Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Guest jrobert

Will FS10 finally herald the end of the 2D panels

Recommended Posts

Guest Peter Sidoli

With the superb clarity and relatively smooth frame rates as well as functionality of the latest VCs I wonder now whether FS10 will no longer have the old 2D format.With the release of FS9 it seemed strange to me that MS should have so many ways of displaying a panel.A Jack of all trades master of none approach.With FS10 I wonder whether they will have enough confidence to ditch the reliance on 2D and put all their efforts into VCs only using 2D as click on popups for sub systems.With the advancement in "smooth" guage technology I for one wont be sorry to see this mix match of panel presentation finished.Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest allcott

Agreed. As long as the 3d offers the opportunity to `lock` views I think the day of the 2d panel is coming to an end. And I am (was) a real 2d buff! I find that increasingly the 2d panel is only of any use as a way to access pop-up subpanels, and I spend more of my time in the VC than ever. I never thought I would, but you're right, latest developments have mad me a convert!Allcott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't imagine that happening, unless FS10 becomes FS Bush pilot or FS GA.VC's don't generally work well in airliners. Aside from most airliner VC's needing way more than the ideal single VC entry in the panel.cfg, they don't lend themselves well to having all gauges coded into the mdl itself.Add to that the annoying VC lighting issues i.e. fs sunlight has no regard for solid walls and then the often less than ideal outside/panel view.However, if MS solve the lighting issue, add lot's of snap-to views so that you can quickly look at the OH or the radios etc and of course solve the gauge fluidity...........well then things will be different.http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...BANNER_PAUL.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really would like to fly more with the 3d cockpits.But before these guys drop the 2d panels they better fix their performance problems and stutters with the 3d cockpits.Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest abent

I certainly hope not. Though some of the payware planes seem to have very crisp looking VC's, the one thing I can't stand about any VC is the distorted perspective when you pan around. I highly doubt that I'd buy FS10 if they ditched the 2-D cockpits. :-( Adam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest JeanLuc_

Peter, if "smooth" gauge technology is 3D polygons in a VC like a couple aircraft around here and you like them, you may consider having a look at the new TrueGauge XP in the DreamFleet Baron 58:http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/rxp_flt.htmThe page starts with:"Reality XP sets new standards with TrueGauge XP! You think smooth 3D gauges in a virtual cockpit sets the bar? Think again! "Hope this helps!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Peter Sidoli

That is an indication of what can be available. It would be interesting to know what MS thoughts are on the way ahead with how the panel/cockpit should be displayed in FS10.This is one area where hanging on to the past meant that FS9 gave us an unsure and may I say slightly ridiculous situation of so many panel/cockpit options that you felt that MS really didnt know the way forward.I can understand Paul holding on to what he knows and defending that but is more of the same in the next version of FS an advancement?Somehow I think not.Surely we do not want FS10 to be just an FS9 with more glitter. FS10 has to be fluid. I know little or nothing about panel design. What I do know is about reality and making our sims as close to that as possible.The 2D panels never did it for me in the reality stakes. Too much like trying to fly a plane looking through a toilet roll.The VC is better but not perfect in the constraints of a flat screen.The PMDG 747 VC is very clear and fairly smooth.Maybe this new technolgy that you have shown with the link is a pointer to how all the aircraft guages will be dealt with in the next release.Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say the more options for the end user to customize this sim the way they want it -the better. That after all is why MS has been the most succesful sim-the ability to customize it to your own personal preference.I don't see continuing 2d panels as anything that would "hold back" the future fs. I did not ever care for Fly's scrolling cockpits, nor do I the present 3d Fs. Others feel the opposite-isn't choice the way to go? I can understand needing to abandon parts of Fs that may be obsolete and holding the sim back, but I don't see 2d cockpits as anything that do that-especially since the 2d needs to be done for the 3d to manifest!If I only have a choice of 3d in the next version I will probably not buy it-until a 3rd party adds the option for 2d! :-lolAgain though, I don't think this should be the endless debate about which is better-but more the idea that the more ways a end user can make this sim what they want-the more powerful and long lasting it becomes.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the PMDG 747 VC is the best ever; no real effect on frame rates and very crisp. However, I never use it. I still find it very difficult to read all the displays and find it annoying to have to scroll over to adjust the AP settings. By the time I zoom in close enough to see everything it looks like the 2D and now the AP controls are out of reach. I can much faster reach the overhead panel by the pop up button then with the scrolling in the VC. That being said. I use the VC exclusively when flying GA; especially the Aero Commander, and the Aeroworx King Air. VC's work great in the smaller aircraft, but are very cumbersome, to me, in the airliners. They each have their place so I can't see either taking precedence. Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Paul on this one. I routinely use the VC in the Flight1 C172, but still prefer the 2D panels on airliners like the LDS767 and PMDG737. I hope MS don't decide to ditch 2D panels quite yet. There are plenty of other fundamental improvements that MS can make to the new version - such as more realistic ATC - to convince buyers that it's worth trading up when the time comes.Ian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do hope 2D is here to stay ... I'm sure most people know that different airlines have differing cockpit configurations.If one dabbles in panel design one can make any 2D config one likes.But in a 3D only a/c one is at the mercy of the modellerTake the superb Aerosim Tristar ....beautiful model with a VC..but if your fav Trittanic Airline used tape gauges for the engines....oh dear :-lolDefinitely one of FS's greatest attributes is the way it can appeal to all types of simmers ....to take the 2D away would take away a lot of the fun (or is it torture?) of tinkering for me. :(

