I knew this would happen when MS closed their doors on FS!

WOW That's great news! :ernae: :applause::applause::applause: :ernae:

I just hope they get it right. It would be great if all communities would pull together for at least Release 1.0

I also hope it will not be another XPlane!?! :kilroy::pop4::kilroy:

Ben
 
Hmm, I do hope it is a small and neat program. Since they're starting from scratch I'm sure they can do it.

Their train sim looks like it is well done so fingers crossed in a few years they'll have a worthy piece of software.

That or I'm sure Xplane 10 will be good, I know they're designing a new interface.
 
The big problem with any undertaking like this is shown very clearly by the posts that appear on the thread already:

"Must have people on beaches and in cities!"
"Must have 100% accurate landclass and airports everywhere in the world!"
"Must have combat!"
"Must have the ability to walk around inside the terminal!"
"Must use Google Earth!"

As someone said on there... How many top of the range CPUs and GPUs in five years' time do you want to need to have to run this behemoth? :173go1:

They're a very competent company commercial wise, so will rule the totally unviable options out instantly. I'm just concerned that when the "WANT IT ALL!!!!!! WANT IT NOW!!!!!!" brigade get their claws out when they don't see what they demand being included, anything that does happen will be instantly ridiculed very loudly and repeatedly.
 
I find it quite embarrassing that noone mentions flight dynamics there.
After all that's a flight simulation and there is truely a lot to improve over what we currently have. :kilroy:
Other than that exciting news and I wish them all the best of luck.
 
Already had my post added, requesting accurate high alpha/low airspeed flight dynamics, damage models and thrust vectoring (not just for VTOL applications, but 2D and 3D).

So I would not say that no one has mentioned flight dynamics. But the majority seem fixated on eye candy (improved lighting is all the simulator needs, to the point where one object can cast shadows on another).
 
Sounds very interesting. Personally I want more combat sims lol, but this sure wouldn't hurt to have around either.
 
There were a few people discussing flight dynamics and also, more encouragingly, a few people talking about the difference a good weather engine would bring (that directly affecting flight dynamics).

One of my least favourite people in the hobby did come up with a very good post, discussing making it modular and thus much more expandable and able to evolve. That, in my opinion, would be very helpful. Then of course you have the pro VATSIM and IVAO types insisting that all ATC should be canned and their system used instead, the pro-photo scenery types saying that all the terrain should be photomapped... I think the problem with announcing the development of a sim so openly is that all the specific interest groups get to air their views, while those who just want an improvment on the status quo will always be more reserved and quiet. I'm also a little disappointed by those stating that it should natively support existing models (so they can use their FS9/X payware without further outlay). Make it easy to convert models by developers, certainly, but using Microsoft's proprietary code? Not a good idea.

That said, I do hope they go ahead with it, I do hope it's a success and, if it is developed in a modular format, there's nothing stopping the niche markets (or less niche, such as combat) developing alongside the central core. They've got an opening to do something very good here - I hope it works.
 
IanP said:
The big problem with any undertaking like this is shown very clearly by the posts that appear on the thread already:

"Must have people on beaches and in cities!"
"Must have 100% accurate landclass and airports everywhere in the world!"
"Must have combat!"
"Must have the ability to walk around inside the terminal!"
"Must use Google Earth!"

As someone said on there... How many top of the range CPUs and GPUs in five years' time do you want to need to have to run this behemoth? :173go1:

They're a very competent company commercial wise, so will rule the totally unviable options out instantly. I'm just concerned that when the "WANT IT ALL!!!!!! WANT IT NOW!!!!!!" brigade get their claws out when they don't see what they demand being included, anything that does happen will be instantly ridiculed very loudly and repeatedly.
Click to expand...

Have to agree with you there. If they included all of the stuff that people are suggesting, then it wouldn't be released until about 2020 and it'd probably take up about 500Gb on your hard drive (although that probably won't be very much in 2020!). Regional accents for ATC, realistic photo scenery for the whole world - it all takes a lot of time and effort over something that could easily be created by third party developers.

What's needed is improvements to the basic aspects of the sim - things that are impossible to implement or add to the likes of FS9/FSX. Things like improved flight dynamics (it's still beyond me how you can include an Extra 300 in the default sim, without being able to fly it as intended), cloud shadows, perhaps an improved special effects system (the current method is fairly limited when it comes to things like display smoke, tyre smoke, fire, etc). These are the basic things that should be concentrated on, not making sure that downtown San Diego is modelled and textured to the last detail, or modelling the B727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, 787, A318, A319, etc etc etc, as default aircraft. Things like that can be added later.
 
Would somebody tell Mahijs that being color blind, I cannot read his code for registration. Being color blind effects 20% of the male population. I have a severe case. Could he just put the letters in black and white, unless having color perception is a requirement to register in Aerosoft's forum.
 
I am curious if they will choose any established graphics or dedicated flightsim engine, like Oleg Maddox upcoming SOW engine, as a base for this project or completely start from scratch.
That will be the decisive factor for how quickly we can expect to see anything from this simulator.
 
From what they are saying, they have determined some of the way they will move forward from their other - non "public" - simulation activities. I would still not expect anything from this for a period of time measured in years.

As FS9 - and in particular FSX - have masses of life in them yet, however, I don't see that as a problem.
 
While I definitely wish Aerosoft the best of luck.....

I also think they're going to find themselves with a very daunting task....especially if they intend to represent the entire globe of terrain data AND number of actual airports....

:kilroy:
 
Building it by consortium may get it done thoroughly and somewhat timely, although it may be more expensive than MS flight sims have been. I hope they are able to take all the good attributes from each flight sim out there and put it into one package.
 
It pleases me to see someone else thinking about continuing Flight sim!!! It only pushes the bubble forward to enhance our hobby giving one HOPE for a better flight sim experiecne. Keep pushing the boundries and shoot for the sky!!!


Jim:jump::applause:
 
All we need is a sandbox. A good solid platform to build on. Picture FSX without all the autogen,ATC and eyecandy with a modern graphics engine. The world as is.
Open code both the payware developter and freeware can evolve and develop it.
There is no way everyone can be satisfied and if Aerosoft attempts to even find a middle ground its going to be difficult.
Lets hope they do not try to out do FSX or be the next FSX.
I will still buy 2 copies just to show my support.
 
neat idea but i hate to say it but dont be surprised if they drop it for simulator reasons as M$ did.

it would be nice if they bought up the abilty to make an or continue the work started on FSXI and just finish it.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
 
Though I'm sure I am belittling the work MS put into all FS's this might be a one-time opportunity to create a collaborative, a sort of communal effort between those with MS experience and the legion of non-paid talent out there. I look at FS anything as the basic framework with the countless addons as the icing. I would love to see a product meant for all-not just those with the means for getting the latest, most expensive hardware to achieve the full potential. I'm done now, thank you.

And to have it I am willing to wait and help.
 
Very encouraging!

Aerosoft makes some great stuff and if it's up to their present quality, it should be great.

However, I agree with most here. If they put everything everyone wants it will be years and a massive size. I'm glad they are asking for input from the community and maybe they will cull out the things most important to us.

I like the modular proposal, just a "flat" sim and then you could decide on a third party mesh and ground inhancements.

One thing is for sure, they have MY whole hearted support.

Bob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top