I've come to notice that FSX is going to be more of a game than a simulation, with the missions and all. As for the dynamics, it's hard to produce an accurate model because after all, the best flying is by the seat of your pants.

Consider what has happened  already.

1. X-Plane is a tough competitor against FS in terms of dynamics.

2. The CFS series seems to have ended after the downfall of CFS3.

So with CFS out of the way [if it is out of the way] the developers could finally direct much of their time, effort and resources to fixing any issues with FSX. And the mere fact that they are taking so long to finish it clearly indicates that they are doing the best they can to make the sim live up to its motto "as real as it gets".

For those who have been flying the FS series since the time of the first Apple computers, you obviously have noticed a cycle. For example: In the past and at one point, the series was slowly being given new additions until the series reaches a point where it makes a sudden leap in its progress. I remember FS95 being all pixelated which made it look nasty, but then I saw the smoothed-textures feature and support for helo being added into FS98. Then FS2002 came with it famous autogen. Evey other version in between the sims have been nothing more than updates rather than improvements.

So I get the feeling that FSX is that one point where the sudden "leap" begins. I can imagine this cycle continuing for the next 20 years.

Quote:


Uh, what are yout alking about?
Fly spot view, put the aircraft in a spin and see if it reacts like its real counter-part.

For example.

Maybe FS X will deceive Sim pilots with its inaccurate physics once again (anyone managed to get a phugoid going, for starters?)
But do those people they really care, I doubt it, which I understand 
MS knows that 95% of the buyers are not interested in ultra realism.

I'm just happy we're getting a new simulator.  8)

Quote:


Everybody is a critic.

Tell me. What is it with you and spin outs? You seem to be obsessed with spin out to the point that anything doesn't spin out is considered unrealistic. You want spin outs? Go fly IL-2 and you'll have a blast in trying to get "out" of the spin outs.

But seriously, have you ever seen a 747 spin out in real life and recover from it?

As for me, I don't like spin outs. I can't recover from them in either FS, CFS and I doubt I would get out of it in real life as I suck in getting out of them anyways.

I would guess the majority are indeed getting taken in by the pretty pictures.

The issue is not ultra-sim features, but the fact that there are certain deliberate errors with all releases of these sims.

On the basis that we are now on the tenth sim, and we still don't have engine RPM indicators that work, we still  don't have the sim reference vs CoG in the correct place etc, etc,  it can be fairly assumed these endemic traits are part of some marketing strategy. My guess is 'someone' actually doesn't want us to have a simulator in the proper sense. Presumably because if we had one we would not be so ready to buy another.

I personally don't want another half-sim, half-game.

Billy if you read this old boy, put the CG/FS ref in the correct place, get ALL the gauges working as they should, give me realistic prop physics, otherwise no deal.

Quote:


Well, Nimrod pilots do...

From what we've seen I have a feeling that MS is at least fixing some of the flight model problems.  I cant really say much about them because Ive never had the pleasure of flying a plane, but one thing that has really bugged me about fs in the past is the horrendous heli dynamics.  Since the majority of screenshots and videos feature the bell, I have a feeling that they have been working on it and making it fly like a helicopter