To whoom would you recommend MSFS in its current state? Multiple choice.

1. Gamers (= w/o no real interest in flight simulation) looking for achievements
2. Gamers looking for social interaction
3. Gamers interested in travel, sightseeing
4. People with average computers and internet connections
5. People with interest in flight without a lot of gaming- and configuration experience
6. Experienced GA simmers (VFR & IFR)
7. Experienced tube-liner simmers
8. Experienced simmers prefering realistic scenery
9. Experienced simmers prefering a realistic flight environment (weather, airports, aerodynamics, systems)

 

All of the above..... in time. As an ex P3D owner, flying PMDG NGX to study level procedure, I’m enjoying this sim, won’t be going back.

Better to read this first! 😀

Flight Simulator

Amateur and Video Game Flight Simulation

Edited October 4, 20205 yr by OSM

14 minutes ago, RaptyrOne said:

All of the above..... in time. As an ex P3D owner, flying PMDG NGX to study level procedure, I’m enjoying this sim, won’t be going back.

If you enjoy study level procedures of any aircraft.... how exactly is this sim in any way helping?

7 minutes ago, OSM said:

Better to read this first! 😀

That’s just semantics. Even FSX and those that went before have been used by flight schools to demonstrate principles to new students. LM’s P3D even more so. By the definitions of the above, neither is used for pilot training and is therefore boxed into the category of “Amateur and Video Game Flight Simulation.

Whether an individual wants to classify this as a game, a fantasy or a simulation or something else entirely is less relevant. It is a matter of interpretation and personal opinion. Is it a game? Yes. Is it a simulator? Yes. Can it be used to supplement the training of real world pilots? Yes.

Just wondering where raw FSX/P3D/Xplane - no addons except perhaps for a couple of Orbx sceneries and Carenado planes - would fit in that classification.  

Why so defensive?
My answers would be 1, 2, 3, 6, 8 and maybe 4. But I don't have MSFS.

The current state of FSXX is improving day after day, so buy it and be prepared to work on it.

12 minutes ago, dilore said:

My answers would be ... But I don't have MSFS.

Remarkable.

Kind regards, Michael

Anybody who has never flown a real plane because the flight dynamics and the way planes react to wind is atrocious. 

5 minutes ago, pmb said:

Remarkable.

You know the meaning of 'would be'?

Recommended to everyone who wants to rediscover the joy of simming and doesn't want to see his wallet slowly bleed to death. 

Why not a poll where everyone can vote and see results ?

I would go for the first 5 items, although 7) can also apply.

8 ) fails IMO because the default aircraft aren't up to the standards, for instance of even default aircraft in a simulator like Aerofly FS 2, systems are poorly modelled and the aerodynamics aren't on pair with AEFS 2 default aircraft,... and there's few documentation in the SDK about how to really change this state...

For me MFS is surely more a pleasant nice looking mass flight simulation game at it's present state. 

Edited October 4, 20205 yr by jcomm

47 minutes ago, lzamm said:

Just wondering where raw FSX/P3D/Xplane - no addons except perhaps for a couple of Orbx sceneries and Carenado planes - would fit in that classification.  

Whataboutism. 
Please answer the question.