What We Want (Part 1)

[HGNK 20]

Yes we should avoid using the term "eye candy" as though it is something redundant. The purpose of a simulator is to "simulate the real world". The closer to reality it looks, the better it has performed its function. I have always been 100% into graphics - the more gorgeous the sim - the more I want it. 

[martin-w 3,278]

21 hours ago, Holdit said:

What do we want? Time travel!

When do we want it? Doesn't matter!

****

What do we want? The right to procrastinate!

When do we want it? Tomorrow!

****

What do we want? A cure for Tourettes!

When do we want it? %*@@!!&&*!!

 

(Sorry, couldn't resist)

 

What I want is the stuff I have to pay extra for now, like realistic thermals and ridge lift/sink, object-generated turbulence, wind shear, downdrafts, realistic treatment of airframe and engine icing, realistic piston engine management, realistic turboprop modelling/management, tyre grip and braking affected by snow/ice/water contamination of runways, realistic (surface) water physics making floatplane operations more challenging.

Eye candy is nice...but this is the stuff that's really missing, IMO. If the new sim doesn't have these features, then I'd be a lot less likely to make the jump just for the sake of pretty pictures.

 

 

Paul.... thank you. That made me laugh my socks off. 😁

[Raymond.Groenendijk 255]

• Sky colors (especially for sunset and sunrise) that change based on humidity and other atmospheric conditions (like polution which can be a random value)
• True volumetric clouds with self shadowing and shadow casting on other cloud layers, objects and ground (it should be a bit dark below overcast clouds)
• Lots of different cloud types (not just cumulus)
• Volumetric fog banks
• Visible rain falling from the clouds in the distance (so you can avoid it before you get there)
• Landing light cones visible in fog and rain and also lighting up clouds 
• Strobes blinding you when in clouds
• Visible icing on surfaces and windows
• Reflecting puddles on tarmac, maybe snow buildup on the tarmac
• Working windscreen wipers, fogged windows in case of wrong airconditioning settings
• Blackout when cabin pressure is set incorrectly or in case pressure drops at high altitude  
• Realistic weather radar and truly dangerous storms to avoid with it (icing, lightning strikes, severe turbulence, etc.) 
• Busy airports with lots of AI traffic, ground vehicles and moving jet-ways (preferably using real time tables and multiple runways)
• Recreational airports with lots of small aircraft, gliders and more on days with good weather (totally quiet on days with bad weather)
• Quiet airports with rough landing strips and chickens walking around (or something else to bring some life to these airports)
• Adequate ATC for both IFR and VFR with realistic voices that make you feel you are really in an airplane  
• The ability to at least walk around the airplane to do a pre-flight inspection (though walking around in hangars and within the airplane would be cool)
• The ability to at least do some basic maintenance if appropriate (check oil, add oil, check fuel, add fuel)
• Realistic failures (possible based on bad maintenance or missing something during the pre-flight inspection)
• Maybe medical emergencies (but they should not feel scripted in any way)
• Weather conditions or other situations forcing you to go to your alternate airport
• Bird strikes, collapsing landing gear (or tires) on hard landings, lightning strikes, wind-shear, downdrafts, severe turbulence, etc. 
• Great sound effects (at least on par with X-Plane's FMOD)
• VR support with touch control support would be lovely (all serious flightsims now have it) 
• Good flying lessons which don't feel too scripted and are in line with real lessons for at least the PPL license) 
• A career mode, let us work up to flying the heavy metal (if that is what you want) and give us something to do 
• Night flying at least on par with X-Plane (and please add city lights lighting up clouds)
• Cockpits with adjustable lighting for different zones and instruments (just like X-Plane does)

Besides that I would love to see two big online worlds, one for people who just like to mess around, see each other, fly in formation and more. Another one that is moderated (possibly by voting) and only allows serious pilots who follow procedures (maybe only allowing people who got their PPL license in game). These worlds are populated by both players and AI pilots. Azure and server meshing techniques should make this  possible.  

The career mode can be linked to one of these worlds. You begin by getting the proper license(s) by taking lessons and then you go and work for a company (maybe a sight seeing company or a bush flying company). You fly around in their aircraft (for which you have to get the proper type rating) until you have enough money to take more advanced lessons (CPL, MEIR, etc). Maybe work your way up to the big airliners. Or you can keep working for the current company if you like it or buy your own plane and just fly small cargo. 

All aircraft in the world should be physically there, when the PH-HZE travels to Barcelona, it should stay there until someone else (or an AI pilot) takes it somewhere else. If you own an aircraft it will be where you left it and in the condition you left it there. Other people will see it even when you are offline. When you correctly maintain your aircraft it will fly (mostly) without problems, if you abuse it you may get failures. If you miss something important during your pre-flight check you may crash. You cannot do all maintenance yourself, so you might have to take it to a special location sometimes to get the maintenance done. 

