How to expand MSFS and make it even bigger and better

[fppilot 4,418]

6 hours ago, hansb57 said:

Why cant somebody ask for trains without beeing rediculed, but lots of folks are cheering for boats?

 

Personally I'd like UFOs, but with traffic so lacking of realism why would I ask for fantasy......?

[Matt Sdeel 48]

32 minutes ago, fppilot said:

Personally I'd like UFOs, but with traffic so lacking of realism why would I ask for fantasy......?

How is this not different from saying:
Why go to the moon when there is world hunger?

[fppilot 4,418]

16 minutes ago, Matt Sdeel said:

How is this not different from saying:
Why go to the moon when there is world hunger?

Cause I didn't mention anything like either the moon or hunger, which each are not depicted in MSFS.  So like you, I look forward to the arrival of the Dukes.

[Lord Farringdon 535]

If we all just plant our feet back on the ground again, at an airport preferably, we will all understand that MSFS is a Flight Simulator, nothing else. 3PD's have allowed us to have sailing boats, cars and of course Gaist's wonderful ships because the software engine allows this in one way or another. But the execution as many have noted is far from ideal. While Gaists ship are fantastic Heinrik feely admits there is only so much realism that can be achieved when the MSFS does not allow for proper water physics.  In spite of that, Gaist have done wonders with ship wakes. But, take a look at this U-Boat simulator review to see what good water physics can look like if the engine is developed for this.    

 

Having said that, water physics is not the point of a flight simulator. Instead MSFS have modelled the air physics and that is right and appropriate for this genre.  While some have explored Gaists ships and controllable ships as a form of MS Ship Simulator, the reality is that the capability to do this really just allows for enhanced and moving scenery to be viewed by the aviator. There is no doubt that all of these 'vehicle' 3PD's add a wonderful dimension to MSFS scenery and provides a quasi ability to enjoy other simulations. But it is still primarily a flight simulator and IMHO must remain that way. 

However, as I was saying in an earlier thread, it is the development of the MSFS software engine and the emphasis that has been placed on updating the World that offers us (and MS of course) so many other 'vehicle' simulator opportunities at levels of realism similar to MSFS.  In just one example, I think Jorg mentioned in a recent Twitch, it will take them two years to update the Carribean water masking but they see that as worthwhile and have assigned resources to it that allows them to do this.

But do we see this as a World simulator or maybe even an inter- planetary universe? Well, this is where we need to plant our feet firmly on the ground. My 'road map' guess would be that MS is certainly advancing the scenery modelling, but not at all to the exclusion of developing the flight simulator.  I suspect 2024 will offer a lot to the flight simulation genre and personally I can't wait for it frankly.  But it would be crazy to believe they would pour all these resources into just MSFS. So, perhaps other software houses have already been engaged by MS to develop other 'vehicle' simulations using the MSFS base engine? Who knows what we might see reviewed in the next few years. This would be the next step in my view. Only after determining what future potential exists in any particular vehicle simulators placed on the market, and then taking account of the maturity of those simulations, and of the technical feasibility and challenges of doing so, would some integration of the most popular simulations be a possibility. That may be some while down track.

MS have dabbled in ship, train and space simulators (not to mention farm simulators) usually based within fixed geospatial boundaries but now ...well...the world is literally their oyster! 

Cheers

(futuristic) 

Terry          

[cobalt 807]

On 5/4/2024 at 2:33 PM, avhpilot said:

You can fly like Superman or walk/drive in Google Earth VR using your controllers (I use Quest 3). It's like an improved version of MSFS's drone cam. It's in most cases an improved version of MSFS's photogrammetry as well and with street view available at your fingertips to toggle (180/360 degree photo's) to actually see how it really looks.

 

 

Granted that there are aspects in which Google Earth is superior to MSFS (after all, it has been around far longer). But overall, it is hard to believe that anyone would actually prefer moving around in GE over flying in MSFS -- if that is what you are saying, I'm not sure. But whatever works ...

[avhpilot 156]

12 hours ago, cobalt said:

But overall, it is hard to believe that anyone would actually prefer moving around in GE over flying in MSFS 

Of course.

