Explosive scenery

[bjpilot]

I know I'm going to catch flak from this, but I think MS should make the trees and buildings (autogen and fixed) destructable. If your plane hits a building, the building should set on fire and eventually either explode or collapse, using model switching or something of that nature. And, this should be able to be seen over multi-player. Think about it, a plane crashed on VATSIM. The virtual Coast Guard or Virtual CAP goes in, see's a smoke trail in the distance, and finds a huge crater in the woods. The crashe even started a forset fire, and the virtual water bombers squadron comes in and dumps water, putting out the flames. These kind of things would add adventure/mission type scenerios, without the need to go to a linear level-based type of game. I think this would be a great addition, especially with the more interactive worlds we now have (Cars, deer, etc). This doesn't seem too har to do, I'm no expert, but maybe a couple of damage models for the autogen buildings, some fire and smoke effects, and some kind of xml program to allow fires to spread and be put out by water bombers. What do you guys think?

[khaliah]

I get pretty frustrated when I get a CRASH when the tip of my wing hit the tip of a tree branch bush flying.

[n4gix]

I'm going to pretend I didn't read this... ;)

FS Crash Simulator? I think not.

[bjpilot]

It doesn't have to be "fs crash simulator" to have realistic crashes. In that case, why are the buildings on LOMAC explosive? Even the "autogen" houses that you never blow up. I think we need a more dynamic and realistic enviornment, and that means buildings that get damaged when you hit them. Note- I'm not asking for the bloody body parts flying all over, just airplanes that are a bit more breakable and buildings that are breakable at all. Why does everyone seem so dead set against this? What do you want, planes to bounce happily off everything they hit and keep flying?

[n4gix]

First of all, LOMAC is a "combat aircraft simulator," so it's not surprising to see missles, bombs, bullets and destruction.

The major raison d'etre for the Flight Simulator franchise is to provide "entertainment."

If you honestly consider "crashing" as a form of "entertainment," then I'd prefer not to speculate on the underlying psychological pathology... ;)

[JSkorna]

There has been enough discussion about this entire issue and the answer is always the same: no, no way, not going to happen. Same as with guns and bombs.

Hope this helps,
Jim
http://www.hifisim.com

http://sales.hifisim.com/pub-downloa...evelopment.jpg http://sales.hifisim.com/pub-downloa...nner-proud.jpg [hr][link:www.jdtllc.com|http://www.jdtllc.com/images/rcv4bannersupporter.jpg]

[kingnorris]

IMHO, no need for it in FS. Why? Because FS is more of a simulation, and less of an arcade-style game.

[bjpilot]

"missles, bombs, bullets"

Where did I mention any of those things? If we don'e want to see any destructiveness, then I guess we shouldn't have things like blown tires on the runwayu either, just a big "crash" banner.

First of all, people do find crashes entertaining. Ask 80% of americans why they watch Nascar, or why the TV show Maximum Exposure is so popular.

Second of all, I am not saying we do this so that people can gleefully crash into things. I am saying that when they do, it gives a lot of the already existing organizations (who presently have to make custom scenery to do this) the oppurtunity to do what their real counterpart does. Fire bombers, SAR aircraft, etc don't belong on a combat sim like LOMAC. Also, it adds a bit of entertainment on games like lomac, even on non-combat, practice formation flight missions when you see a smoking hole next to the runway and laugh because someone bought it. It's a freaking game, no one really died, and I honestly can't believe how you guys act like it is so offensive to have a plane crash set surrounding scenery on fire. Civilian planes burn just like military ones, and there are thousands of people who download SAR sceneries of burning airplanes in random spots now (just do a file search for "SAR"). Hell, X-plane has forest fires in it, you don't see people complaining abuot the "brutal violence to the poor animals in the foruest" on that. Sheesh, you guys seriousnly need to lighten up and be a bit more open minded.

Conclusion:

I am NOT asking for guns, missiles, nuclear weapons, light sabers, clusterbombs, or anything of that nature.

All I want to see is planes that create a better effect on the terrain when they crash, and also that don't just disappear after a crash. The person who crashed can reset on the runway and keep flying, but his wreck should stay there to allow SAR missions, etc.

Everything that I want is already available as downloads, as sceneries, crash effect enhancements, etc. I guess all those people who develophed, and downloaded those files are sick in the mind, huh? I am asking for these types of things to be integrated in the next sim, which I honestly don't think is an unreasonable request. Squawkbox is avaiable as a download, but people want to see that integrated. Etc, etc, etc. Open your minds a little bit people, geeze!

I am interested to see one of the developers opinion on this matter.

[khaliah]

Your wasting your time explaining. Just put your idea out and hopefully Microsoft pick it for a future version. Always remember this when posting, some people here would be perfectly happy if Microsoft re-released fs3 as the new fsx. The fear of new technology.

[kingnorris]

I understand where you're coming from now,bjpilot. I've stated before that it would be nice to have random failures like landing gear tire blow-outs, engine failures,etc. Also, now that I think about it, Flight Unlimited III had some nice crash effects in it,but that didn't make me want to deliberately crash all the time. But, Microsoft itself may not want these fiery effects in the sim,just because they may feel it's not a good part to include. As stated by Khalia,maybe someday MS will include it for a future version