Why the hell can`t u have realistic crashes in FS, like if u hit the ground u dont stop immediately, the plain burst out in flames, and if u crash in a building there should be fire, anytihg else than the boring (the plain stops, game over)

i know there were som issues in regards of 11/9, but hey, it makes the game less fun  

Subtle,

There are a couple of freeware and payware addons that put thuis stuff back in.

I have CrashFX (payware).  If I screw up....... I go down in BIG flames  .

best,

.............john

I prefer not having the big huge fire ball wrecks leveling buildings.

sound familiar, microsoft doesnt want a "T" simulator.

also, planes do not always make fireballs when they crash, even sometimes, they dont catch fire when they hit buildings.

What you remember is exactly why MS suppresed the damage effects in FS 2K2...and probably in FS9 as well.

The whole point is to allow us to enjoy the freedom of virtual flight...not to provide gratification to those who might have baser motives.

Having said that...it might be nice on occasion to see the result of a particularly spectaculr screw up.

Well put

all this time i thought the point was to safely land the plane.  i spent all this time making nice landings for nothing. 

although i agree in some respects about not having huge fireballs etc what i would sure love is to see the gear buckle when hard landing or the ability to at least try a belly landing without it just bouncing from the floor without a scratch...engine fires would be great aswell and maybe certain bits fall off under pressure..tire blow outs and all that.... that would be awesome.. i know its programmed into the model but havent came across many of the above examples yet.

For me, adding back in crash effects is in no way "about" deliberately crashing.  What it does do for me is add some more realistic "consequence" to systems failures and /or a pilot error.  I want to have that message reinforced for myself........ I didn't just "mess up" in a "game"...... were this REAL....... I just likely killed myself and/or others.

The crash effects are really about NOT crashing for me.

Some of the crash effects packages let you set the magnitude of the "crash" as is appropriate to the plane and the circumstances...which is nice.  A c172 can make a little smoke and dust, maybe a small flame, and a small depression in the ground or something..... and a "heavy" full of fuel...... well...... you get the picture.

best,

...................john


PS:  At least onece I have found myself in a "dire" situation and knowing I was really going down.... and doing everthing possible to avoid buildings and trying to desparately "park it" in an open area away from as many "virtual people" as possible.  Actually found myself sweating after the attempt to "survive" and to save "others".  Sometimes this sim is quite immersive.

Quote:


Great point, ruekesj. 

In fact, the same could be said for running a combat flight simulator in the same room with anyone who as been in actual combat or who lost someone in that situation.

best,

.............john

I really don't think someone can get traumatised from a simulator like FS9 or CFS.  

All this blame on games for people murdering others, blame games for stress, blame games for whatever else you think it should be blamed for.  I think the only things games can be blamed for is when you are really get stuck into a game but have to do something and you don't want to leave the game.  

Were we a murder free, stress free society before games.....

Simulator does not equal game.

I made this thread, so I just need to make my point clear, I dont  wish the plain could burst out in flames, just beacuse it is fun to watch, and crash my plain on purpose, but what the heck, when the plain eventually by accident crashes, there should be some flames, or smoke, or atleast the plain should slide on the ground, that would happen in reality wouldn`t it?

It would also add some depth to the game, sweating as hell just to make a good emergency landing.. it could happen with good pilot skillz that u actually managed to save the plane..

No flaming intended Subtle!  I was just giving my point of view.  If you want special effects go for it.

All,

    I don't unserstand this.  Granted, it sounds to me like Subtle is complaining about the "realizm" of his Flight Sim.  I enjoy a good fire ball too.  But not in real life.  That's why I chose a "simulator".  I don't want to spent another 50 bucks to destroy my plane, intentionally or not.  I don't see the need for two separate "games" to accomplish my desires.  I believe strongly in OPTIONS.  I want the ability to have the option of FS9 making a simple thud telling me I made a boo boo. I also want it to go BOOM!  If a thundering ball of flame isn't your thing, fine.  But it seems to me, Subtle is being ridiculed for wanting this "grand simulator of flight" to provide "childish" results.  I've been spending many, many hours learning CAD's and building aircraft. I've spent over $5000 building my Goflight Cockpit.  I have so much more fun taking that brand new aircraft and smashing it into a mountian or, dare I say, a building.  I have great respect for those who died in 9/11 and those who lost someone (myself included).  What I did find disrespectfull was Microsoft coming out with a patch to "remove" the towers.  Did they ever come out with patches for anything else?

So, what am I trying to say?  If Subtle wants explosions, fine, it's a game.  If I want to perform a flawless, by the book taxi and takeoff and then smash into something, fine its a "stimulating simulator".  If someone else wants to take advantage of the most realistic "simulator", fine, I'd considter them a "virtual professional"?

    It's seems to me like people are ganging up on Subtle for his desires, and I don't think anyone shoud be "shut down" for their beliefs.

  I hope I didn't overstep my bounderies or step on any toes.

    This is my opinion and I've spent the last 17yrs of my life keeping "Our" right to have it.

Most sincerely,

Joe

Quote:


Hmmmm

I know where you're coming from John but I still have to disagree with you and I'll try to explain why.

