Notice to developers: no 2D cockpit - no sale to me...

[Guest UlfB]

>>>It's actually easier than switching back and forth>>>between the VC and the 2D panels.>>>>Is toggling TrackIR easier than having 2D popup panels on my>I can guarrantee you if you set up a TrackIR correctly with>button assignments on your joystick/yoke, it is a WHOLE lot>easier than using undocked 2D "windows" on a second (or third,>or fourth) monitor.FalconAF,Your'e hilarious. How could toggling TrackIR and then change camera view in VC be easier than just look on my second monitor???????And how can you guarantee that I would prefer it your way?????? I've tried it and IMO it's not easier.Ulf B

[FalconAF 213]

>Your'e hilarious. How could toggling TrackIR and then change>camera view in VC be easier than just look on my second>monitor???????>And how can you guarantee that I would prefer it your>way?????? I've tried it and IMO it's not easier.>>Ulf BNo more hilarious than your assumption I've never used more than one monitor! ;-)And who said anything about having to change camera views in the VC? That's the whole idea about using a TrackIR in the first place. You don't have to change any camera views using a TrackIR. Move head to get close to instrument...hit yoke button to pause panel movement...adjust instrument...hit yoke button again...move head back to original position. Takes a whole 2 seconds at most. OK, 5 seconds if you are entering something in your FMC pages. Doesn't get any simpler than that. Then you can use your second monitor for other things instead of filling it up with all those duplicate guages.To each his own....

[Guest UlfB]

>Takes a>whole 2 seconds at most. OK, 5 seconds if you are entering>something in your FMC pages. Doesn't get any simpler than>that.You make my day ;-) To move my eyeballs slightly to the right and look on the second monitor takes me 0.4 seconds and I don't have to press any button on my yoke. Doesn't get any simpler than that. Ulf B

[ErnieAlston 33]

>>Eaglesoft was first and continues to offer both 4:3 ratio and>16X9 ratio widescreen 2D panels in the same package so it's>fair to say that we are committed to using both 2D and 3D for>the forseeable future :-)>That's good to hear, cause I like both, and I don't want to lose either. There are certain phases of flight where I prefer to use one over the other, so I always like to have both.Regards.Ernie.

[Guest SkullxBones]

>I agree entirely with everything Rob Young has said: there's>no use for 2D panels anymore in FSX, because the new View>system can replicate any "2D" panel with a carefully>positioned fixed camera.Most 3D panels try to accurately replicate the dimensions of the real panel including the space in between gauges. If you try to simulate a 2D panel with a 3D camera view, many times you end up with either not enough gauges being displayed, or if you pull back to see more, you can't read them.Many 2D panels look like real panels but their dimensions are different than the 3D panels in that they are squashed together more to allow more instruments and switches to be displayed.That's why as a consumer I will not buy planes with only 2D or 3D panels, they must have both.

[N400QW 205]

Correct. That is why we committed to both 2D and 3D in the same package:-)

[virtuali 4,421]

>And you are entitled to your opinion which I also disagree>with. Just because you prefer a certain method and I something else>does not mean you or I are exclusively right.>Choice is a wonderful thing isn't it?My reply didn't had anything to do with my personal preference towards the VC versus the 2D panel.My reply was simply aimed to a very specific point you made in replying to Rob Young, were you said that yes, for mechanical instruments the smoothness of the VC can't be beaten, but that wouldn't be the case by adding a glass gauge.To this, and to this only, I replied, citing a real world example that proves the opposite.>You can say or feel anyway you want, but just because you>think there is no reason for a 2D panel perspective does not>mean everyone is in agreement with you. As I've said, and Rob Young said as well, there's no such thing as a "2D perspective", as if it were a different thing. Using the new FSX camera system any perspective can be created by placing a fixed camera to reproduce the same view you might have had in "2D" (emphasis on the quotation marks)

[Guest UlfB]

>Using the new FSX camera system any perspective can be created>by placing a fixed camera to reproduce the same view you might>have had in "2D" (emphasis on the quotation marks)But what you can't do with your camera view is to drag it to a second monitor so that you may fly the ac with the main 3D view and the camera view visible at the same time.Ulf B

[virtuali 4,421]

