Can FS10 catch up with add on developers?

[dallas]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Add on developers are coming up with some very cool stuff lately...
VATSIM - FSNavigator - RealityXP GPS - FSGenesis mesh - Ultimate Terrain
USA - NuRoads 2.0 - Flight1 Flight Environment & Active Sky 5 - Birds Eye
View replacement ground textures.



And MS can't touch any of the great add on aircraft like the Bonanza,
Spitfire, PMDG 737, Decathlon, King Air, etc.



MS is going to have to pull a rabbit out of its hat to beat all this stuff.
Is there a chance the product they come up with could just be completely
unimpressive compared to all the add ons?





Dallas

 

[william]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:kE_Ge.6652$0C.1939@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Add on developers are coming up with some very cool stuff lately...
> VATSIM - FSNavigator - RealityXP GPS - FSGenesis mesh - Ultimate Terrain
> USA - NuRoads 2.0 - Flight1 Flight Environment & Active Sky 5 - Birds Eye
> View replacement ground textures.
>
>
>
> And MS can't touch any of the great add on aircraft like the Bonanza,
> Spitfire, PMDG 737, Decathlon, King Air, etc.
>
>
>
> MS is going to have to pull a rabbit out of its hat to beat all this
> stuff.
> Is there a chance the product they come up with could just be completely
> unimpressive compared to all the add ons?
>
>
>
>
>
> Dallas
>
>
No basis for this opinion but to play devils advocate. MS has the resources
and could do the same if not better job than all those mentioned above. But
if they did, the continued MS bashing about monopoly etc., would escalate.
I think MS provides the basic foundation which then allows 3rd party
devlopers to do the rest. This tactic provides and creates wealth throughout
the market place. The release of SDKs from MS support this.

Just a theory of course but worth considering.
Bill

 

[user]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

I think also is to get MSFS to run on as many machines as possible "out of
the box". I'm sure MS could do a MEGA-sim but I would think MS would want
the specs to be as low as possible to run on say a 1GHz machine (just a
figure) with 32MB video card and 256MB RAM (figures again).

I'm not sure the ratio between regular users of the program (FS9) and
power-users like most people in this newsgroup that have addons and
up-to-date computers. It's market share I believe they strive for, and why
not.

2992

 

[crash]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

2992 wrote:
> I think also is to get MSFS to run on as many machines as possible
> "out of the box". I'm sure MS could do a MEGA-sim but I would think
> MS would want the specs to be as low as possible to run on say a 1GHz
> machine (just a figure) with 32MB video card and 256MB RAM (figures
> again).
> I'm not sure the ratio between regular users of the program (FS9) and
> power-users like most people in this newsgroup that have addons and
> up-to-date computers. It's market share I believe they strive for,
> and why not.
>
> 2992

 

[crash]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Dallas wrote:
> Add on developers are coming up with some very cool stuff lately...
> VATSIM - FSNavigator - RealityXP GPS - FSGenesis mesh - Ultimate
> Terrain USA - NuRoads 2.0 - Flight1 Flight Environment & Active Sky 5
> - Birds Eye View replacement ground textures.
>
>
>
> And MS can't touch any of the great add on aircraft like the Bonanza,
> Spitfire, PMDG 737, Decathlon, King Air, etc.
>
>
>
> MS is going to have to pull a rabbit out of its hat to beat all this
> stuff. Is there a chance the product they come up with could just be
> completely unimpressive compared to all the add ons?

Scussa empty reply left for 2992 - meant to cancel out to reply to Varmit
direct.... oops

I've been having the same thoughts lately, usually when getting the c/c
statement, and M/S will have to indeed work some MAGIC before I even
consider flushing hundreds of bucks into the bit bucket if nothing more than
superficial cosmetic changes are made to FS2004 and sold as FS2006 (with
most [all?]old addons incompatible aka FS2002)!! Just like I skipped FS2000
(whew!).......
Personally some things wouldn't make a difference anyway, since I don't use
ATC, or fly heavies, and am perfectly happy with a couple of decently
modeled aircraft quilling about in some believable weather. The ONLY thing
that would sell me is, well, pretty much what FS2004 has/is evolving into!!
Maybe half the world @ near photo "quality" scenery without the blurries @
LOD 13 (or even 12) would be nice, but doubt if it's gonna happen anytime
soon Then I'd be first in line to spend another several hundred bucks for a
6 to10 DVD set in one complete integrated package for the
scenery/weather/airport aspect, since everyone has to use the same
airspace - about the only extra extravagance you'd have to bother with is
the ultra detailed addon airplane(s) of your choice (ok, and maybe some AI
stuff, etc.)!! Since anything of any significance is in a constant state of
metamorphosing, it'd be nice to have one source to worry about updates,
patches, etc... Although that opens Pandora's box concerning monopolies,
lack of inovation, ad naueseam, it'd be NICE!
Since I'm not planning any major hardware upgrades until 2007 anyway, it's
all academic and will just wait for M/S's show & tell with bait breath -
hell, by the time they roll out something REALLY jaw dropping, it'll no
doubt need, nah, demand, a new box & Vista OS .......
And three wide aspect flat screens, and...........................