Jobs within the career world should be varying, think of: 

• Sight seeing tour
• Towing gliders or banners
• Parachute droppings
• Air shows 
• Aerial photography flights (which can be used to upgrade the scenery with... oh no wait...) 
• Crop dusting 
• Transport cargo and/or people over short to long distances (from small amounts in a C172 to large amounts in a B747 for example)
• Supplying distant villages and camps 
• SAR operations
• Taking an aircraft to a specific airfield for maintenance 
• Medical flights
• ...

Edited August 14, 2019 by Raymond.Groenendijk

[Deleted 250]

2 hours ago, Raymond.Groenendijk said:

• Please don't quote very long quotes. The quote has been removed as it appears above yours.

• ...

Awesome! Send that to Microsoft! That's it, everything

[GeoSkyman 59]

1.Performance 

2. Reality

Please do not disappoint us ones more.

Geo

[Wobbie 938]

Raymond's wish list can be achieved when he goes for his PPL. 

Its nice to dream, but the reality is that what we will probably get is something that will appeal to the 60 million Xbox users, as well as simmers. It's up to 3rd party developers to flesh out what we want, after Microsoft releases the basic sim engine, as they have always have done. 

It MUST be accessible to 1st time users to be successful. The reality is, as seen before, that existing simmers, especially the so-called serious simmers, are very demanding. It must be remembered that the majority of us that just want to fly around, without pushing every button in sight, must also be considered. 

Just because we do not fly tubes and such like (the usual mix of letters), our simming wishes are just as important, and we are not to be regarded as lesser simmers just because we don't push every button in sight. 

So, out the box, the ideal would be an accessible sim for all, especially newbies, and support from 3rd parties to flesh the sim out, for the more discerning. 

Now, imagine if Microsoft also marketed a range of yokes, pedals, joysticks, radio panels, VR and other hardware. That will be a game changer.... 

[LHookins 3,117]

1 hour ago, Wobbie said:

It MUST be accessible to 1st time users to be successful.

Excellent post, Robin.

 

1 hour ago, Wobbie said:

It must be remembered that the majority of us that just want to fly around, without pushing every button in sight, must also be considered.

I like pushing every button in sight, but there aren't a lot of buttons to push in a Piper Cub or a Stearman. 🙂  Even a DC-3 isn't all that difficult.  I'm happy if all the buttons work, but aren't necessary to fly, as in using control-E to start the plane or having an Auto Start button somewhere.  

Complex in-depth study sims are necessary but can be provided by third party developers.  There will be new users who will eventually want to migrate to that kind of aircraft and those aircraft need to be available, both for those new users and for existing serious simmers.

Hook

[Raymond.Groenendijk 255]

1 hour ago, Wobbie said:

Its nice to dream, but the reality is that what we will probably get is something that will appeal to the 60 million Xbox users, as well as simmers. It's up to 3rd party developers to flesh out what we want, after Microsoft releases the basic sim engine, as they have always have done. 

It MUST be accessible to 1st time users to be successful. The reality is, as seen before, that existing simmers, especially the so-called serious simmers, are very demanding. It must be remembered that the majority of us that just want to fly around, without pushing every button in sight, must also be considered. 

But isn't a good career mode just the solution to cater those XBOX users? Just throwing out a bare bones sim has never worked in the past, so why would it work this time, people get bored with it and don't know what to do after a few hours. XBOX users are mostly gamers, they are used to game mechanics like leveling up, working towards a goal, unlocking new things, getting in new places they weren't able to before, that's what makes them tick. Simple missions won't attract too many of them because they miss a lot of the mentioned game mechanics, they won't pull people in. 

Now I do agree with you that a career mode where there is a steep learning curve involved (getting your PPL certificate) may be a step too far for a lot of gamers. But that is solvable by letting people choose from two modes, a simple one with simple lessons (just the basics like takeoff and landing), a simple flight model, lots of helpers to power up the aircraft and navigate and more fun and game-like jobs to do.

The other mode can be geared towards people who actually want to learn to fly and experience the life of a pilot in a more realistic way. 

[SteveW 1,792]

Maybe being able to play with the toys in the box in another way would suit some. There was a game once that was used to set up a movie scenario and have it play through and record the film. Scenarios were based on action movies with stunt flying and road vehicle stunts.

The ability to set up scenes in a similar way might provide a very addictive tool. To provide times, speeds, paths for vehicles and aircraft, operation of hangar doors, runway lights, and so on.

Set up an array of cameras with auto tracking and other functions of zoom and focus

Triggering certain scenarios where we are, such as on final approach.

Finally sitting back to watch our creations. Probably needs huge explosions.

