• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

OFF TOPIC: New civilian flight sim with VR!

eddie said:
I don't like the idea of having to buy regions to fly in. Sweden $10, not a lot really, but add in all the other regions of the world, and its going to get spendy quick!
Click to expand...

As we do with ORBX.
Nothing new there, and I hope the aftermarket developers are allowed access to this sim.
:encouragement:
 
I bought the original Aerofly FS. Pretty graphics, but it always felt like I was flying a large RC model plane. And the lack of systems and a larger flight environment with which to interact made for a quick loss of interest. Sat on my hard drive unused for a long time.

I fear the same for Dovetail. I like the flight model in Flight School, but the rest of the package leaves much to be desired.

It will be hard for a new developer to put together the rich world we now have through FSX/P3D and the vast array of addons. That tired old engine has given us all she's got, but how much has been wrung out of her is pretty remarkable. Can't think of any other sim that comes close to realizing such a complete world and software ecosystem.
 
I second that..as maligned and disparaged as FSX often is..it is in reality quite remarkable in scope and adaptability.
If we consider all that ACES incorporated into one Flight Sim - there is a ton of depth for the original price.
 
heywooood said:
I second that..as maligned and disparaged as FSX often is..it is in reality quite remarkable in scope and adaptability.
If we consider all that ACES incorporated into one Flight Sim - there is a ton of depth for the original price.
Click to expand...

I'll third that. :)
 
Well, this topic has gone off on a couple of interesting tangents. :)

1) Not buying any game because it's on Steam and Microsoft has a competing store is just silly. I bought this game from Steam, I started the topic, and I work at Microsoft. :) (But I don't speak for them in any way.) Anyone in the industry will agree that Steam is around for the long run. It's an enormous service. MS has a Windows 10 Store and is trying to do some cool stuff, but Steam still works great and still has a bazillion happy users.

2) No, this game is not as full-featured as FSX. Limited weather, no ATC or air traffic, etc. But it's still in development, what it does do is amazing, and it deserves our support as sim fans. The more of us who buy into it and provide feedback, the better it will be able to get over time. And despite what the Internet thinks about everything, it's not a contest. If AFS2 gets popular, it won't harm FSX at all, but it may provide a platform to grow and re-legitimize what is an important hobby for us. In the meantime, I have FSX and a bazillion add-ons, P3D, and AFS2 all installed on the same system and they're getting along great, thanks.

3) Would love to see an AFS2 subforum.
 
Potential is superb. The interview with the developers was very interesting especially the parts about the priority of getting 3rd party devs on board and the game engine being their own.

My take : it should do well. It has the eye candy to bring in the casual, it has the relatively simplistic learning curve to keep them and it has the potential to convert them to become more voracious users of simulators. The potential to increase its offering to the more hardcore users is there ( perhaps a DLC offering :p ). If nothing else it may push the other offerings ( simulators ) to offer more or to "up" certain areas of their games from a medium priority to a higher priority.

More simulators means more simmers, which means more market, which means more interest ( dev and consumer ), which means more content which can only be a good thing ?
 
You have to compare it to something, just for a frame of reference.

No one is saying it's better.

We're just saying that they have managed to do something pretty cool, which is a flight sim that loads in seconds, not minutes, looks unbelievable, from cockpits to atmosphere, even better than P3D, and gives an incredible sense of flight.

It does not have the features that FSX or P3D have, not even close, but then none of us are giving up on our other flight sims. If only FSX ran like AF2 and looked like AF2, we would be in flight sim heaven.
 
Would be interesting to see a comparison of two current, state-of-the-art sims, like P3Dv3 and this new one. FSX is 10 years old, I think it's going to look weak compared to anything current. If this new sim is giving P3Dv3 a run for its money, it is definitely a contender.
 
Well, it's kind of apples and oranges, because P3D has essentially been in development since 1982 (given that it's built on top of the FSX code, which was built off the previous incarnations of MSFS), while this is a new title which hasn't even been released, and is building off a sim that's only a couple of years old. So P3D absolutely blows it away when it comes to feature set, available expansions, and so on.

But in the areas where they do match, AeroflyFS 2 has dramatically faster loading, supports VR without an add-on, has much sharper graphics in VR mode (I can read the instruments without leaning in, like I have to do in P3D/FlyInside and DCS) and at least on my system it has much smoother frame rates despite the extra graphic detail.

