FS in 1st Person POV...

[Guest SilverCircle]

>>I think you are going to hear people pretty much say that>it>>sounds a lot like a game to them.>Perhaps, some will say that. After all, the GTA series has>being doing this for years. On the other hand, people made>similar comments when the first Virtual Cockpits showed up a>few years ago. Everyone said it was a silly gimmick and that>it would never be practical to fly form that point of view. >Well, things have changed a lot since then, haven't they? They said that because the implementation of the first virtual cockpits was so poor that they were barely usable for flying, because you couldn't do anything except looking around a bit.Now, VCs are fully functional and you can use all your switches and see all the gauges in the VC with the same quality as in the 2d panel.

[slashed2 53]

A easy response to your definition is then why model taxiing? Terrain mesh? Autogen? Airports? Real pilots have lives, why not simulate them from as many aspects as possible or desired by the user? Aviation involves many aspects from flight to planning, by your narrow definition MS would need to drop the flight planner too as it is done pre-flight.I'll even compromise, why not an add-on that does it, so those who do not believe Flight simulation should be tainted by individual imagination and other ideas of its' definition are not offended?Ian.

[Guest Babubhai]

>A easy response to your definition is then why model taxiing?> Terrain mesh? Autogen? Airports? Real pilots have lives,>why not simulate them from as many aspects as possible or>desired by the user? Aviation involves many aspects from>flight to planning, by your narrow definition MS would need to>drop the flight planner too as it is done pre-flight.>>I'll even compromise, why not an add-on that does it, so those>who do not believe Flight simulation should be tainted by>individual imagination and other ideas of its' definition are>not offended?>>Ian.The defenition was given so people are on the same level, of what a flight simulator essentially is. And not some kind of pilot life simulation.A line needs to be drawn somewhere...And like I said I want to see MS Flight Simulator as a flight simulator and not a life simulator.

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"John,Please I don't want an essay on what people's perception of "flight" and "flight simulators" are..."So you are allowed to flood the thread with opinion after opinion and I am not. Sorry, the forum doesn't work that way. If I want to write an "essay" as you call it I am more than welcome. You didn't open the thread."Everyone here knows what is meant by flight simulator in general;"A device that simulates the conditions or sensation of flying an aircraft""So someone wrote a definition for Websters and that defines an entire hobby? We're all proud of our hobby, and just like our children, we can define it in whatever terms we wish. Websters might define a child as an offspring born of a male and female. I define my daughter as a wave of energy that brightens my day and gives me purpose. Doesn't fit into Webster's well."I have a right to express my opinions."Then do so without asking "what is this lot on"? Comments like that tend to suppress and invalidate opinion. As does your reply to my post. I've been around here long enough and have offered enough, as well as others here, that we all have the right to offer any "essay" on the subject we want.-John

[Guest Babubhai]

You have the right to express your opinions. I was just writing what I felt about your post.Anyway I feel I have made my point clear. And wish not to keep repeating the same stuff over and over again, so I will not continue posting in this thread anymore.

[Guest allcott]

>>"What you guys are talking here is some kind of airport>simulation. Which is different from flight simulator and what>you need is something else which fits this purpose.">>It's been forty years since I first flew, in a Lockheed>Electra. That fired up a love of aviation in my then five>year old imagination which has lasted to this day. And I>still am amused when people come in and define "flight" as if>it has a fixed meaning. It doesn't. "Flight" existed long>before there were airplanes. One trillion birds and insects>couldn't be wrong.>>Whether you're a passive observer or in the cockpit, behind a>FMS or dangling under a Trike, you are experiencing flight. >Whether you're watching on the ground, walking around the>tarmac, or staring at the wing, you are using the sim for just>as much a valid purpose as the simmer who is logged into>VATSIM from morning to dusk.>>I think the member here asked a pretty innocent question, and>still it fires up debate and snide comments "What are you lot>on?" and "Excellent for twelve year olds" that don't belong,>in my opinion, in any forum that celebrates a product that>celebrates flight. >>I think the best answer is "I wouldn't use the sim that way">and leave it at that. But ultimately this sim is an>entertainment title. All the eye candy is there for a>reason--to sell copies of a product that subsidizes our>greater interest in aviation. Most of us are "hard core">here, many of us spend time in real aircraft. I actually find>the question asked in this tread pretty intuitive. For me,>walking out to the Allegro or Kitfox to do a preflight,>getting a whiff of Avgas, watching the aircraft in the>pattern--is as breathtaking as that first sign of the wings>feeling light or a final with crosswinds. I love Flight. I>don't have to be in the air all the time to be part of>Flight.>>-JohnI respect your opinion. But I am beginning to loathe the way your pontificate and pass judgement on HOW things should be said. Just who appointed you Pope of Flight Sim? You seem to have taken to doing this a lot lately, It's getting tiresome. If you don't like the manner or vehemence, don't read it or just quit coming here. I express my opinion, and you express yours. I don't need you to tell me how to express my opinion, and if you want to water down the passion and belief that comes out often in discussions like this in others, then express yourself in the emotive terms you use above you are actually becoming the worst form of forum abuser. The Hypocrite.Allcott

[slashed2 53]

I understand, but still why draw a line, why not an open ended simulation without any limits. Each individual could choose where that line is drawn. Again, it could be payware/freeware, that way you wouldn't have to buy it.And even though the discussion has gone off topic a bit, you did state a protest against the OP's idea of a first person view. I do not believe he wanted a life simulator.Anyway, I understand your concern but I'm sure it won't turn into a game. Any ideas such as a career mode will most likely be payware, or in later versions a menu selection like the missions. MS will hopefully always allow a sandbox mode for those who just want to hop in and fly.Ian.

