15 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

That picture really explains everything & tells us that it;s a Game for Windows, called Microsoft Flight Simulator!

 

That is what Microsoft turned it into with Windows... (The picture is FSX..)

The earliest releases of Flight Simulator were not marketed that way..

Hence the discussion.

Edited July 24, 20205 yr by Bert Pieke

The initial game designer group, also assisted Kuju Ltd, a gaming design studio, in develop Microsoft Train Simulator, and was renamed to Aces Gaming Studio in 2002, until it's demise in 2009. 

It's very clever marketing. Microsoft is pretty good at that, as their market value shows.

 

On 7/23/2020 at 7:08 PM, jpc55 said:

I'm enjoy this thread!

Strangely enough I do too.

 

On 7/23/2020 at 7:51 PM, bonchie said:

Biggest thing that would get simmers if they were suddenly dropped into a real plane is not the button pushing. It'd be the feeling of force placed on the body, from turbulence, to what it feels like on short final as you get into ground effect and start the flare. Everyone's game when it's a computer screen. Most would be terrified and start overcorrecting. It's a different world when you are actually flying a 70kt short final in a four seat single, getting bounced around, and feeling the plane sink, watching that runway quickly fill the window as you flare at the right moment. 

#1 thing I see when simmers go up in real planes (plenty of YouTube videos of this) is that two handed death grip on the yoke. 

You have a point, even the motion in FFSs is so incredibly different from real life that I would doubt it is utterly useful. But even more I'd say they simply could not handle the vast amount of information and stimuli they'd get bombarded with, that are all virtually non-existent in the simulated world. And also won't be in MSFS. It's an entire different story when you are in a true 3D "VR without the V" environment, not alone in the skies or at the airport, people around you who you need to work with, talk on the radios, operate the systems, fly, manage, navigate, deal with unforeseen circumstances and ideally always be ahead of the aircraft. Many think if they can "fly" whatever aircraft in FS they could do the same irl. Well they could probably "steer" it, to some extent. But that's not what it's about. I fully support your "terrified" hypothesis. Even if we leave non-normals aside: Depending on the situation they'd just get lost within seconds.

 

On 7/23/2020 at 8:55 PM, Wobbie said:

It's a game that simulates a simulator

On 7/22/2020 at 7:41 AM, Der Zeitgeist said:

The answer is "never". The concepts of "game" and "simulator" are entirely subjective, both can be whatever you want them to be, and they're not mutually exclusive.

I agree with a lot of what has been said above. To throw in another 2 cents, it really depends on your definition of a game or a sim. If this product - whatever it may be - is intending to be (or to simulate, see above) a sim, then naturally I'd compare it to a "real" flight sim, of which probably no one would argue it's a game (albeit it could be used for such purposes, which kinda shows how pointless this debate quickly gets...). Nevertheless, to get to the OT's original question, from all we know this product with all its visual glory will still fail to offer a whole ton of functionality and possibilities a "real" sim has. Consequently, I fully support Zeitgeist's answer. The only correct answer is "never", and also MSFS will, if I define it, still be a game. Yet, as someone who has gone the path from FSXX into rw aviation I can say that FS has helped quite a lot along the way, and I intend to use the upcoming version again to train rw procedures. But it's crucial to know the (countless) limitations. All a matter of how you use it. As has been pointed out numerous times. 😅

Edited July 24, 20205 yr by badderjet

The answer to the OP's question, inane as it is, is that this software is whatever YOU make of it.

You wanna make it a "game"?  Go for it.  Bingo!  You're a GAMER!  Feels good, right?

OTOH, some of us who happen to be licensed pilots IRL see an opportunity to use it to practice our flying skills without spending our money for flying time, and the software offers that opportunity, within reasonable limitations.  Real life flying can kill you; we take it seriously, and we don't see flying as a "game", whether on the computer, or in our cockpits.

Is that a problem for someone?  Seriously?  Take today's simulation software however you want to - your choice - and don't presume to criticize anyone who choses to see it differently from you.

Edited July 24, 20205 yr by Nobody2020

11 minutes ago, Nobody2020 said:

Who has so much spare time on their hands that they want to spend it debating questions like the one the OP posted?

Ummm...You apparently...you said so yourself 😂 (and me too since I replied earlier 🤦‍♂️)

And to be fair, I think the OP was more asking when did this “generic flight simulator genre thing” go from game/curiosity to simulation to YOU personally. That’s the way I took it anyway. Could be way off on that. Wouldn’t be the first time.  

Edited July 24, 20205 yr by snglecoil

A good friend of mine was a Phantom flight simulator tech in the Air Force.  Anyone want to claim that this wasn't a true simulator? 

When he wasn't testing real world Air Force pilots, he was in the sim cockpit.  His favorite activity?  Take off, fly straight up on afterburner until he ran out of fuel, then see if he could glide to the next airport.

Game or simulator?  You decide.

Hook

On 7/22/2020 at 5:08 PM, fppilot said:

Well honestly I did not intent to see it turn into what it has...  Would a moderator please lock this one up?

 

 

 What was you were expecting ? The question has been raised 100s of times, the usual answers are now either raised eyebrows or, more appropriately, light humour. 

Granted, you tried to bring new life to the genre with a skillfully crafted question but you are an old-timer you should know the  #1 operational principle of forum posting. You never ever control what follows your initial post. You just cross your fingers and hope for the best.

Just teasing you my friend 😇.

The most pointless irrelevant question I see on this forum time and time again, I mean frankly who actually cares what you refer to it as. It’s like being stuck in the Groundhog Day film, give it a rest now fellas the subjects been done now surely. Choosing between the two is just about choosing what it means to you nothing more, anyone demanding one over the other is simply wrong that’s about as deep as this topic needs to go.

