Sign in to follow this  
Guest myskja

Better visual crash damage...

Recommended Posts

I don't know if anyone else mentioned this but it would be nice for once to see realistic visual damage in Flight Simulator. It's been far too long the only thing one sees when crashing is a pause and a message stating, 'Crash'. If I crashed a 747, it would be nice to see a better representation of that. If I run into a building it would be nice to see damage both on the plane and the building. A fatal dive in a 737 from say 27,000ft should leave nothing but a hole in the ground. Not trying to sound morbid here but hopefully we see something better than a pause in the sim with the plane hanging in the air waiting for the flight to reload...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Just think about what you are really asking for. 9/11 still very clear in most minds, what do you think the airlines who let the community use their logos would think about all the little Johnnys of the world crashing 757/767s into buildings in such graphic fashion? Or anyone who has been directly involved in any manner with such horrible crashes, to believe that Microsoft could be so inexcusably wreckless to let anyone mimic these acts in their sim is beyond my comprehension. I hope and have a good feeling that it ain't gonna happen and I support them for taking some sort of stand thus far... ...............Randy J. Smith................A PROUD MEMBER OF THE PMDG BETA TEAM[h4]Evolution is a process that results in heritable changes in a population spread over many generations[/h4]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I echo Randys comments. Having also lost three friends in real aviation crashes and seen the misery such crashes cause, I have no desire for MS to waste time and money which could be better spent on other aspects of the sim.Aircraft failures are another matter as they involve the challenge and descision making required to make the flight safe and are part and parcel of what the pilot has to be prepared for.Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Randys comments.Lets top talking about this ridiculous topic now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Lets top talking about this ridiculous topic now.So, I'm going to play devil's advocate for a minute...Plenty of automotive simulations show realistic damage when hitting walls or getting into Turn 1 pile-ups. Similarly, many, many more people die in auto accidents than plane crashes. So by your standards, should all games should be devoid of any realistic damage tendencies? Let me also say this: I'm an aviation professional, and my job is to assure safety of flight. So I don't take the subject of safety lightly.Obviously then, when I "fly" in FS, my goal is not to plant a 767 into the WTC. However, this is an entertainment title, and it would be silly not to acknowledge the fact that not everyone takes it as seriously as me, or you.I hardly think that anyone here is advocating that graphic violence be portrayed. No one wants to see bodies, or body bags, or death tolls. Just something other than a red bar that says "crash".Please don't mock someone else's ideas just because they don't fit your ethos. Nick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Plenty of automotive simulations show realistic damage when hitting walls or getting into Turn 1 pile-ups. Similarly, many, many more people die in auto accidents than plane crashes. So by your standards, should all games should be devoid of any realistic damage tendencies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with previous comments, not to be rude, but what do you expect to see, a fire ball crashing into a mountain, and dozens of mutilated bodies (of course simulated) on the floor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I really wish this topic wasn't so taboo that whenever an overly sensitive person reads it he wishes for the thread's closure.Let's refer to the frequent debate of whether MSFS should be referred to as a simulator or a game. Most people will happily defend MSFS's status as a simulator, but then wouldn't that imply that it should be simulating every aspect of flight? If you are involved in an incident that involves banging up a piece of the plane, wouldn't it be an interesting challenge to try to bring the plane down safely rather than reading a rather dull "CRASH" message that already assumes you died? And please, I don't want to be bombarded with responses from dozens of self-proclaimed expert pilots who claim that you should never be involved in an accident in flight simulator. I've "crashed" in MSFS before, as I'm sure everyone else has, but it hasn't traumatized me to a point where I thought "oh my God that could have happened in real life" and I stop playing forever, instead I keep practicing...because flight simulator is a learning tool.Having said that there does need to be more realistic damage modelling in the sim--perhaps not the extent described by the original poster where the buildings themselves get damaged, nor the point where corpses can be seen scattered on the ground, but I think as long as the plane is still up in the air and the pilot isn't "dead" then the plane should remain in our command with all of its wounds. Or maybe there could just be an option for it :(.Derek D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>Lets top talking about this ridiculous topic now.>>So, I'm going to play devil's advocate for a minute...Agree with you Nick. I don't see nothing wrong in having a graphic representation of e.g. an engine explosion, airframe damages after a crash landing, structural failures when airframe overstressed, or even total destruction of airframe after a crash. I think it's ridicolous to get offended by such things.Marco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a solution.At time of install, ask 1 Question.Are you going to be using FSim as a game or as a simulator. If the answer is "Game", provide for all kinds of crash an explosion and stuff... if its "simulator" focus on the main things and forget about crashes visual quality.;)Manny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion is that damage to an aircraft should only come from a failure within the aircraft. Therefore, valid causes for visual damage or stress on the aircraft would be things like: excessive engine vibration, high temperatures/pressures, g-loading, heavy landings, tail strikes etc... The exceptions would be bird strikes to cause engine damage and lighting stikes. If the aircraft could represent these problems visually then if the aircraft did fall to the ground then the simple "CRASH" message would be sufficient.There would be no purpose to seeing an aircraft crash, break apart and explode. Instead, a bird strike causing excessive engine vibration and flames would have a purpose because you would have to manage the problem.Real pilots face genuine problems all the time, both in reality and in full-motion simulations. Therefore, I don't see any reason why FS should not be similar.Obviously if someone tries to fly into the scenery then the crash is not born from the aircraft so the crash message is fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By why the double standard regarding damage caused internally and damage caused externally? It seems rather arbitrary that damage caused by the scenery is immoral and shouldn't be simulated whereas other kinds of damage is fine. I'm sure most people would agree that a failure is a failure, regardless of what may have caused it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with you Nick. I don't see nothing wrong in having a graphic representation of e.g. an engine explosion, airframe damages after a crash landing, structural failures when airframe overstressed, or even total destruction of airframe after a crash. I think it's ridicolous to get offended by such things.MarcoWell said Marco! Some of these so called "Hard core" sim pilots need to lighten up and get a dose of reality. Crashes are a part of life so I feel it should be simulated to an extent. Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although this is an interesting suggestion I have to agree with Randy on this. You can't have a civil simulator depicting pain on thousands of people. There's a few video games out there on the market that already glorify gang violence and violence against police. This does nothing to society as a whole and yet you have many groups that empathize with the reckless behavior by software developers.When looking at sims like TAW and Falcon4 I can see where you would expect better crash damage out Flight Simulator. Just remember FS is a GA simulator not a combat simulator. You

