Western Express expansion has a glitch that makes all sounds extremely quiet.  While the volume can be boosted by editing a config file, it then makes the sounds way to loud in the base "heavy haul" content.  This is the kind of issue can probably be fixed by changing a few internal parameters; but it's been nearly 3 months and still no fix.

 

I agree that DTG has a reputation for not fixing bugs with their existing train sims all the while constantly introducing new content for dlc. The flickering train station lights in TS (from a distance) is one reason why I refuse to buy another route that reproduces this same core issue. And I refuse to purchase TSW until they make it compatible with RailDriver that took "years" for them to get working correctly with TS.

However, FSW is a different team and I suspect that DTG is not looking to make the same mistake with a new market / sim. The noise surrounding DTG's handling of TS / TSW should be enough of a wake up call and I can imagine that Steven Hood does not want FSW to be associated with that reputation. 

I also suspect that many more fixes and features are coming to FSW before full release.

[Pastaiolo 1,688]

3 minutes ago, pmb said:

No need to imagine anything, here is a recent poll:

http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/128744-there-comes-a-time-of-the-year-aerosoft-anniversary-poll/

All bias aside, you can certainly relate Aerosoft forum users to serious simmers in a way.

Here's another one with similar results

http://www.flusi.info/forum/index.php?thread/6564-welchen-flugsimulator-nutzt-ihr-im-herbst-winter-2017-18/

Kind regards, Michael

 

The problem with the aerosoft poll is simple. They mostly offer products for FSX/P3D, i would expect the user base on their forum to be the same. So it doesn't really give a good idea of the general playerbase and where it goes.
An easy way to prove it is by bringing up the case of DCS, which in the modern combat sims environment has no competition, and is likely to have more than the 18 people who voted for it on the aerosoft forum poll.

 

It's like if i was to go on x-plane.org and do the same polling options. Would i be surprised in finding out most are using XP11 and not P3D?

[Chock 17,769]

Running a poll on Aerosoft's website related to FSW usage, is about as useful as stopping people who are pulling their car into a Ford service centre and asking them: 'What make of car do you drive?'; then claiming your survey result conclusively indicates that Fords are the car everyone drives.

You're going to get a tainted result at pretty much any online location you conduct such a survey, and particularly when there are so few add-ons available for FSW and more pointedly the site is one which sells add-ons, none of which are for FSW. Such a survey would probably have indicated there were more users of Ready For Take Off then FSW if they'd asked about those two, since one of those is an Aerosoft product.

As far as switching from another sim to FSW when it gets released, when its complete state and features will be known and the TPD stuff starts showing up, that will be the time to determine whether people will decide whether they want to use it or not. And even then it doesn't have to be an either/or decision, there's nothing stopping anyone from using any amount of simulators they like.

But if FSW depicts the most realistic weather, which by definition means it will depict the most realistic environment in which an aeroplane actually operates - and it looks quite like it is going to providing the plan actually goes to plan - then if users want realism, it will certainly be a compelling reason to start using it. Thus the notion that 'serious simmers' will only want to use P3D, is b***ocks, because anyone who is really serious about wanting to depict flight realistically will be all over that functionality like a rash, that is of course assuming trueSKY actually delivers what is promised for FSW, which isn't a given yet by any means, despite DTG's desire for it to be so. Wanting to do something and actually pulling it off are not the same thing.