VR?? Maybe, but I'm not convinced the quality/cost/novelty aspect has been
overcome yet.. After boB has us all down for a keg and cookout to try his,
I may change my mind............ d:->))

Cheers'n Beers.. [_])
Don

 

[crash]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

As long as we're wishing out loud, I forgot to mention they also need to
make it a tiered system, a little like 2002 had their Pro version, only a
MUCH more dramatic difference, also reflected in the price, naturally. Have
the basic, or starter, DVD/CD's, go for about what's it's usually been
introduced at, around the $50 range, and and that'd cover the casual gamer,
baby sitter, type buyers, which would offer a glorified FS-9 since the
finite details are pretty much wasted after a certain point - THEN for the
power user, have a DVD six pack, priced appropriately for content; or even
diviide the world into quadrants, and have 2-3 DVD's for each, available
seperately. Lots of us rarely venture out of our corner of the world
anyway, so that'd help make it a little more budget friendly with the option
@ ~ $50 each (we're talking ULTRA good stuff here), and if you want to go
wild [raise own hand] you'd pop for the entire set (for a 25% discount of
course)......

 

[crash]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Marcel Kuijper wrote:
>
> Why can't grass look like grass and water look like water?

Oh grow up and stop whimpering Studmuffin! The grass is usually a brownish
green, and the water is, uh, greenish brown. Now in Arkansas with the hot,
dry summer we've had, that pretty well describes the lawns and ponds!! As
real as it gets!! Except in the tropics, then the water looks like someone
left the night lights on in the pool........

> A themepark with moving rides here and there would be nice

Have you been to San Diego, Coney Island, or (and it's damn near ON the
airport) Silverwood, Idaho lately?? Moving rides everywhere..

> Or maybe they already have....what do we know, right?

No comment......... d:->))

 

[dallas]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"CRaSH"
> THEN for the
> power user, have a DVD six pack, priced appropriately for content;

CRaSH shows great promise as a Microsoft marketing wizard.



Dallas

 

[bryan]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"2992" <nope@no_one.com> wrote in message
news:az2He.8358$Zt.696@okepread05...
>
> I think also is to get MSFS to run on as many machines as possible "out of
> the box". I'm sure MS could do a MEGA-sim but I would think MS would want
> the specs to be as low as possible to run on say a 1GHz machine (just a
> figure) with 32MB video card and 256MB RAM (figures again).
>
> I'm not sure the ratio between regular users of the program (FS9) and
> power-users like most people in this newsgroup that have addons and
> up-to-date computers. It's market share I believe they strive for, and why
> not.
>
> 2992

Actually I think they might go the other way and require a fairly high end
system. I just bought Battlefield 2 and it won't run on a Ti4200 card at all
(something to do with 1.4 shaders or the like) so it wouldnt surprise me if
you will need something over 2.5Ghz and a top notch vid card just to get the
next flightsim to run. Of course,the "required system "specs on the box will
say you can run it on a 600Mhz crud box with no vid card lol


Bryan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Goes without saying, I suppose, that the six pack would be held together by
duct tape?

JW
"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:7KbHe.7692$Uk3.962@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "CRaSH"
>> THEN for the
>> power user, have a DVD six pack, priced appropriately for content;
>
> CRaSH shows great promise as a Microsoft marketing wizard.
>
>
>
> Dallas
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:kE_Ge.6652$0C.1939@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...

> MS is going to have to pull a rabbit out of its hat to beat all this
> stuff.
> Is there a chance the product they come up with could just be completely
> unimpressive compared to all the add ons?

Quite possibly. In any case, having just had to spend money upgrading my PC
and consequently re-loading all my stuff (especially FS and add-ons!) I
don't think I'll be buying FS10 unless three conditions are met:-

1. All current add-ons that I have will be usable.

2. It does not require a better machine than I now have for equivalent
performance (yeah, unlikely I know).

3. It is a major leap foward in all areas (also unlikely but if it was then
1 & 2 would probably not apply).

I have a feeling I've loaded the dice against MS here! :0))

Iain

 

[dallas]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"iainsmith.rugby"
> don't think I'll be buying FS10 unless three conditions are met:-

I brought this up because this is the first time in Flight Simulator's
history that they have been faced with add-on developers that have become so
powerful and pervasive in every aspect of the sim.

I would hate to be the FS10 project manager this time around with the task
of putting out a "wow" program.

Dallas

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:5EwHe.7122$0C.357@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "iainsmith.rugby"
>> don't think I'll be buying FS10 unless three conditions are met:-
>
> I brought this up because this is the first time in Flight Simulator's
> history that they have been faced with add-on developers that have become
> so
> powerful and pervasive in every aspect of the sim.
>
> I would hate to be the FS10 project manager this time around with the task
> of putting out a "wow" program.
>
> Dallas
>
>

Not so hard. Just give us a flight planner than handles alternate airports
as well as SID (DP)s and STARS. Give us an ATC that can handle ALL real
world type situations, including missed approach /going to alternate,
emergencies, SID/DP and STAR flight plans. The ability to talk to enroute
radio, to include flight plan filing and changing. Weather depiction
(clouds) that are truly thick--can't see through them. 100% Accurate
airports. AI traffic control that is realistic.