regardsEd

http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/127932.jpgAMD Athlon 64 3500+, 1024Mb PC3200 DDR, 300Gb HD 128Mb DDR Nvidia 6600GT PCI Express, Audigy 2 ZSCH Products Yoke, Pedals and Throttle Quadrant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bobsk8

I'm another "look at the 3D panel, then switch to 2D for serious flying" pilots. I have a few planes on my PC that have excellent 3D panels, but I find myself switching to the 2D when flying ILS's,or other piloting tasks that require a high degreeof concentration and accuracy. If you told me I had a choice of one or the other, I would vote for 2D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3D does seem to be the way forward, there have been and will continue to be tramendous advances in vc presentation, be it c152 or B744.System performance is critical, and MS will consider that - vcs push h/w to the limit with a large outside view seen from within a 3d environment.I may be wrong but I think at least for fs10 MS still wants John and Jane Q Public to be able to buy their product, jump in and fly a 737 past Mt Rainier without too much trouble - still easiest with a large clear 2d panel that won't stutter all over his/her Dell 3000 For me, even though I get good performance in vcs, I can tell my hardware prefers 2d (fan speeds/temps :) ) and I don't like overtaxing my hardware.I use 3d exclusively for taxi and also for some procedures - the perspective is unbeatable, but 2D is still my main perspective.regards,Markhttp://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a319/markrey/lds1.jpgXPHomeSP2/FS9.1/3.2HT/1GIG/X700pro256

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

>With the superb clarity and relatively smooth frame rates as>well as functionality of the latest VCs I wonder now whether>FS10 will no longer have the old 2D format.>I certainly hope now. I use the 2D 90% of the time because it's more natural for instrument flying.>With the release of FS9 it seemed strange to me that MS should>have so many ways of displaying a panel.>So many?There's 2 ways, unless you count the mini-view which IMO isn't a view at all.>A Jack of all trades master of none approach.>Oh well. Better than doing one thing well that noone needs...>With FS10 I wonder whether they will have enough confidence to>ditch the reliance on 2D and put all their efforts into VCs>only using 2D as click on popups for sub systems.>So you DO want 2D...If you get rid of the 2D view completely, you loose those popups as well as those come free with the 2D view and are in fact 90% of the work for the 2D view (the rest being a few bitmap images).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully, they'll keep both. I love flying with a well-made VC panel, but complex IFR or pattern flying in VC, however good the panel, is almost impossible in VC with Active Camera/FS CoPilot head latency enabled. Playing 'pin the tail on the donkey' with radio and OBS settings in turbulence is not my idea of fun, and yet I would not want to disable the 3D latency as it lends so much to the sim. In such circumstances I alternate, using the 3D panel to look around when not under pressure, but 2D when the heat is on so that at least I can be sure my perspective is always correct and that a touch of the hat switch doesn't screw up my sight lines!I fly a lot of close-quarters multiplayer ... I guess all this doesn't matter so much if you have the skies to yourself.MarkMark "Dark Moment" BeaumontVP Fleet, DC-3 AirwaysTeam Member, MAAM-SIM[a href=http://www.swiremariners.com/cathayhk.html" target="_blank]http://www.paxship.com/maamlogo2.jpg[/a]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gordius