Edited July 25, 20205 yr by Carts85

I was also part of a virtual flying club, until lockdown closed our doors. Called Cape Virtual, here in Cape Town, & we had our clubhouse at Ysterplaat Air Force Base (FAYP). We met every 2nd Saturday, hauling our PC boxes, 2x monitors, keyboards, mice, maps and so on.. Connecting everything up, realising that we had left a keyboard or mouse at home. Then switching on, then off, then opening the PC box to press in the ram sticks or graphic card that maybe got loose in transport, then switching on again. 

Phew, the mornings were spent mentoring The Young Falcons. The Air Force bases are mandated to have a youth program, so we got use of a clubhouse provided me mentored the kids of the YF. A 2 year program, 30 incoming kids a year. So we mentored 60 kids, every 2nd Saturday morning. They got lectured, did basic survival training and we followed up by doing practical lessons on PC's, such as nav ex, flight plotting etc. After lunch, they went home, & it was our time. The 2 year projec, free for the kids, ended up with a Wings Parade, where we got pilots from the local flying clubs to fly the kids & let them have hands on flying.

Anyway, we also built 3 sims, an Avro Shackleton sim, an AerMacci MB326 twin seater, used as a trainer her in South Africa, built into a fuselage. The Shack has seats, controls, throttles & pedals from an actual Shack.

The point I'm trying to get to, before I forget..the 16 PC's that we are using for the kids are a mix between Celerons & other 'vinatge' stuff. They work, Because of their interest quite a few kids have gone on to PPL's commercial flying and to the Air Force. 

The sim, & hardware in this case, was not really relevant. It was the immersion that the kids had, that cultivated their new passion.

Us guys that looked after them? Well,now we get a bit contentious.. out of the 15-20 regulars, maybe 4-5 were into bus & tube flying. We had a LAN at the clubhouse.The rest of us were into fun flying, a bit of network flying & racing, as well as nav work.. flying to dams & so on. We use freeware South African scenery, with local additions, as well as or favourite.. the Avro Shackleton, (payware, developed partly by a local team) & other aircraft that were flown locally from the base & South Africa. The flight modelling in the Shack & Impala sim was perfect, that real pilots braced themselves in their seats, anticipating touchdown.

The question coming is what sim did we use? LOL.. We all used FS2004.. It just worked, we had the planes & scenery & it worked perfectly on the sims we built. No other sim gave us the aircraft nor the scenery, payware or freeware.

We never thought of it as a sim or a game. it was a vehicle for us to have fun & a bit of learning with. We played a lot as well, Lear racing up the coast and so on. 

Anyhow, we are certainly not lessor simmers/gamers just because we use older software, that says GAME on the box.

I was the librarian, making sure that we all had the same scenery & aircraft.. we even had vehicle racing! In a sim? does that make it a game when we change planes to a car, or is it a sim?

To repeat a point I made in an earlier post: what you call it is unimportant (as most people seems to agree), but I do think flight simmers need to recognize that it was originally designed to be a simulator, and still is used in some real-flight instruction. So, if it is a game for some folks, that is certainly not ALL it is!

19 minutes ago, cobalt said:

To repeat a point I made in an earlier post: what you call it is unimportant (as most people seems to agree), but I do think flight simmers need to recognize that it was originally designed to be a simulator, and still is used in some real-flight instruction. So, if it is a game for some folks, that is certainly not ALL it is!

Originally designed to be a simulator? lol.. A circular debate has no end. To repeat a point I made in an earlier post: It's a game that simulates a simulator. Called a game by Microsoft, but  called, for marketing reasons a simulator.. as in 'I'm a Flight Gaming pilot will not pull the girls as I'm a Flight Sim pilot will.

Anyhow..'nuff said.

7 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

A circular debate has no end.

Robbie, it is not 'circular'; it is a mobius loop...

When one reaches the end they are back at the beginning because it is a mono-planar surface.

If we substitute "person running any FS" for "ant" in the description below, and consider the - region to be "game" and the + region to be "simulator" it is quite clear that one necessarily equates to the other. Period.

The Möbius strip, also called the twisted cylinder, is a one-sided surface with no boundaries. It looks like an infinite loop. Like a normal loop, an ant crawling along it would never reach an end, but in a normal loop, an ant could only crawl along either the top or the bottom.

1 minute ago, Wobbie said:

Originally designed to be a simulator? lol.. A circular debate has no end. To repeat a point I made in an earlier post: It's a game that simulates a simulator. Called a game by Microsoft, but  called, for marketing reasons a simulator.. as in 'I'm a Flight Gaming pilot will not pull the girls as I'm a Flight Sim pilot will.

Anyhow..'nuff said.

The first computer program designed to simulate flight was developed by Bruce Artwick, founder of Sublogic, in 1978. Just a fact of history. That subsequent versions of his program have been, and still are, used in flight instruction in some places, is also a fact. If it is also in your mind  "a game that simulates a simulator" I will take your word for it! Can we then call it a "simulation-simulator"?
 

Probably the best post I've seen for ages. 

But.. always a but.. cut that mobius strip along it's centre, you back to 2x circular strips.

Another analogy is like calling it FS2020! 

12 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

But.. always a but.. cut that mobius strip along it's centre, you back to 2x circular strips.

When you cut the Mobius strip in half you've made a strip twice as long with 4 half twists. Cut the half-Mobius in half again and you get two linked strips, both with 4 half twists. ... This is why marking a line down the middle of the Mobius strip, 1/2 way from one edge, produces a different result from all other fractions.

Enjoy this animated 3d explanation: