Just now, LHookins said:

That's what they're asking for when they ask for a study level sim.  A decent flight model should be a given in all aircraft.

Earlier I posted;
Starry-eyed dreamer: "Gee, I hope the default 747 is study level!"
Me:  "Gee, I hope the autopilot works."

I think now people know why I said that. 🙂 

Hook

:)

27 minutes ago, robert young said:

"Study-level" is a rather wierd term for something that is well done. But that usually refers more to systems, hydraulics, procedures, flight management computers, gauges, start up and shutdown procedures and so on. Designing a decent flight model is I think not part of "study-level". If you look to the sim racing world, you'll see quite demanding sim racers who want a convincing physics model in a car, and that is after all reasonable, because it doesn't matter how pretty the cars look if they drive poorly.

So I don't think a good f/m, especially given the multiple examples available nowadays, is something that only expensive addons should be required to achieve. It seems to me to be rather a basic requirement given that it is a FLIGHT simulator!

It seems to depend on what people expect. I've always said for years the most i myself expect out of any new sim was approximate parity with FSX default, and for the actual Sim itself to provide the base for expanding from there.

Everything after that is gravy in a world where most contenders for the creators of a new sim would be working from a severe lack of resources and Manpower.

Now..... Perhaps it's par for the course to expect much more from Microsoft, but the thing isn't even out yet, and according to a lot of testers, including me, the planes generally feel and act just about the same as planes feel and act in any other wip sim you could mention.

When the Sim is finally released, and the nda's go away, then I guess we'll see the pros and cons revealed by the people actually working on creating content, but right now, I feel like we are probably very much like the blind men and the elephant.

 

Edited August 8, 20205 yr by HiFlyer

21 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

Its kind of a thing the community does. Critiquing the living heck out of upcoming sims, nitpicking every last thing and going over it all with an electron microscope often seems to me like the community attempting to coerce developers into creating "study level" aircraft as free defaults,

This was done with Flight, Dovetail sim... Even Aerofly, as default aircraft are compared badly with $40 and more 3rd party craft.

I've seen it so often, I don't even have anything against the practice. Its just something we do, like cats sleeping 15 hours a day.

Nature.

Your condescending attitude and sense of superiority towards the community is annoying. "Oh, those silly simmers in the Petri dish, always asking for silly things..."

Not that there isn't some truth in it, but it's a normal thing that everyone pushes for his particular interests, be it a fully functional G1000 or missions and aerocaches.

In this particular case moreover, what is being criticized is not some technical detail like "fuel flow off by 5%", but some apparently major issues with flight handling that look very similar to those that XP suffered for years and that were as equally and rightfully criticized, so I don't see it as "nitpicking" at all.

I'm pretty confident that they will be solved, and discussing them should be a good thing even for that.

All this being said, I hope this very frank post is not taken the wrong way, I often agree with you and appreciate your posts. 🙂

6 minutes ago, Murmur said:

Your condescending attitude and sense of superiority towards the community is annoying. "Oh, those silly simmers in the Petri dish, always asking for silly things..."

*Shrugs* I find many in the community's condescending attitude and superiority towards the un-anointed, gamer's, and those who would "dumb down" (an oft used term) simming to the general publics apparently knuckle dragging levels annoying. If the community gives it out on a regular basis (which it does) and finds nothing much wrong with it, then there should be nothing much wrong with getting it back from time to time.

Edited August 8, 20205 yr by HiFlyer

15 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

the blind men and the elephant

Looks like Gary Larson's work.

Hook

10 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

*Shrugs* I find many in the community's condescending attitude and superiority towards the un-anointed, gamer's, and those who would "dumb down" (an oft used term) simming to the general publics apparently knuckle dragging levels annoying.

Oh on that I couldn't agree more.

🙂

Truth is more participation from "gamers" helps having more resources to fulfill "simmers" requests, so a compromise is necessary. But many simmers don't understand that. For example, the mobile version of a competing sim was very criticized for those reasons...

Edited August 8, 20205 yr by Murmur

45 minutes ago, LHookins said:

Oh lordy, I don't EVEN wanna think about it.  If you're willing to study the aircraft, work out the necessary file adjustments, and publish them, you've got your work cut out for you, and I suspect you'll be praised.

You probably know more about fixing flight models than the developers.

Hook

I fondly remember Rob Young's tweaking of  a default 172 long ago. Glad to  see the flame still burning strong and maybe the desire to come back from retirement to the stage . Looking forward to your contributions to FS20, Sir ! 

2 hours ago, martin-w said:

My response deleted!  Because Rob had responded and I hadn't realised. Thus no need for me to counter the response from the evil antagonist. 

 

You talking about me?

Funny thing is that a lot of issues that Rob has pointed out I still see in X-Plane. Hmm.

Not going to read all this thread, but I assume someone has mentioned the bouncing TBM and waddling A320?

2 minutes ago, hanhamreds said:

Not going to read all this thread, but I assume someone has mentioned the bouncing TBM and waddling A320?

Sorry, you'll have to read the thread to find out. 😄 

Hook

@hanhamreds You noticed it too? 

To summarize, we have three parties: those who think all is fine, those who think this is to be expected with 'default' planes and we first have to shell out $100 extra for a decent plane, and those who feel something is off.

And on top of that the autopilot oscillates.

Of course all can be different after launch, but in the mean time we have a lot of fun here exchanging opinions.

Join the club and pick your party. 🙂

Edited August 8, 20205 yr by RudyB24

1 hour ago, LHookins said:

Sorry, you'll have to read the thread to find out. 😄 

Hook

Doh!

4 hours ago, ahsmatt7 said:

You talking about me?

Do you have a sense of humour?

31 minutes ago, martin-w said:

Do you have a sense of humour?

Yeah I do. Maybe you aren't as funny as you think you are.