If you took on Fly! what would you do, change or add?

[Roger Mazengarb 0]

G'day Michael,Didn't you notice that it has already been done!! but not yet released :-eek Cheers,Roger @YSSY

[Roger Mazengarb 0]

G'day Tony,Mate read the locked thread. Someone ( forget who ) is claiming to have done this already.Cheers,Roger @YSSY

[Fall_guy 1]

Hi Peter,Being practicle, I suggest changing things that will attract the NUMBERS to FLY, because without them any future changes will be a waste of time and money, as TRI bare witness.Changes (must be adapted so users can develop and contribute)1) The Sound Engine2) Air Trafic Control (localized) to each airport3) A1 Traffic (Airports are busy places)regards JohnDC10 projectB737-500

[akriesman 0]

Peter,For starters...(1) Transparency bug (nasty problem due to scenery engine precisions).(2) Fix weather functionality in the SDK (Started by David Sandberg, and maybe Chris Wallace).(3) Rewrite AI traffic system(4) Add sophisticated ATC. Allen

[Mac_Paint 35]

Peter,A lot of good suggestions. May I add aircraft night lighting? All of these aircraft would look great at night if only we could see them. Pete

[Guest]

I would be quite satisfied with having fly!2k quality clouds back and (why not!) an update of the magnificient addon SKY!.biber

[Guest]

Hi PeterSome of the things I would like to see is:Better Navids, airways ect.Better scenery. something like Andy D but with matching buildings, trees ect..bette AI of aircrafts.More dynamic airports. Bette Wheater Much better fog!What really helps is super lighting and with todays graphic card I think this should be possible.Look at www.es.com and http://www.es.com/resources/27a_com_sim1.wmv http://www.es.com/resources/28+esig_comm_sim.wmvI have some ideers to how we can get FLY (III) in the air for a small amount of money. Hope we can get things runningRegardsHenrik

[Guest]

I would make a sim which covers a smaller area (ala Flight Unlimited) but make it very complex. Use the most accurate maps/sattelite images to create incredible graphics at high resolutions. I would make the weather as dynamic and complicated as possible and also the ATC amde as intlligent as possible (sould be easier in asmaller area). I would make the planes as complex as possible and with as much systems modelling as possibe. The most realistic Traffic that I can get and I would be a happy camper.Basicly I would concentrate on Scenery in a small area, Weather in a small area, ATC in a small area, Aircraft realism and "Flying Enviroment"Few planes like: 1 trainer, 1 twin engine, 1 acrobat and one business jet.I think a sim can be made much better if it is concentrated in a smaller area. More time can be spent on other things.I don't think a sim like that would have toom uch market but I can dream can't I? :-)

[rodger 0]

Mikk, first of all it is nice to see you here again. Hope you`re doing well!Of course you can dream, I think we are all dreaming here. ActuallyI don`t have much more to add to the "wishlist", but I have to disagree with your wish for only a small area in a sim. I think I understand your point, but look what happened to FU3. Didn`t they trymost what you said? Otherwise excuse me if I am mistaken. But I think everybody (me included) wanted a world wide sim. And I think if you get one thing right it should be possible to do it for the whor world. Again I could be wrong, but I am also dreaming........Take care,Rodger

[Guest]

