[EDITORIAL/RANT] Over the years I’ve watched the slow progression of development advancements relating to flight simulation add-ons. It started with a little extra detail here, then a little more animated movement there, next some added dynamic randomness, then on, and on, and on... So what’s the problem with innovation you ask? Well, nothing in principal. The problem is that I think developers have outgrown the current flight simulation platforms, namely FSX.
Mainstream flight simulation developers have discovered some fantastic methods of circumventing or enhancing basic FSX limitations. The problem however is that FSX is becoming something it was never meant to be, a “super duper” flight simulator. This means it is theoretically possible to fly a highly realistic commercial jetliner into a realistic, dynamic, and animated airport using exact real time weather. Throw in loads of realistic simulated air traffic, hundreds of miles of accurate terrain and landmarks surrounding the airport, even some road and boat traffic to boot. Sounds like paradise does it not? Well, in reality what we have here is a disaster...
We have too many choices for enhancing our flight simulation experience, the problem being that many want to experience all these wonderful additions at the same time. Instead of a fantastic lifelike flight most users will simply experience the all too familiar OOM. Even if the simulator manages to avoid the dreaded crash, smooth fluid performance is almost out of the question in this type of maxed out scenario given the platforms inability to properly utilize current high end hardware.
Now we can’t blame the developers for this as each has done the best job possible within their specific niche. We can’t really blame users as it is reasonable to desire the best available in flight simulation technology. Hard to blame Microsoft as FSX was released long ago before our current high end hardware or advanced operating systems existed. So who can we blame? Nobody really, we’re just sort of up the creek until someone comes out with something better.
Perhaps we should learn to dial down our expectations for the time being, I know I have. This doesn’t mean I avoid the latest FSX releases, it simply means I do not use them all at once. I understand that the combination of a highly detailed airport along with an advanced commercial jetliner likely means I can’t enjoy immersive real time weather along with dense AI traffic and moving vehicles. Sadly, that’s just the way it is.
So, like most of you here, I patiently wait for the next big thing…..
11 comments:
I disagree, with that analysis. I think theirs still a lot of room to move forward with aircraft and airports. I will grant you that some of the more advanced Dev's seem to push the limits such as PMDG. But also they keep updating their SDK platform which helps a lot also with VRS. Theirs of course the new platform out Prepard3D, which basically is FSX sp3 at the moment in my mind. I'll gladly call it' it's own platform if they can ever incorporate a new engine for x64 platforms. The issue at the moment seems no big Dev name will touch it with their aircraft. As far as I know PMDG and Vrs,LvlD which could simply revise some modules and installers could enter this market but seem no one wants to touch it. I would suggest it must have something to do with all companies involved Eulas which state not for professional use. But this would make for a very good topic which I would assume would win hands down your challenge to win the $30.00 dollar gift at end month.
Hin, Hint
And I thing Microsoft missed big time with Flight! Should have made a big upgrade for FSX with big performace tweeks..
I think it is a very bad moment for simulation. There are wonderfull addons but they all are made for an obsolete platform, and mostly people invest money on paying addons which we don't see a clear future.
And what about new platforms? P3D? PMDG disagrees, ORBX agrees. Xplane? Carenado agrees, ORBX doesn't. DCS? it is growing veeeery slowly.
It is incredible that nobody is seeing the future of a new flight simulation ambicios platform. If Iracing is growing and MMO too, why not a serios new software on flight simulation?
I disagree with PMDG, who says that the leaving of Microsoft has been a good thing, I would very, very pleased with a FSX 2013 or something like that. I see how MS products are growing in the good way (Office, Skydrive, Outlook...) but FSX is something so old.
So many addons can't survive in a such old platform, we hope any platform to be as good or better than addons...
Absolutely! I can only hope P3D V2 or a global extension of AeroFly as we've seen a couple of days ago will live up to expectations and allow for future development and improve/add features already standard on FSX/P3D V1.
