Sign in to follow this  
tgibson

Statistics on FS11 Wish List

Recommended Posts

>3. Flight dynamics. Definitely time to redo this. Very little>has changed in several versions of FS. Obviously, many FS>users are not pilots and would prefer more of an arcade feel>to the planes. Real pilots and aerodynamic engineers who use>FS would definitely like the flight dynamics of a real plane>to be as accurately modeled as possible. There has long been a>slider for flight realism in FS and putting the slider all the>way to "accurate" should be true to life in future versions.>Making this accurate for users would also make it accurate for>AI.>I would hope that your line of thinking is NOT a change to something such as X-Plane's, for the sake of a "different" method of flight dynamic programming. In other words, "look up" tables versus "blade element theory".Both methods certainly have their hits and misses, but look up tables as used in MSFS work rather well in duplicating characteristics of known performance. There is nothing "arcade" about this method if it's a case of comparing to the X-Plane's way of doing it.Geoff A. has it correct, when it comes to controls & perceived feel. It's a combination of using controls with no real feedback & a "mind game" of what we see on the screen. A full blown motion sim with correct feeling feedback would always be the better way to go, give or take a few million in price difference...L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Hum, tried to avoid these debates.From my background as a developer/manager of scientific softwarethe FS series is state of the art. Other programs that do "similar"scenes are not actually doing the same thing. In FS the aim isto provide some real global view - that is - the entire world isdefined in some form as mesh/textures and land classes. You average"game" has a set of generic views, or a very small area (island)to work with. Any one step (fps) in FS requires knowledge of the real world pointand what textures are to be placed in the field of view. Due totraffic packing requirements they use about 100 mile radius to definewhat might happen if you move in a particular direction. Essentiallyevery direction you could move is unique, every point has a differentmesh and land class, though textures may be generic and dependenton what you have loaded. How many airlines do you have (I have 25000 airlines/liveries/planes) in your AI, what about the airportscenery. Then there is weather, clouds and all sorts, all extensiveand unique. Don't confuse what FS does with most programs like Oblivian, or world of witch craft - this is a very different scale of problem.FS is excellent - just that our expectations are just a bit high - and does not matter what a developer does, the expectation of auser is always a bit higher than the delivery :) As for use of finite element analysis or parameterised equations -I think this needs a separate thread. Both are good or bad. Ialso agree with flying (glider in my case), yes I enjoy FS andit has some similarity with flying - but only up to a point. If nothing else it's going to hurt if you make a mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of people didn't put their wishes up there, because it was previously asked for by earlier posters. Or am I mistaken and someone did an actual poll?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,According to the MS bloggers you can just about forget about #1 (ATC) and #11 (AI Aircraft). They said back when FSX was being developed that they consider this system as outdated, replaced by the Multiplayer system. It also takes a huge amount of resources for any improvements. Now I hope they have changed their minds, but they haven't said anything different since then...--Tom GibsonCal Classic Propliner Page: http://www.calclassic.comFreeflight Design Shop: http://www.freeflightdesign.comDrop by! ___x_x_(")_x_x___

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading OnCourse software's write up seems to me that ACES could as a minimum include some hooks in FS and/or a AI SDK to allow AI interaction and all the things listed that are currently not possible with this package at present. This would probably satisfy the requests at the top of the wish list re ATC.WOZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

