6 hours ago, pstrub said:

Ok, this is something I can understand for first-time students, but if you use a flight simulator to do preparatory flights ahead of real flights, I think the good graphics actually helps to make certain landmarks less conspicuous than they are in a simulator with "older" graphics. I remember in FSX some features such as the runways  stand out a lot more than they do in real life and in MSFS, which may make it less useful than taking a sim flight with better graphics. 

Anyway, my original comment was a bit tongue-in-cheek, but in fact I'd be interested to understand this.

Your point is also well taken. Makes sense. It would be interesting to hear from flight instructors on this.

I think these game vs. simulation discussions are plain silly. MSFS is what you make of it. I've been flying MSFS with realism in mind, following VFR charts, doing proper visual approaches, etc. So, I am making a simulator out of it. I agree that IFR functionality is still lacking, but even with the limitations I've tried to fly it as close to reality as possible. I've had friends come over to play with my MSFS and made a game out of it: flew cruise speed a hundred feet from a neighborhood, pulled crazy maneuvers, hit the ground landing at 1000 fps... they made a game out of it and loved it. 

19 minutes ago, andradef said:

I think these game vs. simulation discussions are plain silly. MSFS is what you make of it. I've been flying MSFS with realism in mind, following VFR charts, doing proper visual approaches, etc. So, I am making a simulator out of it. I agree that IFR functionality is still lacking, but even with the limitations I've tried to fly it as close to reality as possible. I've had friends come over to play with my MSFS and made a game out of it: flew cruise speed a hundred feet from a neighborhood, pulled crazy maneuvers, hit the ground landing at 1000 fps... they made a game out of it and loved it. 

And my guess is that is exactly what X box users are going to do with MSFS, until they get bored with it, and move on to another game. 

2 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

I would love to see the new sims.

And I would love to share some pics with you (and the forum) - but in recent years the regulations about taking pictures and also posting things like that on social media have become absolutely stifling 😞

Even taking a friend along on a simulator mission - which was no big deal 20 years ago - is a nightmare in paperwork and approval process these days.

Cheers, Jan

 

It's like asking your little kid if it is something they want to eat or a vegetable.

bs ☘️

7 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

And my guess is that is exactly what X box users are going to do with MSFS, until they get bored with it, and move on to another game. 

Perfect - that leaves the infrastructure for us word not allowed .  

Something often missed is that Geologist's luv a tool like MSFS.  Not to mention teaching opportunities.  Microsoft's version of the encyclopedia revisited.

Cheers

bs ☘️

 

   

On 4/28/2021 at 1:40 AM, OSM said:

Does anybody know a good car simulator, not a game, but a simulator, to learn how to drive in a big city with the intense traffic?

Actually, yes, to an extent:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/493490/City_Car_Driving/

I haven't played it, but I've read surprisingly good reviews of it.

 

19 minutes ago, kaosfere said:

Actually, yes, to an extent:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/493490/City_Car_Driving/

I haven't played it, but I've read surprisingly good reviews of it.

 

Wow!!! Thanks a lot! It has an operational and realistic mirrors! 😃👍

Edited May 1, 20215 yr by OSM

It’s a simulation of a simulator. 

Only the monkey knows!

 

Well a lot of other computer products now classify themselves as a "Sport" and even have professional leagues.

Maybe MSFS should go for the "Sport" tag  as opposed to simulation or game.

I suppose the other option is the more addicted and fanatical could try and classify it as an alternate religious activity ?  There could be tax benefits to that.

On 4/29/2021 at 11:15 AM, andradef said:

I think these game vs. simulation discussions are plain silly. MSFS is what you make of it. I've been flying MSFS with realism in mind, following VFR charts, doing proper visual approaches, etc. So, I am making a simulator out of it. I agree that IFR functionality is still lacking, but even with the limitations I've tried to fly it as close to reality as possible. I've had friends come over to play with my MSFS and made a game out of it: flew cruise speed a hundred feet from a neighborhood, pulled crazy maneuvers, hit the ground landing at 1000 fps... they made a game out of it and loved it. 

Some of these more gamey things were actually done for real. I recall the true movie, 30 Seconds Over Tokyo. About one of the Doolittle Raid crews.

When the B-25 Ruptured Duck was over San Francisco Bay enroute to meet USS Hornet they decided to fly under the Golden Gate. When my Ex bought me MAAMSIM's Briefing Time for FS9 for my Birthday one year sure enough, I had to set her up at KSFO, North Departure and fly her under the Golden Gate 🙂🙂😚

Seeming as the main reason to want to call it a simulation seems to be to justify the vast expense of the hobby - my suggestion, as mentioned above, is call it a "sport" instead.

People have no issues justifying spending vast amounts of money on "sporting equipment" so calling the game a "sport" should solve that problem nicely.

On 4/29/2021 at 5:36 PM, Bobsk8 said:

And my guess is that is exactly what X box users are going to do with MSFS, until they get bored with it, and move on to another game. 

Do you currently own a console?