I think any serious sim fan would want both. FSX or P3D when you want the whole world, sophisticated add-ons for weather etc, thousands of add-on planes and scenery, etc. AeroflyFS2 for beautiful scenic flying in the supported areas, amazing VR support, aerobatic flying (the Pitts and Extra are crazy fun to fly, particularly with the sense of speed you get), and the other stuff that's there now.

And buying it now (1) helps support the company's efforts to build up the sim's capabilities, and (2) gives you a chance to try it early and help influence its development to hopefully include the stuff you'd like to see down the road.

Back in the 1990s I was the flight sim columnist for Computer Gaming World magazine. And there was enough new stuff that I could write about new sims every month! This year is the first in forever that I've actually seen more than one new sim released (this and the Combat Air Patrol 2 Harrier sim, also in early access, and which just released its first VR test version today).

Rather than insisting on comparing new sims or flexing our rivet counter muscles, we should be overjoyed to see some activity in the market, and doing our best to help make these cool early access sims successful so they can get even better!
 
pilto von pilto, where did you see the interview with the devs?
griphos said:
I bought the original Aerofly FS. Pretty graphics, but it always felt like I was flying a large RC model plane. And the lack of systems and a larger flight environment with which to interact made for a quick loss of interest. Sat on my hard drive unused for a long time.
Click to expand...
Same here. I probably flew that one for maybe three or four hours total. Not a great investment.

This one, though, wow. Been booting it up and flying VFR every chance I get! There's so much more already, and it's still early.
 
So here's a couple observations...now mind you Ive only watched the promotional video and not flown the thing...so don't pounce on me too quickly!

The only comparison is really with P3D335 and the new lighting engine. FSX doesn't have it.

1. "Default" scenery looks photorealistic so that must be why it's not a world model? Much better than stock textures. P3D textures for scenery overall look just as good when using something like payware scenery or BLUESKYSCENRY. Look I ng closely it appears that lighting is what is pushing the illusion of realism. The shadows are deep and contrast is high. P3Dv3 lighting engine is capable of doing this exact thing and looking ultra realtistic.

2. Aircraft. Is dependent on mesh detail and quality of textures. So I've seen better in P3D and FSX. But it's really a matter of opinion.

3. Flight performance (FDE)...I have not idea! I haven't flown it! LOL. But P3D is capable of almost full realism as fare as the external flight engine will take it and CPU power will allow.

4. Terrain mesh. Looks like they are using extremely high res terrain mesh with photorealism textures. Again if you can find that mesh in P3D you can do the same thing.

5. Weather. None at this time... P3D take tour pick at weather textures and scenarios from default to payware.

6. Systems depth ....again no clue! P3D is fully capable of full systems modeling.

7. Weapons (if you're into that) comes with a detailed Hornet! Again I doubt it... P3D has Tacpack by VRS. Or default is capable of moving many weapons systems.

So I'd be hard pressed to leave P3D. DTG 64 bit is likely to be the only real contender in my view however, if LM releases a 64. Bit version I'll likely stick with it because I like how fast and how much they listen to user input for enhancements. I asked for 3 seperate cube maps (high altitude, medium altand low alt) and we got dynamic reflections! I don't know that it was my request or if they had the vision but either way they are in tune with the mind of the simmers!
 
These are flight sims, not girlfriends. You don't have to leave the old one when a new one comes around.
 
That sim looks pretty cool indeed. Not my cup of tea though, because of the lack of features mainly. But yes, I wish P3D looked that good :)
Here is an interesting review/first look from Froogle:
 
Thanks for the Froogle video. Very helpful. I might go ahead and buy this thing. I am curious now.
 
ejoiner said:
Thanks for the Froogle video. Very helpful. I might go ahead and buy this thing. I am curious now.
Click to expand...
From the short video appraisal it looks like it would make a nice addition to my growing list of regular flight sims. DTG is out - Aerofly is in.
Clearly FS2 isn't going to replace FSX P3D anytime soon but it sure looks like it does what it does well enough
and fast enough and prettily enough to own a spot on my HD
 
That Froogle video brings out how beautiful the visuals are, and looks super smooth. And if it handles VR (Rift) well, that's another big win. Does it have robust mulitplayer capability?
 
No you don't have to. You can, that's all.
If you watch the video I posted, you'll notice Froogle is simply using a TrackIR, not a VR headset :)
The video is from end of May this year, though. I think the VR was not supported at that time...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top