3 hours ago, Target71 said:

More planes for MSFS? Great! Free? Great! Will it replace DCS in my games eco-system? Not a chance!

I have not been on DCS much in the last few months because I have been on MSFS...but that is because I have been enjoying flying and not being shot out of the sky (my handle is what it is for a reason). Two different experiences. I will not invest in a MS combat simulator for the same reason I haven't bought the Christian Eagle in DCS, different sims have different strengths. Microsoft "Flight Simulator" and Digital "Combat" Simulator. That said, if you have a smaller budget (DCS, as all sims, is expensive) then "pew pew" in MSFS could be fun.

heh, hit quote rather than edit...sorry bout that

Edited June 15, 20215 yr by Target71

A classic WW2 combat flight simulator is not possible as there are no Bing maps from the 40's, but a modern Falcon 4 simulator would be a dream come true.

Combat will never come to Microsoft Flight SImulator, they specifically state weapons (even non-functioning) are not allowed on the marketplace - this is likely because they want to maintain their PEGI 3, E for everyone rating. 

 

Also consider the bad optics they'd get from kids shooting at airliners, etc.

Edited June 15, 20215 yr by HypePerformanceGroup

21 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

The only problem I see with this is griefers.  For example, if somebody were playing the bus simulator, and they wanted to grief pilots, they could run the bus over the runway at a popular airport just to word not allowed off the people playing the flight simulator.  But if griefers could be controlled (ie. if enough players report a griefer and that griefer is made invisible to other players), I don't see why something that combined all the simulators can't be done.  It makes a lot of sense actually and adds even more realism to a "combined" simulator world. 

"Griefers" (or "wreckers" as we prefer to call them) are a persistent threat in the world of public server online racing, so you are almost certainly correct that this would happen in a "world" simulator. Sadly, that is the nature of the beast known as the human race

Edited June 15, 20215 yr by Christopher Low

5 hours ago, conundrum said:

That wasn’t what I said. There is a reason DCS has limited map sizes. There is also a reason why their planes and maps cost what they do.

Ok.  I don't really like "limited map sizes."  I also don't really like having to pay $30 to $50 USD for each separate "limited size map" as an add-on.

If Microsoft can give us the entire world to fly combat jets at no extra cost after we purchase the initial copy, just like we can with MSFS, that's a much better feature than what DCS World gives (of course, any combat simulator by Microsoft would need to implement missions, weapons, ordinance, damage to buildings, etc, to be a more comprehensive combat simulator).

Edited June 15, 20214 yr by abrams_tank

3 hours ago, HypePerformanceGroup said:

Combat will never come to Microsoft Flight SImulator, they specifically state weapons (even non-functioning) are not allowed on the marketplace - this is likely because they want to maintain their PEGI 3, E for everyone rating. 

 

Also consider the bad optics they'd get from kids shooting at airliners, etc.

Which is why a combat flight simulator would be a separate product and played on a separate server.  Just like Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator was a separate product from FSX.

3 hours ago, Ixoye said:

A classic WW2 combat flight simulator is not possible as there are no Bing maps from the 40's, but a modern Falcon 4 simulator would be a dream come true.

Yup.  A modern combat flight simulator makes the most sense for Microsoft since they have the world modeled already in MSFS (the trick would be how Blackshark AI and Asobo can render the destruction of buildings but I think they could figure that out).

On 6/14/2021 at 4:28 PM, ca_metal said:

What about putting everything together, truck simulator, train simulator, bus simulator, ship simulator etc. I mean, would be awesome to see everything working on the same platform. But yeah, right now it’s just a dream.

That would be awesome but the reality is that it would likely turn into a GTA5 Online world of madness. Unless of course (like GTA5) you can have solo sessions and Invite Only.

22 hours ago, GSalden said:

The idea is nice but for the professional world the SDK needs to be way more enhanced than now.

It has to support all hardware in a Level D simulator. That is still far away.

P3D does support it. But who knows what will be coming.

But my guess is that MSFS stays for the consumermarker only. And they might license it to accompanies  like LM / Boeing / Airbus ….