[docnobby 0]

>A line needs to be drawn somewhere...Well, I could't agree more! :-hah But what are the restrictions? In fact the restrictions are defined by two factors:- Development time- Hardware requirementsSince there are alot of creative and open minded free/payware developers, development time will be the minor problem. Hardeware will always be a personal question depending on how much money one can / wants to spend. But you will always be able to draw your personal line! You don't want to fly with passengers? Don't buy fspassengers! You don't like the new ground traffic in FSX? Turn it off. And im shure, even if some kind of career mode would be included in following FS versions, you will always be able to just start a free flight if you like it that way! :-smooch

[Manny 1,293]

>If Its an added feature... Sure>>I'd like that. >>MannyI should have added...Provided it used the Second core.:)Manny

[briansommers 74]

ok, now back on topici have been wanting a walk around "module" (for lack of better term) for years! i would love to be able to take the avgas sample and check it for water content, etc, look at the hinge line, etc, etc, man that really makes it viseral and no i dont mean a visual gimmick but sometimes be able to find something wrong, once in a great whileciao!Brian S

[Jimmy Angel 19]

I think having a virtual hangar is a great idea ... perhaps even your own little fictional airfield. We could be John Travolta (sans the crazy scientology stuff) with an airliner parked in our front yard.For me, FS is all about immersion. We're not talking necessarily about business sims or any of that stuff .... just immersing yourself in the environment and experience of flight--and perhaps enjoying the role of a guy who can afford a hangar full of expensive planes.There are people who just want to treat FS like a pure simulator, and there are people who want to role-play the experience of flying and being a pilot. Nothing wrong with neither, says I.

[Guest flight]

When I recently took my first flight (last year) in a small plane, the pilot walked me through the outside and inside pre-flight inspection, and I was told that it was the most important part of the flight. It was both informative, and a pleasure to understand just how serious the preflight inspection was. To say a walk-around is not a part of the simming experience is to say a pre-inspection of a boat and life-jacket is not a part of a fishing trip, or checking the car before a long trip is not an important part of the family vacation. It is an integral part.To me selecting a plane and just taking off is not a flight sim. A simulation goes all the way to the nuts and bolts, even what some may see as tedius.I applaud FSX and the way it is bringing more "candy" to the sim. But to me it's not "candy". When I took that first flight, I marvelled at the world below me, that looked so much different than the world I saw out of a passenger jet when flying from coast to coast. To now fly (FSX) and look right and left and see things you really would see in a "real" world...well that is simulation! Beauty, distractions, all make it more of a simulation...yes, a flight simulation. The reason we didn't have it before is because we didn't have the raw power to properly simulate an outside world. Now we're getting there.Even now, I sometimes load up Lynn and Bill Lyon's "missions" (some which rival what FSX offers by the way) and I'll get in the jeep which I have parked by a little cabin, and drive down the road to the airport nearby. Whatever GA aircraft the computer has chosen to park there, I'll drive up to it, stop the car, and then load that aircraft from that airport, and begin my flight. I just find it more "real". From the time I get into that jeep, till I load the plane, I am thinking about flight. And that, at least to me, is as real, at least for now, as it gets. And that my friends, is a flight sim! (AT least to me).

[maxter 0]

Mmmmmmmm, and here is my unsolicited, pontificating opinion. I very much prefer John's way of putting an unsolicited opinion to yours...How's that for an equally meaningless post to match, but then again you probably didn't have to read this... however I do respect your opinion. :-rollBack to the topic, the idea of extending the sim to encompass a wider range of interactions with the aviation experience is IMH pontificating and judgemental opinion is that it has got to be a good thing when compared to the titles that seem to occupy most of the real estate at my local EB.As always these extensions should be optional as many folks/purists would no doubt find it highly objectionable.Cheers,Chris Porter:-outta

[frankla 44]

well said!

[1mikel151 71]

>There are people who just want to treat FS like a pure>simulator, and there are people who want to role-play the>experience of flying and being a pilot. Nothing wrong with>neither, says I.Exactly, no reason a "line needs to be drawn". As long as it can cater to both types, then have at it. I wonder how many just load up FS and sit there watching AI, far from an actual "Flight Simulator" IMO.Regards, MichaelKDFW

Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe nForce4 SLI-x16 / AMD