I am only trying to say that MSFS is still lightyears away from becoming this so-called 'world' simulator that can do everything. I am very impressed still with the way MSFS depicts the world. That is why I have purchased a ship to sail and a car to drive but in the end only to find out that it is still a very limited experience. Although, especiall in VR, the view and perspectve on ground or sea level can be a very convincing one from a certain distance. Immersion often brakes when coming to close.

[cobalt 807]

OK, I understand. But who is saying MSFS can "do everything"? My point was, and is, that MSFS opens the way to unlimited possibilities for experiencing the world virtually in myriad ways, which we will see unfolding over time.

[Lonesome Cowboy Burt 189]

On 5/2/2024 at 8:40 PM, Fielder said:

We want trains! Because then they would have to fix the tracks.

In real life that's what I used to do, follow the tracks to the town and then look for the airport right outside the town. No radios. No ATC. Usually nobody else at the airport. Rural area. 1 such airport owned by each county (public, free for all). The only fee was to rent a hangar. When the county road crews re-tarred the road by the airport, then they would drive in as they passed by and re-tar the runway. No trees around, so no leaves. KIds on small Honda 50 motorbikes, drove to the airport and cleared weeds in exchange for free flights. Minimum age to get a small motorcycle license was 14 years old.

 

Aah memories, my first QXC involved following a rail track for 40 miles and a few years ago I was flying along the north somerset coast and spotted below a steam train...just had to get low and take it in. So yea rail activity would be cool.

(BTW the steam train was only about 5 years ago in case anyone thinks im even older than I look/feel😁)

[Fielder 3,787]

China was operating long haul working steam trains around the year 2000. I'm not sure if they still do.

I remember modern day S.E. England steam trains in train simulations.

[bofhlusr 466]

[eslader 1,820]

On 5/3/2024 at 2:44 AM, Lord Farringdon said:

Perhaps a better question is why wouldn't MS exploit this world landscape and scenery engine for more than just one version of the vehicle simulation genre?

You don't need the technology MSFS brings to the table for a train sim game. Trains only go where the tracks go. It's better to make a very narrow world with high-detail graphics that just encompasses the tracks than to simulate the entire planet, the vast majority of which has no train tracks on it.

On the other side of that coin, train sims require very, very high fidelity terrain under the train. If you tried to run a train along a track from the MSFS scenery, you'd crash because when you get down to ground level, even in really good scenery areas things are just wrong enough that you wouldn't be able to stay on the tracks and would derail.

Similar story for cars. MSFS's engine would make more sense for cars, but not until it's capable of making a truly high-fidelity simulation of the planet.  Look at any mountain or river and you'll see a road dunking into the water or paved at an impossible angle on the side of a cliff because the terrain accuracy, while acceptable for flying over it, is wholly unsuited for driving anything on it.

 

 

[Sonosusto 711]

trains would be cool yes but just like cars  and boats it just takes more cpu 

[petejohno1 63]

Trains? It can be done. YGLA Gladstone airport in Australia ( ORBX) has them.

[SamYeager 245]

On 5/2/2024 at 6:44 PM, bofhlusr said:

MSFS has Xbox, ships and boats (GAIST and Seafront), Dune, and Top Gun. So how come no trains?? Might as well integrate or expand and have fun, fun, fun!

Trainz Railroad Simulator 2022 - Trailer (youtube.com) - amazing sceneries
First look at the Parallel 42 Campout Utility in Microsoft Flight Simulator (youtube.com) - for MSFS bush planes
Juice Goose UTV by Parallel 42 - TRAILER (youtube.com) - vehicles for MSFS passengers

Might as well have more fun by doing something DIFFERENT right?  In my OPINION, more of the same things is like looking at a kaleidoscope. 
Kaleidoscope Visual Meditation Music, Kaleidoscope Mind Movie, Visual Relaxation (youtube.com)

Sure... they're BEAUTIFUL and nice and all that, BUT more GA prop planes and Airbuses are just variations of the same things.  😲

You're way behind the times. This was raised as a wish on the MSFS forums a few years ago. The latest wish list available from MS/Asobo shows the wish marked as 'Not Planned' after appearing as 'Under Investigation' for quite a while.

[pinepix62 64]

I want a logbook that knows that I took off when the wheels leave the ground and that I landed when my wheels are back on the ground, and airport and runway lights that turn off during the day in good variability. Now that I think back, this is stuff that worked in FSX....

Edited May 7 by pinepix62