16 minutes ago, blingthinger said:

And yet Austin's life and career proves your statement wrong. Over and over again.

 

Okay, I'm convinced that you don't know about the subject matter. You don't understand that you CANNOT make a flight simulator without understanding game development. 

Even the image below required early knowledge.

3 minutes ago, brinx said:

Even the image below required early knowledge

Ohhh! You think that video graphics automatically equates to video "game"!! SIGGRAPH is proof enough that such a correlation is silly.

Here's my whole point.  Why can't you just leave it alone?

This topic has been debated about in these forums many times before.  And, according to the non XP community, it's always OUR fault (as in the X-Plane community) when it turns into a heated debate.  Whereas in the MSFS forums, when someone calls MSFS a game, it's a free for all verbal bashing on anyone who dares put finger to keyboard.  As proven by my last post.  Whether it's a game or a simulator, in these settings, can be put down to personal opinion.  I've done several contract jobs for several large aviation and nav corporations, including the CL650, who treat X-Plane as a simulator due to them using the CL650 within a training setting.  The last contract was as recent as last October.  If they treated X-Plane as a "game", I wouldn't put any faith in any of these corporations.  

 

There is no way I would expect you to change your mind, and we won't change ours, so just say "agree to disagree" before this thread gets locked.

Edited February 12, 20251 yr by GoranM

Here is another simulator. This time a driving simulator.

2 minutes ago, GoranM said:

Here's my whole point.  Why can't you just leave it alone?

This topic has been debated about in these forums many times before.  And, according to the non XP community, it's always OUR fault (as in the X-Plane community) when it turns into a heated debate.  Whereas in the MSFS forums, when someone calls MSFS a game, it's a free for all verbal bashing on anyone who dares put finger to keyboard.  As proven by my last post.  Whether it's a game or a simulator, in these settings, can be put down to personal opinion.  I've done several contract jobs for several large aviation and nav corporations, including the CL650, who treat X-Plane as a simulator due to them using the CL650 within a training setting.  The last contract was as recent as last October.  If they treated X-Plane as a "game", I wouldn't put any faith in any of these corporations.  

Apparently, something is getting lost in translation here. MSFS, Xplane, P3D are all flight simulators. You can use them for training. No one said you had to treat it like a game. That is why P3D is used by Lockheed Martin professionally. I am pointing out that they are still a type of game. You cannot develop any of these simulators without knowledge of game development.

7 minutes ago, brinx said:

You cannot develop any of these simulators without knowledge of game development

Such a silly correlation. You've heard of openGL, no? Austin chose that as the gfx api very early on. It was originally developed by SGI. They were known for their supercomputers back in the day, not games. Plenty of simulator software packages then and now are developed without any connection to game dev.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenGL#History

2 minutes ago, blingthinger said:

Such a silly correlation. You've heard of openGL, no? Austin chose that as the gfx api very early on. It was originally developed by SGI. They were known for their supercomputers back in the day, not games. Plenty of simulator software packages then and now are developed without any connection to game dev.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenGL#History

Never heard of it. Never heard of openGL, Never heard of DirectX, never heard of Vulcan.  Really?

You CANNOT make a flight simulator without knowledge of game development. Simple. 
Even if you are developing using 2D sprites, that is still knowledge of game development.

38 minutes ago, brinx said:

You cannot develop any of these simulators without knowledge of game development.

Ok, we can agree on that.  Mainly because it's like saying you can't make a 3 michelin star meal without knowing how to make a McDonalds burger.

19 minutes ago, brinx said:

Never heard of openGL

I sent you pages and pages of wiki to read. You didn't read it??

SGI's openGL wasn't born of the video game industry. It's entirely possible to write graphical apps without knowing a thing about the game industry or ever intending to associate with it. CAD being a good example, then and now. SIGGRAPH is a another great example of a large group of folks doing exactly that today. They might share some similar ingredients as in Goran's burger example but they certainly aren't considered games. Even by the video game industry itself.

 

36 minutes ago, brinx said:

Vulcan

K. VulKan.

2 minutes ago, GoranM said:

Mainly because it's like saying you can't make a 3 michelin star meal without knowing how to make a McDonalds burger.

The analogy makes no sense. 

Please don't tell me that you believe a flight simulator like Xplane, MSFS, or P3D can be developed without knowledge of game development. I'm going to assume you genuinely agree here.

2 minutes ago, blingthinger said:

I sent you pages and pages of wiki to read. You didn't read it??

SGI's openGL wasn't born of the video game industry. It's entirely possible to write graphical apps without knowing a thing about the game industry or ever intending to associate with it. CAD being a good example, then and now. SIGGRAPH is a another great example of a large group of folks doing exactly that today. They might share some similar ingredients as in Goran's burger example but they certainly aren't considered games. Even by the video game industry itself.

That was a joke. Of course, I know what OpenGL is.

36 minutes ago, brinx said:

The analogy makes no sense. 

Please don't tell me that you believe a flight simulator like Xplane, MSFS, or P3D can be developed without knowledge of game development. I'm going to assume you genuinely agree here.

I'm agreeing with you.  But it takes more knowledge to make a "simulation" than it does to make a "game".  Just like it takes more knowledge to make a 3 michelin star meal than a McDonalds burger.

4 minutes ago, GoranM said:

I'm agreeing with you.  But it takes more knowledge to make a "simulation" than it does to make a "game".  Just like it takes more knowledge to make a 3 michelin star meal than a McDonalds burger.

Okay. I see what you mean. Yes. I agree.

8 hours ago, brinx said:

If I see misinformation, I will point it out. There are indeed users on here who do not know that flight simulators are simulation games. 

It would have been better to just agree on you being wrong, rather than repeating again and again your personal belief and claim that it‘s a fact.

Professional flight simulators are not classified as video games. They belong to a separate category of "simulation software," specifically designed for aviation training and education. While video games aim to entertain, flight simulators focus on providing realistic training experiences for pilots, helping them develop their skills in a safe and controlled environment.

Give us please one credible source that puts professional simulation software in the category of video-games.

19 hours ago, efis007 said:

If we are looking for an "aerodynamics simulator" we should all fly with this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FlightGear
Instead we fly with XP12 simply because it has the nicest graphics.
After the release of XP12 there was nothing but graphics for months.
"The realistic lighting"... "the pbr reflections on the metal sheets"... "the reflections of the sea"... "the sound of the wind in the woods"... "the volumetric clouds instead of 2D"... "up to the most bizarre things like the simulation of the pupil that dilates/constricts and makes the sky overexposed and the panels black, or the crazy camera that simulates the head shaking".... and all the other things typical of video games and that have nothing to do with the "aerodynamic design tool".
Those who design airplanes do not need Hollywood effects to design a plane that flies well!
All those graphics and those XP12-style effects are video game stuff, everyone knows that.
And everyone bought XP12 just for the new graphics.
Because graphics make you have more fun and play better.
If it weren't like that, we would all be on FlightGear (which is also free) 🛩️ 

I've never managed to get Flight Gear to work adequately.

12 hours ago, mjrhealth said:

And people actually believe it as if it has any authority.

I have a 30 year old set of Encyclopaedia Britannica in my spare bedroom. Their 'authority' comes from many decades' of earning that authority, by being correct. More so, they do that footnote thing. Like Wiki, they are jumping on point.