actually quite a few of us suggested that the slider system be 'scaled' for current at release hardware. the ability to run the sliders maxed on a high performance maching at time of purchase.alas, but I dont even see it on the list, guess it makes to much sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does to some-and not to others. For myself-I don't want the ability to run all the sliders to the right with limitations chosen by Aces based on what they expect a high performance machine at the time of release. First, as this release showed-predicting what hardware will be in a couple years is pretty tough-and since most features have to be decided soon this is prone to be off.Many of the sliders/options I don't want on anyway. I prefer to have more in certain areas and less in others, and I like making my own choice. Aces mentioned somewhere that they left out cloud shadows in this release because they thought the performance hit would be too great-I would have rather had that option, and had the choice to turn down something else to get it. http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also totally agree with Geofa. I can hear the complains already that is: - why should ACES limit MY ability to set MY settings this is typical of MS trying to control......etc etc. Bad idea.WOZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>actually quite a few of us suggested that the slider system>be 'scaled' for current at release hardware. the ability to>run the sliders maxed on a high performance maching at time of>purchase.I disagree with this strongly and would emphatically advise any developer not to go down this route. The major flaw I see in this is that similar systems all get the same "cap" or "cutoff" for the max settings. This fails to take into account the individual's user preferences. There are some items which I don't care too much about on the settings menu that I turn way down or even completely off. I do this so I can max out other items that are more important to me.This allows me to achieve a good balance of performance and maximize my enjoyment of those features that I truly like. I certainly would not like a "scaled" slider system that caps off certain items and prevents me from gaining my maximum satisfaction of those personally important items.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok guys, I see where your headed. your using the sliders to 'balance' the system to allow for your own choice. I understand and have to agree - thanks for the input.however, I just get a bit bothered after the release of a lot of folks bending all the sliders to the right then complaining of FPS issues.anyways, thanks again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see what you're saying Mike, it's true there are a few users who feel they are entitled to turn all sliders to the right, and then are puzzled at why they're not getting blazing performance. Here's a suggestion. How about a slider system similar to what you suggested. But instead of a maximum cap that prevents you raising the sliders any further, a warning or a reminder pops up that informs the user that performance will take a strong hit if they exceed the recommended maximum. The recommended maximum will be based on each individual's hardware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't they already have warnings via tooltips about hits to performance? And...although it doesn't work perfectly they do have a rudimentary initial read of the hardware for the initial setup. PerfBucket or something to that effect.Still, no matter what they do people will always push the envelope, myself included. It's the whole pandoras box syndrome, once you see what you could have, all heck breaks loose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Don't they already have warnings via tooltips about hits to>performance? They do, but I was thinking of something more active, dramatic, and immediate, such as a pop-up window warning that displays whenever you move a slider past the "maximum recommended" point.Psychologically this has the effect of reminding the user that he or she is directly responsible for degraded performance should they deliberately choose not to heed the warning.I think it will be a lot harder to blame ACES when one gets 5 FPS after having ignored a barrage of pop-up warnings telling you your perfomance will suffer if you continue to move the sliders beyond the recommended limit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately I believe they would be treated a bit like warnings on a cigarette packet Tim ie pretty well ignored. Its hard to restrict humans to not push the envelope.Re WOZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the list, if they address the top10 on it we will have the best sim ever. But you know they won't. They will address the bottom 2. more planes and logbook. As always. maybe in fs55 one can hope for proper dynamic lightning (no, not light bloom) and weather (and how it affects the flying object)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Unfortunately I believe they would be treated a bit like>warnings on a cigarette packet Tim ie pretty well ignored.>Its hard to restrict humans to not push the envelope.True, the warnings would probably be ignored in many cases. But the real purpose of the warnings is actually not to restrict people at all from pushing the envelope. Instead, the real purpose is 2 fold:1. To give the user some idea of the range of acceptable performance, and a recommended maximum, according to the system he is running. (This is lacking right now, which unfortunately leads a number of users to think they should be able to max out the sliders without a penalty in performance)2. To let the user know that he himself, and not ACES, is responsible for poor performance when the warnings about exceeding the recommended maximum are ignored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing I'm really hoping for is better integration and tools for taking real world GIS data for things such as building footprints and forest areas and being able to define autogen that way rather than through the old autogen annotator...After that ATC and AI are important and if they can be merged into the MP environment it would be good.MP as I see it has a drawback of being localized to one region if there is someone using the tower, for broad MP VATSIM and the like need to be used...For MP to really catch on I think that handing off to another controller within the FS MP environment would be key... imhoOh and aircraft type code to be implemented into the Airport Facilities Parking data...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this