In MSFS You're Not A Person, You're A Camera

[Maladoror 89]

5 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

But, does it have a commode in case you get diarrhea? 

Yes and includes a shower and bath. Its a 2100 sq ft G58, very comfortable. Now if I can get my wife to wear that PSA stewardess uniform, everything would be perfect.

[Shack95 2,658]

4 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

But it amazes me how much things can become quite uncivil over a fairly simple subject matter that shouldn't be contentious at all.

These are the conclusions I‘ve drawn from conversing online:

• Use as many mitigating phrases as possible
• Don‘t use hyperbole. Never. 
• Don‘t post on impulse (grit your teeth, swallow it and move on)
• Don‘t use humour unless you mark it as such (which makes it unfunny in most cases, so better leave it altogether)

Bottom line: non face-to-face communication can be a real pita. 

Edited June 30, 2022 by Shack95

[lwt1971 7,408]

40 minutes ago, cobalt said:

The fact is, MSFS already is what you are talking about, to a large extent. One can drive (there are a number of driveable cars, buses, even a bike!), and there is a plethora of driveable boats and ships; gliders, blimps, and much other stuff that greatly enhances the experience. The website flightsim.to has an incredible array of addons, most of them freeware, that add much realism (e.g. hundreds of ships plying the waters of the world). And as others have pointed out, the drone --- which is an amazingly versatile feature that admittedly takes some time and patience to learn ---  allows you to simulate walking anywhere. (True, it doesn't show your physical body, but in my case at least I don't see that as a drawback).

MSFS is a fantastic achievement, still less than two years old and getting better all the time. No problem in wanting more, but let's appreciate what we already have -- which is far, far more than any earlier sim has provided.

100% .... speaking of the drone, it can definitely provide for some interesting non-flight experiences:
 

 

Edited June 30, 2022 by lwt1971

[Maladoror 89]

I would like the ultimate (or meta sim, is that the term now?). I would like to be flying and look down and see a train with a gamertag chugging along the tracks. How about being able to walk onto a someone else's plane and becoming a passenger or their copilot. I want to see it all in the sim. Of course, this would be after the flying portion was perfected. Guess this will always be just a dream.

[kakihara123 144]

10 minutes ago, Maladoror said:

I would like the ultimate (or meta sim, is that the term now?). I would like to be flying and look down and see a train with a gamertag chugging along the tracks. How about being able to walk onto a someone else's plane and becoming a passenger or their copilot. I want to see it all in the sim. Of course, this would be after the flying portion was perfected. Guess this will always be just a dream.

Ha.. why stop there. Include truck, tram, cable car, bus,  normal car driving... I mean it is kind of the obvious solution that somewhere in the future there is not a different program for each and every sim. It makes sense to combine them. Why not see an F1 race from above in a helicopter that is driven by real people?

To be clear, the tech is nowhere near there, but it is also possible for sure. The passenger aspect is also interesting. I wanted to show my parents MSFS in VR but the build in AI is to bad to actually fly the plane. So choosing any flight in the world and let them walk through the airport and board the plane (and getting rid of pesky real life stuff like security checks) would be pretty cool. Use them Jumpseat on a plane controlled by a player... to learn something. The possibilities are basically endless. 

[cobalt 798]

1 hour ago, Shack95 said:

These are the conclusions I‘ve drawn from conversing online:

• Use as many mitigating phrases as possible
• Don‘t use hyperbole. Never. 
• Don‘t post on impulse (grit your teeth, swallow it and move on)
• Don‘t use humour unless you mark it as such (which makes it unfunny in most cases, so better leave it altogether)

Bottom line: non face-to-face communication can be a real pita. 

And I would add, know what you are talking about. Too many posters in this forum (including this thread) simply are not fully knowledgeable about MSFS and its capabilities ( the camera system, for instance). Many complaints about perceived flaws turn out to be due to lack of experience in using the program. This is understandable since MSFS is a very complex sim, but too many people rush to judgement when they encounter a problem.

[Bernard Ducret 790]

Perhaps my old age has me confused, but I really don't understand what is so contentious here, and - above all - what is foreign to a flight simulation when it can be used eventually as a training tool for future or current pilots?!

Yes a walk-around would be a nice addition to MSFS IF it is used by the airplane developers, the same way they do failures on many airliners and GA aircraft, to offer the necessity to walk around your plane before flying (AS IN REAL LIFE...!) so as to check if your pitot cover is off, your tires are in good shape, your flaps correctly extended, etc, etc, and if you don't do it seriously something may happen (as it was mentioned by another poster for an XP simulation), whatever a pilot in true life has to do even on an A380!!! A walk-around is mandatory regardless of the plane you use, did you see your pilot do it before the flight, did you watch an inflight film, they all start with that, so what is so disturbing about this phase, is it too degrading for an armchair pilot? Failures are optional on all complex aircraft addons, walk-around could also be optional and if you elect not to use it, your airplane will be assumed to be ready for flying, as simple as that.

