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

[rka 916]

1 minute ago, garydpoole said:

But this is an MSFS forum...

Maybe I misunderstood your initial comment, sorry in that case. I thought you were saying that third person is not real world and as such shouldn't be simulated.

[garydpoole 182]

14 minutes ago, rka said:

Maybe I misunderstood your initial comment, sorry in that case. I thought you were saying that third person is not real world and as such shouldn't be simulated.

No worries. My point was that although third person isn't real world simulation, does it matter ? If that's how people wish to use MSFS, then so be it. It's all about choice. 

[kakihara123 140]

35 minutes ago, GSalden said:

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.
 

 

 

Why do you keep calling those features toys? That is simply wrong. I also don't care about any multi monitor support, since for me VR is far superior. But that doesn't mean I don't understand people wanting that. Also who said anything about the order features should be implemented? For me a proper ATC is the most important thing atm. And remembering the position and size of toolbar windows when switching VR on and off. Also auto assigning control profiles to aircraft. A body to move around in the world should not have a high priority, but for me it would be a more important addition then multi monitor support. But that is logical, when I only use VR and one monitor...

[GSalden 4,414]

17 minutes ago, kakihara123 said:

Why do you keep calling those features toys? That is simply wrong. I also don't care about any multi monitor support, since for me VR is far superior. But that doesn't mean I don't understand people wanting that. Also who said anything about the order features should be implemented? For me a proper ATC is the most important thing atm. And remembering the position and size of toolbar windows when switching VR on and off. Also auto assigning control profiles to aircraft. A body to move around in the world should not have a high priority, but for me it would be a more important addition then multi monitor support. But that is logical, when I only use VR and one monitor...

You look at it differently than I and that’s ok.

As I wrote in an earlier post I have had several opportunities to fly a Level D Flightsim and none of the instructors nor pilots wanted to walk around in the virtual world outside the cockpit.

But you and others may like that…

 

 

Edited June 30, 2022 by GSalden

[rjquick 178]

What's really an immersion killer is that you can just hop to any of these planes and fly them without getting any training or certification first. FS2020 should require that you pick a plane and then go through the proper training and testing for that type to get a certificate before allowing solo flight.

Sure, I'm being sarcastic, but people want/demand 'realism and immersion', but only the parts of it that they personally want. "The wheel wells are blurry and the toilet doesn't flush!! I can't fly this nonsense!!".

[kakihara123 140]

2 minutes ago, rjquick said:

What's really an immersion killer is that you can just hop to any of these planes and fly them without getting any training or certification first. FS2020 should require that you pick a plane and then go through the proper training and testing for that type to get a certificate before allowing solo flight.

Sure, I'm being sarcastic, but people want/demand 'realism and immersion', but only the parts of it that they personally want. "The wheel wells are blurry and the toilet doesn't flush!! I can't fly this nonsense!!".

Onair has a light version of that. If you want to use a new type of plane on one of the harder difficulties you need to do a short checkride. Some climbing, leveling off and then a slow 360 degree turn just above stall speed at altitude. It is actually not that easy. Many people want enhanced career modes. 

[mrueedi 702]

5 minutes ago, GSalden said:

As I wrote in an earlier post I have had several opportunities to fly a Level D Flightsim and none of the instructors nor pilots wanted to walk around in the virtual world outside the cockpit.

So they skipped some checklists....

[rocketlaunch 571]

Try it in VR, you become so much more. 

[virtualstuff 707]

2 hours ago, GSalden said:

You look at it differently than I and that’s ok.

As I wrote in an earlier post I have had several opportunities to fly a Level D Flightsim and none of the instructors nor pilots wanted to walk around in the virtual world outside the cockpit.

But you and others may like that…

 

 

Most of them don't want to sit behind a screen either after 5 days of flying different legs in the RW lol

Edited June 30, 2022 by awf

[RichUK 474]

2 hours ago, GSalden said:

You look at it differently than I and that’s ok.

As I wrote in an earlier post I have had several opportunities to fly a Level D Flightsim and none of the instructors nor pilots wanted to walk around in the virtual world outside the cockpit.

But you and others may like that…

 

 

This isn't a level D sim. This is MSFS.

In real life pilots have to do a walk-around. Real life is even more realistic than a level D.

I can give or take a 'walking' feature, but it isn't unrealistic to think of a mode that simulates walking - correct camera angles without messing around too much etc.

 

[cobalt 749]

OK, I accept the fact that some users of MFSF would like to see a walk-around app. But in nearly two years of following countless debates on two MSFS forums, this thread marks the first time I have ever seen this particular issue raised. Therefore I have to conclude that its priority ranks very, very low for most simmers, if it is even on their list at all. I hope that those who do care about it will get their wish at some point. Meanwhile, let's move on.

[RichUK 474]

46 minutes ago, cobalt said:

Meanwhile, let's move on.

Like this thread is stopping progress. If it doesn't interest you, then you are free to move on.

Like I said, I don't particularly care for the idea, but ideas are ideas, regardless of whether you like them. They cause no harm to MSFS and its progress.

[MarcG 2,292]

4 hours ago, cobalt said:

OK, I accept the fact that some users of MFSF would like to see a walk-around app. But in nearly two years of following countless debates on two MSFS forums, this thread marks the first time I have ever seen this particular issue raised. Therefore I have to conclude that its priority ranks very, very low for most simmers, if it is even on their list at all. I hope that those who do care about it will get their wish at some point. Meanwhile, let's move on.

As before it was discussed around launch time, just because you haven't seen anything on it doesn't make it any less wished for by players 🙂 so no, let's not move on, let's move with our legs 😉

[Ricardo41 5,690]

12 hours ago, GSalden said:

I am still not interested in these “toy” features

....then why do you comment -repeatedly, and with basically the same point over and over - on my suggestion?

You seem threatened by someone elses ideas. 

Or do you think I have a direct line to Jörg Neumann who is going to drop everything else they are working on to implement my suggestion?

It's like a guy who is not interested in a girl, but still calls her everyday to tell her.......he is not interested.

[rka 916]

Isn't he even the guy which has a complete toy room for flight simming? 😛