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys I didn't factor in that this is a GA sim and therefore tragic events need not be glorified. Like Dillon said there's too much of that going on anyway. I was looking at this sim in comparison to other Flight Sim's on the market. Falcon 4.0 is for combat where as Flight Simulator is for General and Commercial Aviation.Thanks Randy, Dillon, and the rest of you guys...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I'm sure most people would agree that a failure is a failure, regardless of what may have caused it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of this-there was just a mid air collision in San Diego yesterday between a C172RG with a student and instructor-and a 182.Beyond being sickened by this tragic accident-a pit went in my stomach as a year ago I trained for CFI in San Diego in a C172RG-and flew many times over the area the collision happened. My first thought was that this could have been the plane I trained in along with my instructor. It turns out is was not-but my heart still goes out to these pilot's that were tragically killed. Now the media loves putting out this image of the burning Cessna-but do we really need this on a flight sim? http://www.10news.com/index.htmlhttp://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ChrisYou do touch on a point which is that the sim needs to be exciting but that can be done by making challenging weather scenarios or adventures.I even thought looking at the FSX Ski plane shots of having sims within a sim.Fly yourself to and land on a glasier in say the Alps and change the plane for a set of Skis.MS could model a Ski run in high detail so you could get a realistic downhill ski through forests to the base of the mountain.Or change the Ski for a hang glider and glide down?Even fly a racing team to a grand prix track in a business jet then drive a racing car around a modelled track.Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see. I have a ten foot pole. Hmm. Nope, not long enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Why not make his crash even more real ? he could get a mate to>smash him in the face with a Glass bottle at point of impact.>That would really be fun.Peter,I think you're being unreasonable. As I said above, I really, really don't think anyone is asking for a depiction of charred bodies on the side of a mountain, okay? Do you remember FS5, where the airplanes came apart and spun to earth in loose formation if you overstressed the aircraft? Was that a vile depiction of death and destruction meant to arouse people's morbid tendencies? I don't think so. I think it provided the player visual feedback of his mistake. And speaking strictly from a game play perspective, it also gave the player motivation to correctly fly his aircraft.Or, how about the WWI air-to-air combat mode that shipped with FSII? Was there a human being in that enemy bandit's cockpit?Personally, I think its highly unlikely that MS will implement any enhanced crash effects, so its probably a moot point, but suppose for a minute that they do. Do you think that it would be a user selectable option, thus allowing sensitive users to turn it off? I bet it would. So what's the harm?Nick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tdragger wrote:>Let's see. I have a ten foot pole. Hmm. Nope, not long>enough. Smartest one of the bunch! ;)Nick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Failures for aircraft should be modelled visually and programmatically (where there is a point to it so that something can be learnt) but not the end crash sequence (where there is no purpose and nothing can be learnt)We all know what the final result of such failures can be. Therefore all we should be interested in is how to stop or manage such failures.A nice smooth landing should be the result in the sim with a nice summary page showing how we handled it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Well said Marco! Some of these so called "Hard core" sim pilots need to lighten up and get a dose of reality. Crashes are a part of life so I feel it should be simulated to an extent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this