[Raymond.Groenendijk 255]

1 hour ago, SteveW said:

Maybe being able to play with the toys in the box in another way would suit some. There was a game once that was used to set up a movie scenario and have it play through and record the film. Scenarios were based on action movies with stunt flying and road vehicle stunts.

The ability to set up scenes in a similar way might provide a very addictive tool. To provide times, speeds, paths for vehicles and aircraft, operation of hangar doors, runway lights, and so on.

Set up an array of cameras with auto tracking and other functions of zoom and focus

Triggering certain scenarios where we are, such as on final approach.

Finally sitting back to watch our creations. Probably needs huge explosions.

You are talking about stunt island aren't you? I remember playing that as a child for hours on end. That would absolutely add a remarkable game/creative approach to MSFS and it would ensure lots of great exposure on YouTube. Being able to view aircraft from angles people have never seen before and picking people up from moving trains and stuff like that will certainly attract a different group of players to the sim. I like that idea. 

[dilore 126]

On 8/13/2019 at 3:49 PM, Flamingpie said:

Still, eye candy is what will make or break the sim. Add all the features you (and all others here) mention but leave out the eye candy and just a few die hard flight simmers will get the sim. 

I'm all for eye candy but I think realism is equally important. Look for example at Aerofly FS2, lots of eye candy but it's only moderately successful. I think lack of realism has a lot to do with it (yes, I know, they have one of the best helicopter simulations).
MS Flight had similar issues. And the reason why XPlane has become so popular is not because of the eye candy but because of a better flight model. IMHO.

 

Edited August 15, 2019 by dilore

[Raymond.Groenendijk 255]

3 minutes ago, dilore said:

I'm all for eye candy but I think realism is equally important. Look for example at Aerofly FS2, lots of eye candy but it's only moderately successful. I think lack of realism has a lot to do with it (yes, I know, they have one of the best helicopter simulations).

 

What actually pushed me away from Aerofly FS2 eventually was the absence of life in that world, everything looked quite good, especially in VR. There were no cars on the roads, no aircraft in the skies, there was no ATC to talk to, the water was just a frozen picture, I just got bored after a while. Also when it became dark you could not see a thing, no lights on the ground, no illumination of the runway or taxiways from your landing/taxi lights, that was a huge turnoff. 

Also the default scenery was so flat, no modeled buildings on the ground, just some trees eventually. The scenery area was also limited on top of that, but I could have lived with that if only the rest of the simulation was deep enough. But you weren't even able to shut down the engines after a flight. And finally the clouds and weather simulation, bwegh!! 

For me flight simulators are all about immersion and exploration. I just want to get the feeling I'm really there. Aerofly FS succeeded in that thing when you gained some altitude in clear weather conditions, it's lighting was superb in my opinion. The sun really felt as the sun with its warm yellow color. From what we saw of MSFS they seem to nail that tiny aspect.   

 

[Deleted 250]

A multiplayer world like vatsim or ivao.

With integrated software for communication and navigation for air traffic controllers and pilots. 

 

[Holdit 551]

7 hours ago, georgiosgiannoukos said:

1.Performance 

2. Reality

Please do not disappoint us ones more.

Geo

And no "the computer that can run this properly hasn't been made yet..."

[Holdit 551]

On 8/13/2019 at 2:49 PM, Flamingpie said:

Still, eye candy is what will make or break the sim. Add all the features you (and all others here) mention but leave out the eye candy and just a few die hard flight simmers will get the sim. Leave out most of what's wanted in this topic but add the eye candy and a lot of people will get the sim anyway. A few die hard flight simmers will skip it but when push comes to shove I think everyone likes pretty pictures. Specially those who aren't into flight simming right now. When you look at the history of flight simming you will see most of the changes and updates and whatever had to do with the graphics. Everyone likes nice graphics. But not everyone minds the lack of object-generated turbulence (just to mention one). There is only one reason most of us got excited after seeing the MSFS video: the graphics! And rightly so: graphics are more important than some die hard simmers want us to believe. I've been flight simming since the eighties but if MSFS comes with graphics that make me drool I will get it. I know it's not really done to say that if you want to be regarded as a 'real flight simmer' but screw that: I love eye candy and I'm not afraid to say so. 😎

Oh I like eye candy too, but without the depth if the eye candy is all there is then it'll got old quickly enough, at least for me. If the news sim looks pretty but needs all the additional stuff to be repurchased that's an investment I'd definitely putting on the long finger. A big financial outlay just for prettier graphics isn't a compelling case for this simmer, when I can have the same setup just with P3D v4 graphics without spending anything. True enough the MS business model is likely to prioritise high take-up, but I'm not concerned with their business model; I'm more interested in my purchasing model.