Good "rant". I'm getting the "add-on fatigue" atm. Too many add-ons, too much tinkering, too taxiing on my PC too much money spent etc. What the flightsim world needs is a brand-new platform made for the hardware of today AND for the hardware of tomorrow with decent features BUILT IN from the get-go. That's not going to happen though, we have P3D which although is a step up from FSX is still legacy! and we have X-Plane. I've been trying out the X-Plane demo a little more thoroughly the last few days then when first downloaded it a couple of weeks ago and it's growing on me. Especially the fact that it doesn't give me inconsistent performance nor does it have that "on-rails" feeling I sometimes get from FSX. It feels much more "organic" and I like it even if some things seem a little exaggerated and there is some grade A freeware for it. Still, my FSX installation isn't going away anytime soon but I feel the long-term future for my simming needs right now is X-Plane.
I'd like the fs community get organised and get behind crowd funding a project like project cars. Let's start a project flight. The SIM driving community raised a few million dollars and still going. Surely be able to hire a development team for that?!?!?
Let's not forget the a significant amount of "fiddling" comes from outside the flight simulator or its addons. If you think about it, building proper hardware and configuring the OS/drivers/hard drives has become a lot more complex with so many options to choose from. An entry level PC user would hardly be able to set up everything correctly. I work in the IT, and have a good understanding of that side of the things. Still, it took me almost 5 years of tweaking to get the "PERFECT" simulation experience with multiple external addons, running 30FPS constantly. Only 25% of tweaking was FS related... My 2 cents anyways...
I don't know... but the addons are fine to me! I don't know what I did to my CFG file, but somehow I have no performance problems and it runs fine. I think there is just one thing that make FSX so bad, but I did not found it yet, although I dont have that problem anymore.
Me, as a videomaker, would love to have P3D... but for a lower price and for x64!
Addons are easy to recreate for P3D since it is almost the same engine as FSX with some improvements. And as a videomaker... I would love to have an EZDOK for P3D too then. Hehehe!
FSX is good enough. With all the addons coming up. Like the T7, 737 classic, A330 (aerosoft and BBS). I just can't wait to get those!
To be honest, I believe that still comes from the sim. I mean, FSX/P3D code is still legacy, and not that well-written or efficient to begin with. If you had a new code, fresh sim, it's my belief that performance issues would not be a worry, regardless of your addons as long as you have the proper hardware, much like most other modern games.
What is needed is someone to buy out the codes, and or rewrite it so it works with the computer systems of NOW. As far as add on scenery goes-I think what should be done it to concentrate on the BASICS of an airport, we do not need detailed internals, and a lot of little features should be dumped in favor of smoother operation, also it would be nice it whoever makes an airport add on, also detail the surrounding area out to a distance of 20 miles of so. I would far rather fly into an airport area with visuals and a nice looking airport.
A nice topic for duscussion, but I mostly disagree with it so far :)
Not because of being a developer, but because of the following.
For a simulator, which has to process thousands of information spaced along huge distances every second, an efficient rendering engine can only be on the conservative side (i.e. low far detail, limited or-no real time shadowing, limited light/weather effects etc..etc..)
Even if a new simulator platform was to be released today, don't expect to see Call of Duty graphics. All those games/rendering engines are based on a totally different philosophy, and they are made to function based on a totally different logic.
Even if so, FSX has a rendering engine that is somewhat outdated. This means that add-on quality relies almost exclusively upon to the developer/artist who must produce new methods to provide all the realism that is missing from an outdated rendering engine.
As new techniques are being developed every second, I see huge improvements as well as room for even more, in the general quality of add-on products every year.
Simple enough to prove, you can compare the quality of FT_Athens or FT_Dubai to the quality of scenery add-ons
1-2 years ago.
As a simple note on performance, again, I say that it depends on the developer and the amount of time he/she/they are willing to spend
on it.
Microsoft has provided tons of information for developers on how to fine-tune and adjust your models/scenery to gain performance, but unfortunately very few have thoroughly looked into it.
Post a Comment
Comments are now deactivated. Please visit our new website: AirDailyX.net
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.