I must confess that I don't quite see the problem with having both. As I see it the only advantage to a VC flier is the difference between one and two key strokes to change to spot view although I can understand the reasoning behind what you say.My vote goes for both for several reasons one of which being that when developing freeware aircraft if the designer has to include a VC that adds so many hours of extra work which IMHO would deter some. Designing a VC panel is not as simple as 2D which could lead to a drop in the number of freeware panels as well.VC or 2D are of course a personal choice in FS9. I just hope the VC continues to improve as it has this time around.Andrew BrownROARING THIRTIEShttp://www.gordiusfs.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ben_hewitt

I hope they keep 2D panels, I use them 99.9% of the time - the gauges are much easier to read and its quicker to find buttons and scan panels. Its better than messing about with the mouse trying to click the right button in 3D view!.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the 2D, and use it mostly. I also hit that "W" a lot for a better view when landing, but wish they would add a Tach. My greatest hope is that they expand the capabilities of the fabulous top down view and include an option for all the overlays and enhancements to simulate all the features of FS Navigator in that view.MSFS without FS Navigator and all of it's nice features is clearly not as much fun. Especially "fly to here" and "move to here" ! Just get it over with and pay the developer a royalty to get it into every product sold. The top down view would be perfect for this.Just make sure it can be detached to another screen !!!!!!!!!!!!Bob (Lecanto, Fl)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ThrottleUp

As impressed as I am by VCs I am not sold on them. As long as Im facing a flat computer monitor I prefer the 2D ones not just because of their clarity but because they result in less of a FPS-hit. I also find it irritating to always have to pan, zoon, scroll & press. I know some keyboard shortcuts but still find myself doing that when trying out a VC lol.I feel *true* VC-only flying will come when these things drop in price & PC games/simulations start being designed for them:http://www.togobox.com/images/virtualpic.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Microsoft ditched the 2D Panel it would make things allot harder for freeware designers that specialize in either external models or 2D panels. The 2D panel allows would be designers an easier way to break into this hobby without having to build the whole aircraft. There

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest RonB49

I use 2D instrument panels because I use two monitors; one for the 3D outside view and the other for the panel(s). I don't know how I'd do that with VC. R-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "old 2D format" is still, by far (IMNSHO), the better option for any type of instrument work. The VC is just too cumbersome and the perspective(s) are too difficult for many of us to comfortably do instrument flying. I'll be sticking with FS9 if FS10 turns out to be a VC-only release - which, of course, it won't be :-) .Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As many of you, I use 2D almost exclusively ... take a peek at 3D VC now and again ... but do not like the 3D AT ALL, not at all. (but I really don't care about external views, internal toilets, overheads on the aisle in the first class section, dropping trays, or wing views ... I like to fly the plane ... and have been a passenger to many times to remember in real life)Having said that, I think FS is many things to many people and that many people enjoy the hobby in different ways ... so as long as there is a CHOICE between 3D and 2D and the ability to have the "bells and whistles" and visibly moving slats, and visible gearboxes hanging off the engine ... then all will be good.I hope MS finds ways to improve the software and details so that everyone will be happy ... including keeping the 2D panel for those of us who like it.Choice Choice Choice!!!!and IT'S FRIDAY!!!!Cheers, and

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I guess if performance limitations by having a 2d panel would be reduced by going to only a VC, I would do it. I fly from the VC whenever I can. I see no problem panning with my hat switch to look down at an instrument stack, etc. In real life you have to do the same thing, no airplane has everything right infront of you. The VC gives me a great perspective and allows me to practice where to look for a switch, instrument, etc. and still being able to swivle my head to the left to check out the scenery, instead of the bland quick view that you get by using 2d panels. I write messages on post cards, I don't need to stare at one for hours

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...