>If you try to simulate a 2D panel with a 3D camera view, many times>you end up with either not enough gauges being displayed, or>if you pull back to see more, you can't read them.It's important not to make the mistake to base any assumption depending on what is currenly being offered on the market, and what's possible with the sim.The readability of instruments in the VC might be good or not, depending on which method was used for the VC, especially for mechanical needles. In VCs made using standard "flat" gauges (the same gauges used for the 2D panel), the readability can be very poor on distance, because their were made with bitmaps only and were limited by the bitmap size.But, VC were all moving parts of mechanical instruments are entirely made with 3D polygons, can be even MORE readable than 2D panels, regardless of the viewing distance, because they get all sort of full screen antialiasing on the new graphic cards, and are not affected by the screen resolution or the aspect ratio.Unfortunately, because there's still a ( fading ) demand for 2D panels, airplane designers are faced with a difficult choice:- Reusing 2D gauge code for the VC, resulting in a subpar VC that shows all the common problems that VC detractors usually list, like lack of sharpenss, bad readability, etc. This has the advantadge of being able to share most of the code between 2D and VC panels and making 2D panels fans happy, but at the expense of the VC quality.- Developing 2D and 3D panels with entirely different methods. Meaning, fully polygonal 3D mechanical instruments for the VC, and redoing the same instruments using either bitmaps or another kind of 2D API like GDI or such, for the 2D panel, a very different approach, that is very close of making the panel twice, which might not be economically feasible- Forgetting entirely about 2D panels, which has the advantadge of being able to create the VC as it should, something that we don't see very often (RealAir is a notable exception).

[jrhoads 6]

>As I've said, and Rob Young said as well, there's no such>thing as a "2D perspective", as if it were a different thing.>Using the new FSX camera system any perspective can be created>by placing a fixed camera to reproduce the same view you might>have had in "2D" (emphasis on the quotation marks)>>You have totally missed the point and I totally disagree.

[boris4356 4]

>>Using the new FSX camera system any perspective can be>created>>by placing a fixed camera to reproduce the same view you>might>>have had in "2D" (emphasis on the quotation marks)>>But what you can't do with your camera view is to drag it to a>second monitor so that you may fly the ac with the main 3D>view and the camera view visible at the same time.>>Ulf B>This is my main concern as well. The camera views are all well and good, but to me are useless if you can't undock them to another monitor. It is a pain to toggle through 4 camera views to get to the one you need, then toggle through 4 more to get back to the main view. If I am flying a helicopter or unless I am in autopilot or have perfect trim, I end up off course, and at a different altitude because I can't see where I am going when in a different camera view. This would be the same as if in a real aircraft you had to turn around and face aft to operate some switches and check some gauges. Bill

[robert young 2,897]

Hi Jim,I take your point, but without wishing to be awkward, can we define what is a glass gauge? Rob

[blave 0]

As the OP, I want to add one other thing: for quite a while, I have been fairly obsessed with not ever having to use the mouse or keyboard to control anything in FSX, and have a combination of GoFlight and Precision Flight Controls hardware persuant to that goal. It's an elusive one, but in my world, 3D cockpits actually interfere with *my* perception of "reality" because I have physical knobs and buttons for most FS switchology and knobology. To be sure, that greatly affects my attitude about such things, and I will recognize that many simmers don't have (and may not want) this capability of physical (vs. mouse/kbd) control.But - my personal situation, acquired hardware, and preferences are why I made my post in the first place - I just wanted to cast a vote for what *I* want and will pay for.cheers,Dave B.

[Gypsy Baron 10]

-SNIP->>This is my main concern as well. The camera views are all well>and good, but to me are useless if you can't undock them to>another monitor. It is a pain to toggle through 4 camera views>to get to the one you need, then toggle through 4 more to get>back to the main view. >Simple solution...assign a hotkey to each camera view then map themto buttons on your stick/throttle.I have my 4 main views ( left, right seats, console, overhead )mapped to my #2 POV hat on my X-45 stick. A flick of my thumb takesme to the new view directly. It sure comes in handy flying the A2AB-377!Also, can't you create multiple views in the windows that pop-up whenyou hit the square bracket key? I know they are resizable.I've not tried dragging them to a 2nd monitor.>If I am flying a helicopter or unless I am in autopilot or>have perfect trim, I end up off course, and at a different>altitude because I can't see where I am going when in a>different camera view.This could be cured by opening one of the "bracket" windows with a forward view.>This would be the same as if in a real>aircraft you had to turn around and face aft to operate some>switches >and check some gauges. TrackIR lets you look over your shoulder without having to change views.I do it now all the time when flying the B-377 from the left seatto take a quick check of the FE panel on the starboard side.>>Bill>I fly with TrackIR4 now and would NEVER consider flying any aircraftthat didn't have a VC...amend that to a GOOD VC.In FS9 I was strictly a 2D cockpit flying. The availability ofdecent VC's in FSX aircraft and several FS9 inports coupled withTrackIR and multiple throttles makes it so far and above the FS9experience that I could never go back to "2D".... Paul

[robert young 2,897]

Hi Ron,You're quite right: it is true that some 3d gauges, under the currently available technology, do not lend themselves automatically to FS9 or FSX. I hope you appreciate that my reply to the original thread was addressing a commonly held prejudice against 3d panels, and was not a gauntlet thrown down to other developers.Each and every developer does what is best for its aircraft. I have no argument with that at all. It was not, and is not, my intention to start a competition; merely to inform.Rob Young