Hi RodgerI am doing better thanks for asking.Yeah, Flight Unlimited tried those things and I think they worked nicely. I realize it won't work financialy (that's why I said it's a dream).My preferance is to have a small but very detailed area instead of a generalized globe. You know, a small strip of land enough to make some cross-country flights say (300 miles) with all the airports (at least one major airport) custom modelled and custom maded traffic flying the procedures according to the real world, ATC using routes and procedures accoring to the real world, weather could be made a lot more complex if it's a smaller area as well (IMO).Man, I miss flight unlimited now :-shy , I wish I had flight unlimited 3 now. :-shy My biggest point is that no sim captures the flying enviroment/atmosphere properly. You know, sounds of people in the cabin, rattling noises in the cockpit like panels not screwed in properly rattling, traffic around you with intelligent pilots, occasional bumps in the air, random areas of haze/pollution around cities, growing/changing clouds volumetric clouds that do not pop-up, being able to see that there is an area of overcast ahead (not having it suddenly go from clear to overcast), pieces of clouds around bigger clouds (I believe they are called fractus), areas of rain and areas od hail within a thunderstorm, localized areas of low visibility that you can see from a distance, co-pilot talking and helping, dirty windshiled with bugs, rust on the sides, oil stains, worn and torn panels/planes/buildings/airports, detailed runways that are dirty, cracked, unlevel, full of skid-marks that you cannot see the centerline occasionaly, oil stains and tire marks all over the taxiways and parking stalls, birds flying around, some movement on the ground at low level like cars/busses/trains planes doing crop-dusting, tractors on farm fields, boats/ships on water....the list goes on but I do not want you to fall asleep! :-)In my opinion a sim that has detail like that in a small area would be my pick instead of a "entire globe" sim with less detail. I do not care if I have my home town in the sim, I want a realistic flying experience without getting a real licence because some of us (me! + others) can never fly! The last thing that does not capture the flying enviroment is that things look too cartoonish. I cannot put my finger on it but there is something about the scenery in any sim (except flight unlimited 2 and 3 maybe because they have sattelite images) which is cartoonish. I think it's the colors used. They should be a lot more dirtier (like in the real world) and not so bright happy colors. The airports need to blend in with the surroundings a lot better and the runways/taxiways/aprons need to blend in with the surrounding ground. THe edges of runways and taxiways are too sharp and jagged and the change between colors is too sudden and straight.Oh man, I have so many ideas/dreams and I have some ideas on how to achieve some of the stuff I said.This must be the longest post I have ever made.My point was that the flying enviroment needs to be captured better.Let's all put our ideas together and the clever ones with programming/design experience can maybe do something.I do realize that every sim has some of those "flying enviromet" things but every one has a few different things which is probably why I have multiple sims. All these things can be put together maybe when we have CPU s that are 3 ghz and 1 Gig videdo card!!Take careMike

[LAdamson 240]

>The last thing that does not capture the flying enviroment >is that things look too cartoonish. I cannot put my finger >on it but there is something about the scenery in any sim >(except flight unlimited 2 and 3 maybe because they have >sattelite images) which is cartoonish. Guess I'll have to do this again, but if it makes a lenthly thread, then why not! :)Stock "other sim", high above New York. FUIII cities don't look anymore real at lower altitudes either. But to be fair, I use to get some good looking high altitude shots out of FLY & TerraScene2 also.L.Adamson

[michal 44]

Instead of a contiguous area of 300x300 miles which still is small I would rather have very well done airport sceneries (say 20x20 nm box around airports) but quite a few of them allowing you to make long, short flights between them. If you are flying in-between airports and are above clouds (or even if there is no weather) & pretty high - visual reference to terrain is not necessary specially if you are IFR. This is what professional simulators do and I think this is an adequate way of solving the scenery problem.Michael J.

[LAdamson 240]

My preference is to imitate flight through mountainous areas, where I've either flown or drove. And throw in some deserts in between. It's even fun to set it up as an IFR flight, knowing that dangerous terrain is below. Level ground, or no scenery bores me to near "death". A professional simulator with more emphasis on a full working control panel would easily make up for a lifeless world , but I doubt "nothingness" would keep my interest on a PC.L.Adamson

[Guest]

Hi Larry!Yes the New York area looks excellent but isn't it made using sattelite images or maps? I have to admit that it looks realistic.But, i should have said this in the original post :-shy what I was actualy talking about is the trees and houses that look cartoonish. Don't you agree? I think that they need to be a little bit duller and more variety in color and they need to blend in more. Same with the houses, they look cartoonish. Please don't misunderstand me, I am not falming just observing and trying to figure out how they could be fixed. All the sims have this problem IMO. Yeah, every sim can have nice scenery from high altitudes but I wish there was a way to make the scenery just as sharp at low altitudes.I wish my scenery in FS2002 looked that sharp. A few weeks ago I suddenly got a ad case of blurries and I do not know what I did to get them or how to take them out. Maybe that's why I say that things don't blend in, the ground is blurry! :-(Take careMike

[LAdamson 240]

Most definately, every recent simulation I've used can range from cartoon like, to what looks quite real. Just depends where, what, shading, etc. It's the believable times that catch my interest! BTW--- as to the New York pic, I have no idea of what they actually used. Looks like satellite though. I just happened to be high above it in one particular flight & was quite surprised!L.Adamson