Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Guest Peter Sidoli

Panel depiction in FSX ?

Recommended Posts

Guest Peter Sidoli

When FS9 came out I was rather surprised to see that MS had kept the old 2D panel layout while bringing in the new VC layout.At the time it smacked of " Jack of all trades, master of none" ie MS were not convinced enough of either method to drop one and concentrate their efforts into a brand new way of displaying panels and guages.We had the old 2D looking through a post box slot method of displaying panels and then we had the VC which while much better from a view perspective in itself had its own drawbacks.We are faced with a square screen panel to cram everything into and this isnt good for the old periferal (hope its spelt right) views.If you look straight ahead at a spot in front of you and place your arms out straight you should still perceive a movement when moving your fingers.Now move your eyes to the right while still looking ahead and you can move your arms and hand behind you and still see finger movement.There has been nothing shown in screenshots to show what MS are going to do with panels and cockpit views in FSX or any information on any clever ways of improving the "perception" of periferal views on a sqaure flat screen.Will we be faced with more of the same ie 2D / VC, or will MS finally dump the 2D because they have become masters of a new method of panel/guage /cockpit display which is probably the biggest challenge to be faced in FSX?Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 3202b

I hope they don't dump the 2D panel, there was a huge post a while ago where most people agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest GeorgeDorkofikis

Oh please, do not abandon the 2D panels!At least you can turn them off and fly with outside view only on a small home cockpit. VC cannot be turned off!Also, the impact VC have on some systems is too much for smooth flight.And least but not last, the instruments in VC are generally very hard to read as being small in relation to the prespective. Let's not forget that in the real cockpit you are sitting in a 3D environment, and it's very hard to simulate this on a 2D plane on a monitor.George DorkofikisAthens, Hellashttp://online.vatsimindicators.net/811520/1704.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Dennis_k

I hope the 2d stays, because i use this the most.Sometimes i use the vc, but thats more for picturemaking then flying.Also, al lot of computers can't handle the grafic load of the VC. (i cant use the PMDG 774 VC, my frames go down to 7)My opinion is that they (MS :) ) use them in the same way as they are used now in FS2004 / FS9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Peter Sidoli

>Oh please, do not abandon the 2D panels!>At least you can turn them off and fly with outside view only>on a small home cockpit. VC cannot be turned off!>>Also, the impact VC have on some systems is too much for>smooth flight.>And least but not last, the instruments in VC are generally>very hard to read as being small in relation to the>prespective. Let's not forget that in the real cockpit you>are sitting in a 3D environment, and it's very hard to>simulate this on a 2D plane on a monitor.>>George Dorkofikis>Athens, Hellas>http://online.vatsimindicators.net/811520/1704.pngGeorge the fact that people cling to the old 2D panel method is because MS have not yet come up with an ideal solution.I do not see the two camps 2D/VC and people clinging to the 2D as indicative of how fantastic the old 2D is but of how far the new VC still has to go.Yes there are flaws in the existing VC but already smooth guage technology and other methods are making complex aircraft like the Level D 767 and PMDG 747 as smooth and clickable as the old 2D.The very fact that people call for both systems is indicative that both methods are "Jack of all trades master of none".I know of no other sim which gives two ways of showing panels. If the solution had been cracked in a satisfactory way then this arguement wouldnt exist.There has been nothing shown in screenshots and I dont expect there to be any comments from our friends in this forum. That to me indicates that this is still an undecided problem area.Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest daniel.alm

IMO there's still no better methode as a 2D panel for complex airliners. GA aircraft might be fine with VC, but not airliners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Peter Sidoli

>IMO there's still no better methode as a 2D panel for complex airliners. GA aircraft might be fine with VC, but not airliners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use mulitple displays and 2D panels exclusively. I question the assertion that continued support of 2D panels is hindering the improvement of 3D panels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Peter Sidoli