What is so technically challenging that it would throw other MSFS priorities out of wack? The only category of MSFS users who would not be interested are the cockpit builders who are stuck in their wooden cabin and have no interest to walk around it in their garage or basement (anyone in this category here?).

[RichUK 474]

12 minutes ago, Bernard Ducret said:

The only category of MSFS users who would not be interested are the cockpit builders who are stuck in their wooden cabin and have no interest to walk around it in their garage or basement (anyone in this category here?).

LOL.

[sd_flyer 6,042]

45 minutes ago, Bernard Ducret said:

Perhaps my old age has me confused, but I really don't understand what is so contentious here, and - above all - what is foreign to a flight simulation when it can be used eventually as a training tool for future or current pilots?!

Yes a walk-around would be a nice addition to MSFS IF it is used by the airplane developers, the same way they do failures on many airliners and GA aircraft, to offer the necessity to walk around your plane before flying (AS IN REAL LIFE...!) so as to check if your pitot cover is off, your tires are in good shape, your flaps correctly extended, etc, etc, and if you don't do it seriously something may happen (as it was mentioned by another poster for an XP simulation), whatever a pilot in true life has to do even on an A380!!! A walk-around is mandatory regardless of the plane you use, did you see your pilot do it before the flight, did you watch an inflight film, they all start with that, so what is so disturbing about this phase, is it too degrading for an armchair pilot? Failures are optional on all complex aircraft addons, walk-around could also be optional and if you elect not to use it, your airplane will be assumed to be ready for flying, as simple as that.

What is so technically challenging that it would throw other MSFS priorities out of wack? The only category of MSFS users who would not be interested are the cockpit builders who are stuck in their wooden cabin and have no interest to walk around it in their garage or basement (anyone in this category here?).

There are much to be done in areas of simulation and environment before focusing on preflight inspection walks. 
Note: simulation is complex enough to keep developer attention focused on that for years. 
 

 

[RichUK 474]

34 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

There are much to be done in areas of simulation and environment before focusing on preflight inspection walks. 
Note: simulation is complex enough to keep developer attention focused on that for years. 
 

 

That is true, but there are obviously multiple developers of various skill-sets and types. I am sure someone will knock something together at some point without effecting the timeline of simulation and environment development.

[sd_flyer 6,042]

12 minutes ago, RichUK said:

That is true, but there are obviously multiple developers of various skill-sets and types. I am sure someone will knock something together at some point without effecting the timeline of simulation and environment development.

Like FSRealstic perhaps? They did pretty good job with latest pro version 

[RichUK 474]

6 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

Like FSRealstic perhaps? They did pretty good job with latest pro version 

Yeah, that would fit in their wheel house I'm sure!

[AnkH 2,264]

23 hours ago, GSalden said:

I do not want a lot of imagination in a Flightsim.

Rather strange, bringing the argument about not wanting a lot of imagination, yet putting the TS request into the "toy" corner, although he asks for something that would do exactly this: reduce the amount of imagination needed. Or how do you explain yourselves the walk around part and the entering cockpit part WITHOUT imagination now? In my world, preparation of a flight does not start the moment you sit on the captains chair... 

Side note: take a look at Star Citizen, there, this is implemented and it adds A LOT to the immersion of actually using a space craft in a simulated space environment...

[garydpoole 183]

5 hours ago, rka said:

Strawman argument. All other simulators allow that as well. The only difference is that MSFS can show instruments in outside view. 

But this is an MSFS forum...

[GSalden 4,656]

48 minutes ago, AnkH said:

Rather strange, bringing the argument about not wanting a lot of imagination, yet putting the TS request into the "toy" corner, although he asks for something that would do exactly this: reduce the amount of imagination needed. Or how do you explain yourselves the walk around part and the entering cockpit part WITHOUT imagination now? In my world, preparation of a flight does not start the moment you sit on the captains chair... 

Side note: take a look at Star Citizen, there, this is implemented and it adds A LOT to the immersion of actually using a space craft in a simulated space environment...

I am still not interested in these “toy” features. There a multiple issues that need to be fixed. And multi monitor would be very welcome.

Already you can go around the ac …

Left or right : we decide nothing . It’s MS/Asobo who decides.
 

 

 

Edited June 30, 2022 by GSalden