26 minutes ago, Nuno Pinto said:

I'm stunned people vote for "ATC". Go online, IVAO or VATSIM, it's much better than electronic ATC simulators.

Not everyone enjoy VATSIM, etc. and we need to understand it.

Some users have very limited time to enjoy their simulation hobby, they are just people dreaming about being pilots and their lives are very very busy as they have kids, long shift jobs, they live on difficult time zones, etc. so when the time to enjoy the hobby comes, it is for a short period of time and unscheduled, in most of the cases this type of user base can only enjoy the hobby in the middle of the night when their families are sleeping.

Under such circumstances many users find that VATSIM / IVAO do not have an event, ATC coverage or do not have enough online users in the area they wish to fly, so you might be thinking well they can find a location with traffic surely.. but this is not always the case, and when you do.. you need to dedicate some time to prepare your flight by reading charts, etc. since the area is unknown to you and if you don't, you will probably receive warnings from online controllers for not following the correct procedures, this is a limiting factor as you have just 1 hour to do your flight and in many cases some users will just use time acceleration to fit in the flight. Other users just don't wish to speak online as the noise would disturb their families as they are sleeping, and other just wish to have LOTs of traffic around which is not available via online ATC during their available schedule.

The important thing here is to understand there is a large proportion of simmers that wish to fly offline, it is their decision, for one reason or another and it must be respected. Such user base wish to have a much better ATC / AI Traffic immersion experience without the need to go online and it is why ATC received such amount of votes.

It was not a surprise for me, I was expecting even more votes on that subject.. but I guess some of them also wish to have improvements in other areas and decided to compromise.. :)

Regards,
S.

Edited October 3, 20187 yr by simbol

34 minutes ago, Nuno Pinto said:

I'm stunned people vote for "ATC". Go online, IVAO or VATSIM, it's much better than electronic ATC simulators.

Most definitely

49 minutes ago, simbol said:

Not everyone enjoy VATSIM, etc. and we need to understand it (...)

Fair enough, agreed.

Ah, the usual baloney that UNIGINE is unfit as a flight sim engine...

 

 

 

Thanks for helping me explaining my point event better, you can see clearly on the second video that the Airplane is flying in a limited area, it never leaves the local airport neither it climbs out to FL340 and shows you an unlimited horizon.

This is what is what I am trying to explain, it loaded a "limited scene" a not an entire simulated world, don't get me wrong, it works and looks amazing but it has different applications, like focal training on VFR flying around one particular airport, putting out fires and many other applications.

Regards,
S.

Edited October 3, 20187 yr by simbol

It would most surprising if LM adapted Unigine to P3d given that LM is a US defense contractor and Unigine is a product of a Russian company.

2 hours ago, Nuno Pinto said:

I'm stunned people vote for "ATC". Go online, IVAO or VATSIM, it's much better than electronic ATC simulators.

I've seen this statement so many times I'd be a millionaire if I was paid a penny for each occasion.

There are three very good reasons why I will not use online ATC...

1) I live alone so if the doorbell rings I have to answer it. I imagine ATC would not be amused if I just abandoned my comms with them for an unknown period.

2) I sometimes need to go to the toilet during a flight. See above .

3) I often fly in historic time so that I can arrive in far away places in their daylight which may be the middle of the night in the UK simulator time. Will there be a controller in Hawaii at 0300 local? I very much doubt it.

Radar Contact is always there for me whatever time of day. And it uses real people's voices. I know because I'm one of them!

Edited October 3, 20187 yr by Ray Proudfoot

56 minutes ago, Murmur said:

Ah, the usual baloney that UNIGINE is unfit as a flight sim engine...

 

 

 

To be fair, if it was that good and viable, why has it completely disappeared?  The website no longer works.

Based on the poll results, it seems like the only realistic goal they can achieve is better thread optimization. I do remember watching an interview with someone from LM earlier this year claiming the work to the ATC is planned but from the way it was described, it surely didn't sound like it was important enough. 

Well, I went for "slopped runways", because for instance "turboprops" can easily be overcome by talented developers...

The platform is so well established that really detailed applications, being it sophisticated aircraft systems simulation engines, scenery, weather, can be explored by experienced developers to give the end result a level of detail not possible with default aircraft/scenery/weather/ai, etc...

But having slopped runways would certainly add a nice touch of detail, something I've been willing to have in FSX and then P3D for quite a long time now...

Voted ATC, it's been the same since ages, same goes for AI engine.
Slopped runways would be nice.

Updated or updatable stock Navaid database, stock airports mag dec, runways, etc.)
Update to flight planner.

I know there are freeware and payware solutions, but I would like to see those in the base program.

SDK improvements for scenery design.and an interface for C# gauge/exe/dll programming. Would love to be able to place custom gauges in front of the VC panel texture/gauges. (z order for gauges in the VC.),

Edited October 3, 20187 yr by RamonB

Forget it because we all know none of these features will be implemented or fixed 

12 minutes ago, Mitch24 said:

Forget it because we all know none of these features will be implemented or fixed 

Respect Your opinion, but:

I prefer to see half filled glasses, instead of half empty ones.

5 hours ago, Mitch24 said:

Forget it because we all know none of these features will be implemented or fixed 

Then you haven’t researched enough. They have all ( with One or two exceptions)  been referenced in interviews and are relatively plausible options. We all know something significant needs to happen in the next version to keep the platform relevant 

10 hours ago, simbol said:

Thanks for helping me explaining my point event better, you can see clearly on the second video that the Airplane is flying in a limited area, it never leaves the local airport neither it climbs out to FL340 and shows you an unlimited horizon.

This is what is what I am trying to explain, it loaded a "limited scene" a not an entire simulated world, don't get me wrong.

Here's your unlimited horizon. Autogen visibility distance seems good enough to me.

And I quote from the official website: "Not only terrain, but also vegetation and objects are visible up to the horizon."

And: "Advanced Level of Detail (LOD) [...] allows unmatched visibility distance. [...] a limited Earth curvature simulation is also available for high-altitude aircraft."

 

Edited October 4, 20187 yr by Murmur