The FS progs are classified as games and if you see them that way OK. Maybe they started out that way but I happen to believe that over the years mainly because of the demands made by the users themselves, they have transcended mere computer gaming to become something of much greater value.

There is an enormous groundswell of users who are or were real flyers and for them the sims are a way of keeping in touch with that part of their lives, especially if for any reason they are unable to continue doing so in real life. I've had dozens and dozens of emails from all over the world about my Kai Tak scenery and I've been amazed how many have come from real life, often retired, pilots. This includes one ex-CX 707 jockey, who told me how the scenery took him right back to what was the best part of his life.

Also the hundreds of thousands of developers who devote, mostly voluntarily, a great part of their lives to creating addons of all kinds to make the sims more real also must see the progs in a particular way.

Now all of this makes M$ approach their flight simulator software development in what I think is a different way to, say, EA with it's Sports games and so on. This is not to say that M$ don't have a gamey approach - they have the Combat Flight Sims - but I for one have no interest in those whatsoever. Clearly the way M$ do those is quite different from the way they have done FS9, FS2002, FS2000 and so on.

Now if as users we change our stance and begin to let M$ think that OK, the flight sims are just games, that's what I think we will eventually get. But as it is, because most users see them as being 'serious' applications, it constantly encourages M$ to strive for new levels of 'true' realism and not just 'trashy' visual effects. A lot of people on the forum complain about ATC and say they switch it off. If they had got their way M$ would never have done it and the 'serious' users would have been the losers. This is just one of many examples of M$ going the extra mile which maybe they other wise might not have.

So there you are. That's why I think we DO have to draw a line. If third party developers want to create 'crash effect add-ons' and some people want to install em, that's fine by me. But I want - nay insist - that M$ continue devoting their programming horsepower to more worthwhile aspects of realism.

Many years ago I was lucky enough to get my hands on the British Caledonian (as it then was) DC10 simulator at Gatwick and shoot the Kai Tak Rwy 13 approach. If I'd crashed it, which I'm glad to say I didn't, I don't think I and the others on the 'flight deck' would have seen a display of smoke and flames, but I don't think our suspension of disbelief in the realism was any the worse for that.

I know, of course, that many forum members will disagree with all of this, especially a lot of the younger ones. But maybe a few others with the mellowness and wisdom of the years under their belts will find it easier to understand my point of view.

Roger

Roller,

Quote:



Maybe my thoughts are getting mixed up a bit here in the complexity of views on the thread.     I certainly do not view the simulator as a game..... although it is also certainly not a "life and death" serious pursuit.  So I am not advocating that the flight sim series (as opposed to the combat sim series) be looked at as a "game".

I also wonder if this thread would have gone the way it has if the "header" topic had been phrased differently  ?


Quote:


Exactly one of my points.  All of those people attempting to add to the realism factor of the sim is a wonderful thing.  One of those realism factors can be more realistic crash effects.  I have never seen a plane that crashed simply sticking out of the runway basically fully intact with a little green "CRASH" banner poping up near it .   They break up.  Parts get bent.  Parts fall off.  Sometimes they burn.   Sometimes they explode.  The one thing they don't do is what Microsoft put into the sim.

......continued below...........

Go into politics John.  I'd vote for you and I'm on a different continent.

I personally chose FS9 because I wanted to get as close to a flying experience as I could since I dont have the time to go out and get a pilots license. being an artist my imagination takes over when I fly in FS9 and I can almost imagine myself being there.

I also have a freeware crash effects program, however I like John, only use it when there is a pilot error, or something goes wrong with the plane and I have little chance of controlling it and it goes down. I will try everything in my power to get my virtual plane on the ground safely.

I dont really consider FS9 a game persay, but a means of living a dream cheaply (though getting more expensive since Im addicted to payware planes lol)

I guess it boils down to when I first installed the crash effects program. I took off with a heavy and watched from the tower view, the plane take off, make a hard bank and go nose first into the ground. It sent chills up my spine, and I havent done that again.

Sure I have crashed a bunch of planes since I started flying the sim, however my virtual piloting skills have gotten a lot better so hopefully I will have a nice clean piloting record

Wow we certainly beat this one to death didn't we?

Anyone feel like a beer?

I'm a Guinness man myself  .

I think its time to put this toppic away in the attic somwhere and let the spiders take care of it.   

Quote:


Roller,

We are 100% in agreement on the "Straw Dogs" type movie.  And on stuff like "Grand Theft Auto"....and so called "shooters" like "Doom" and that whole genre'.

I am sorry if I have offended you in our discussion...... I was merely sharing a slightly differing point of view.  There is in my mind absolutely no need to show bodies and such..... the mere presence of the somewhat "sterile" crash effects that are already included in the add-ons provide all the "realism" that is needed to have one's mind "fill in the blanks". 

I haven't "played" the quite pervasive M$ combat flight sims........ but one hopes that they are leaving more of the actual reality of "war" simulations out than stuff like "Doom".  The body counts, attrocities, and mayhem in simulating war at any kind of realism would make a civillian plane crash seem pretty mild.

Anyway...... sorry again.  End of my posts on this subject.

best,

...................john