Oh yeah, lets get some realistic flight models, like the addon developers
provide. If they can do it, MS should be able to also. Leave in some simple
models for the gamer crowd, give those of us who want to fly realistically
some really complex aircraft--like the Beech King Air 200 that is now
available. Maybe a real good, complex Dash8, like a certain addon I can
think of (but do not remember the name--sorry).

I think you get my drift.

Did I leave out anything? Don't think so. We have enough eye candy for now,
let's concentrate on the flying aspects of this software.

My 2 cents worth.

Paul

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Paul Riley" <Falcon63624@yahoo.com> wrote in message
newsLCdnZy7bLtTdXLfRVn-3g@sirinet.net...
> "Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
> news:5EwHe.7122$0C.357@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>
>> "iainsmith.rugby"
>>> don't think I'll be buying FS10 unless three conditions are met:-
>>
>> I brought this up because this is the first time in Flight Simulator's
>> history that they have been faced with add-on developers that have become
>> so
>> powerful and pervasive in every aspect of the sim.
>>
>> I would hate to be the FS10 project manager this time around with the
>> task
>> of putting out a "wow" program.
>>
>> Dallas
>>
>>
>
> Not so hard. Just give us a flight planner than handles alternate airports
> as well as SID (DP)s and STARS. Give us an ATC that can handle ALL real
> world type situations, including missed approach /going to alternate,
> emergencies, SID/DP and STAR flight plans. The ability to talk to enroute
> radio, to include flight plan filing and changing. Weather depiction
> (clouds) that are truly thick--can't see through them. 100% Accurate
> airports. AI traffic control that is realistic.
>
> Oh yeah, lets get some realistic flight models, like the addon developers
> provide. If they can do it, MS should be able to also. Leave in some
> simple models for the gamer crowd, give those of us who want to fly
> realistically some really complex aircraft--like the Beech King Air 200
> that is now available. Maybe a real good, complex Dash8, like a certain
> addon I can think of (but do not remember the name--sorry).
>
> I think you get my drift.
>
> Did I leave out anything? Don't think so. We have enough eye candy for
> now, let's concentrate on the flying aspects of this software.
>
> My 2 cents worth.
>
> Paul
>

OK, an edit, stuff I left out. Senior Moment, sorry.

With all of the complexity I mentioned, go back to two different versions.
The basic ones for those who want things simple. Have a PRO version with all
the stuff I mentioned added for those who really want to emulate real
flight. I would personally pay a premium for a version that had ALL those
capabilities I mentioned. Well worth it.



Paul

 

[dallas]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Paul Riley"
>Have a PRO version with all
> the stuff I mentioned added for those who really want to emulate real
> flight. I would personally pay a premium for a version that had ALL those
> capabilities I mentioned. Well worth it.

Jeez... don't encourage them to raise the price. I was pleased when they
cut out the "Pro" foolishness... it wasn't pro... just a couple of aircraft
that were not too important. I didn't get the "Pro" for FS2000 and had to
suffer all the freeware panels that required some of the Pro gauges.

Everything you mentioned, ditto. But add to that list: High resolution
coastlines/lakes for the whole world. I hate it when the shorelines don't
look exactly like the charts.

Dallas

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:OqSHe.8486$Uk3.7496@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "Paul Riley"
>>Have a PRO version with all
>> the stuff I mentioned added for those who really want to emulate real
>> flight. I would personally pay a premium for a version that had ALL those
>> capabilities I mentioned. Well worth it.
>
> Jeez... don't encourage them to raise the price. I was pleased when they
> cut out the "Pro" foolishness... it wasn't pro... just a couple of
> aircraft
> that were not too important. I didn't get the "Pro" for FS2000 and had to
> suffer all the freeware panels that required some of the Pro gauges.
>
> Everything you mentioned, ditto. But add to that list: High resolution
> coastlines/lakes for the whole world. I hate it when the shorelines don't
> look exactly like the charts.
>
> Dallas
>
Hey Varmit, )

I agree, previous PRO versions were not!! I am talking here about a version
that is head and shoulders above the basic. Something the gamer crowd would
not want to even bother with.

BUT, a version the simulator crowd (spelled HARD CORE SIMMER) would love to
have. One that allows a desktop PC to emulate (simulate?) real flight.
Personally, I am not a VFR sim pilot. I want to file an IFR flight plan,
using real weather (even if it is CAVU) and experience the same thing that I
would if I did this in real life.

For those who prefer VFR flight, I would want a simulator (PRO version) that
emulates EXACTLY what they might expect in that environment. I mean
EVERYTHING!!!

AND, I don't mind paying for that degree of realism.

Oh, yeah, one more thing I would like, failed to mention it.

Give us an editable database of airfield facilities (runway numbers, taxiway
designations, added runways) and navaids that can be updated as the real
world changes. AND, have ATC recognize the updates we make. Yes, I use
current (or mostly current) charts and pubs. I want to match the FS world to
those.

I know, I don't want much, just everything!!!!! ))

Paul