Well, I don't see why MSFS has to only target Level D simulators.  The commercial market is made up of much more than Level D simulators.  In the original post, that article from Aero Society cites the different commercial applications using MSFS:

Quote

it in not hard to foresee that real-world aviators and aerospace industry could take advantage of this sim - whether is using it to brush up knowledge of VFR landmarks at a local flying club, licensing the Azure Cloud AI and graphics for another simulator, or using the amazing graphics to market airline livery designs or new aircraft concepts or renders of airports ... ... With a flight sim that allows global VFR flight, this may also could have some applications for example, for mission rehearsal for special forces and military aviators, who perhaps might want to familarise themselves with remote regions of the world or airstrips that are not included in their full-size simulator database. The possibilities could be endless.

But I agree with you that Asobo would need to expand the SDK more if it wants to target the commercial market.  But if Microsoft estimates that there is significant chunk of the commercial market that it can enter and earn a profit, I don't see why Microsoft wouldn't push to expand the SDK for commercial customers.

Please, keep shoot-em-down sims separate from MSFS, which is, and I hope will forever remain, a civilian flight simulator. We do not need to have airliners shot down! Those who do want this capability, should have their own simulator. (Kind of like smoking rooms a few years back).

18 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Yup.  A modern combat flight simulator makes the most sense for Microsoft since they have the world modeled already in MSFS (the trick would be how Blackshark AI and Asobo can render the destruction of buildings but I think they could figure that out).

I respect your opinion but there is no way MSFS could even come close to doing what DCS or IL2 does...the guys behind DCS have been doing their thing for twenty years, and yet, there is still a lot of work to be done on their sim. Despite some warts (pun intended) the A-10C and (Heatblur's) F-14 are masterpieces of military simulations...even with MS' $$$ I don't see MSFS being able to match the fidelity of what DCS offers any time in the next decade, and I doubt DCS will stand still and become obsolete. Oh, and don't forget about BMS Falcon which is almost free (I think MP Falcon for the base program is $4.99 on steam).

Asobo is releasing a top gun DLC for one simple reason, imo.   FSX had one,  and it's a continuity thing for Microsoft.  I remember that the expansion pack was very well received at the time.

Quote

Flight Simulator X: Acceleration[edit]

Microsoft released their first expansion pack for Flight Simulator in years, called Flight Simulator X: Acceleration, to the US market on October 23, 2007 rated E – E10+ for mild violence and released to the Australian market on November 1, 2007 rated G.^[16] Acceleration introduces new features, including multiplayer air racing, new missions, and three all-new aircraft, the F/A-18A Hornet, EH-101 helicopter and the P-51D Mustang. In many product reviews, users complained of multiple bugs in the initial release of the pack. One of the bugs, which occurs only in the Standard Edition, is that the Maule Air Orion aircraft used in the mission has missing gauges and other problems, as it is a Deluxe Version-only aircraft.

The new scenery enhancements cover Berlin, Istanbul, Cape Canaveral and the Edwards Air Force Base, providing high accuracy both in the underlying photo texture (60 cm/pixel) and in the detail given to the 3D objects.

Flight Simulator X: Acceleration can take advantage of Windows Vista, Windows 7, and DirectX 10 as well.^[17]

The expansion pack includes code from both service packs; thus, installing them is unnecessary.^[18][19]

 

There was an F-18 mission to intercept an alien craft near Area 51.   

There was a carrier landing mission,

 

Edited June 15, 20214 yr by Waldo Pepper

On 6/14/2021 at 5:28 PM, ca_metal said:

What about putting everything together, truck simulator, train simulator, bus simulator, ship simulator etc. I mean, would be awesome to see everything working on the same platform. But yeah, right now it’s just a dream.

I was thinking about exactly the same. In certain train simulators devs spend time recreating the environment. In MSFS you'd just need to add detail along the way. It'd be a great idea. Imagine driving to the airport with the train while seeing others on approach. 🙂

On 6/14/2021 at 1:02 PM, jbdbow1970 said:

Lets let them get Flight Simulator working properly first. I'm not all in for combat we have DCS for that.

I like grinding out aircraft in War Thunder,   where I use them in air modes as well as Ground Realistic Battles.    I love flying cas or cap in ground RB.

2 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

Ok.  I don't really like "limited map sizes."  I also don't really like having to pay $30 to $50 USD for each separate "limited size map" as an add-on.

…

If you want to have a playable combat system, as opposed to a slide show (if even that), “limited map sizes” are what you have to accept. I don’t like “limited map sizes” either, but I don’t think Blackshark/Azure or whatever can overcome that.