>I use mulitple displays and 2D panels exclusively. I>question the assertion that continued support of 2D panels is>hindering the improvement of 3D panels.Mr Joe Public doesnt use multiple displays and I have not asserted that supporting 2D is hindering the improvement of 3D.I am suggesting that neither system as they stand do a good job of making the flying experience as real as it gets.The 2D are claustraphobic and as looking through a toilet roll compared to real world.The VC is not as claustraphobic has "better" periferal views but hasnt been as clear or framerate friendly in the past and as they stand are far from perfect yet.PMDG in the their 747 made their VC framerate friendly and clear.I am suggesting that there has to be a better way and I dont care whether its 2D VC or Mickey Mouse :-) for making the cockpit much more immersive and nearer to real world than we have at the moment which frankly is way off real world.We talk about the FDE and how everyone wants a more real landing experience, that cannot be divorced from the other senses which are not FDE but visual and getting the visuals as close to how the real pilot sees them.You are obviously trying to achieve that by going multiple displayPeter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G'day Pete,Totally agree, there has to be a better way... I cannot cope with the mail slot view placed at the level of my stomach either. VC all the way for me...BTW, FYI - peripheral means the same as periferalCheers,Chris Porter:-outtaPerthWestern Australia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also agree. A game called European Air War by Microprose was my first introduction to a true virtual cockpit and from that point on 2D was out. I think to each his own so I won't argue either way, but panning around in the VC to me just seems more realistic and immersive than looking at a panel crammed with all the instruments, so I do agree that the VC is important, more like the real world whereas the 2D is more a relic of the past....Okay, I couldn't help argue a point but again, to each his own and I think they'll probably implement both for this version as many users still use the 2D. Ian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for clarifying Peter.<>Based on the responses thus far, I think many interpreted it that way. For example,<"Finally dump the 2D" suggests to me that to achieve something better, you have to abandon something. I am not suggesting 2D panels and multiple monitors are the solution. Rather, I am very pleased with what we have now, and would like to see these features remain. Improvements are certainly welcome too.Regards,Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Peter Sidoli

>BTW, FYI - peripheral means the same as periferal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it some people complain about..what is not right instead of suggesting what it should be (be specific).There is a saying. "Most of us go through life not knowing what we want..but we are all darn sure...what we have is just isn't it"Manny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pabra

Peter; I'm as amazed as you are that we're still confined to a rectangular display (20+ years) instead of virtual reality displays which by now should have been sufficient developed for public use; it is with this technology that the full use of vc's can be archieved in a variety of rpg's and all kind of simulators. I have seen loose foil that could be twisted to surround our heads 180 deg., while an image was displayed. It seems like something or someone is holding the developement back......In the meantime trackir approaches that goal somewhat but no pheripheral view what is lacking for spotting that flashing amber light in the far corner of the overhead panel before it gets red.Paul@ehgg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<><I am just trying to understand here, are those in favor of changing what we have advocating a solution for the masses, or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Peter Sidoli

><>>><a rectangular display...>>>I am just trying to understand here, are those in favor of>changing what we have advocating a solution for the masses, or>not?What Paul says about virtual reality headsets is probably the best way in the future for a number of experience simulations whether down hill Skiing or flight simulations.What we are stuck with now is a square box to look at. But hey! this is a simulation which means using every trick in the book and some of those incredibly clever and creative minds at MS to fill in the gaps.If we cannot have Peripheral views as the real deal then trick us into thinking we have ;-)If we scroll in a VC to an area of the panel we need to access then let it grow and detail in front of our eyes for access.......Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>George the fact that people cling to the old 2D panel method>is because MS have not yet come up with an ideal solution.Peter,Did you consider a possibility there may NOT be an ideal solution your are hoping for? Certainly the biggest obstacle is the finite size of your monitor and its flatness.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Peter.I would like to see them do away with the 2D panel. The only problem is the inability, in VC, to separate the Panel from the Scenery / outside view. This is absolute must is you want use a Projector or 2 monitors with separate views. If they can find out how to do that, Good by 2D. TV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest tdragger

Hmm, while I wouldn't describe it the same way, I *think* that you'll be able to get the effect you want in FSX. Ping me again when it comes out if you can't figure out how to work it on your own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest daniel.alm

>>Is what you are saying here that the 2D is only good for IMC>flying where you do not need to see out?>The thing is Peter, that most users still have a 17" or 19" monitor. You might dislike 2D and sub-panels but I personally hate to pan around in a VC looking for a miniatuare gauge I cannot read because of its size. So before 3D goggles become standard to everyone, I don't want to fly a simulation like the PT TU-154 from the VC, it just doesn't do it for me. To each their own I guess. Regards,Daniel

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...