Will FS10 finally herald the end of the 2D panels

[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

[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

[Paul Golding 92]

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

[albar965 1,042]

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

[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

[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!

[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

[Geofa 108]

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

[mnmon 0]

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

[oldbear 33]

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

[edetroit 933]

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

[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.

[MarkRey 16]

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

[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).

[Dark Moment 0]

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]