Jump to content

Next for the Crown?


andyjohnston

Recommended Posts

Just wondering about your thoughts.

 

Is there another existing or upcoming sim that might be the inheritor to the MS crown?

 

X-Plane seems hard to use, P3D is FSX (which is almost 15 years old) with some enhancements. Flight had potential which it never came close to, and FSW did as well. NextGenFS never got "off the ground," (sorry about the pun.)

Spent way too much time using these sims...

FS 5.1, FS-98, FS-2000, FS-2002, FS-2004, FSX, Flight, FSW, P3Dv3, P3Dv4, MSFS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That being said, I just found out about this, seems like a Flight Sim for Dummies, but it's at Microsoft's site...

 

 

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/p/airplane-flight-sim-2019/9n27zgzzdjvt?activetab=pivot:overviewtab#

Spent way too much time using these sims...

FS 5.1, FS-98, FS-2000, FS-2002, FS-2004, FSX, Flight, FSW, P3Dv3, P3Dv4, MSFS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

X-Plane seems hard to use

 

I started using X-Plane late last summer and found it more ‘different to use’ than ‘hard to use.’ I treated XP11 like learning another facet of aviation - like the unusual or “hidden in plain sight” markings on a sectional or how to fly a new kind of instrument approach. Not an XP master at all, but I now find it very usable and enjoyable. Might be the same for you.

 

I don’t have much of an answer to your question since I was out of FS altogether for 12 years, but it would seem that optimization would really help a sim appeal to a broad base of users to build that kind of market share.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the results of a FlightSim community survery conducted last year: http://blog.navigraph.com/post/181243982766/flightsim-community-survey-2018-results

 

Looks like most folks are using P3D v4, XP11 and FSX these days.

 

LM is doing a great job with P3D. Yes, I agree that at its heart, it's still FSX. Nevertheless, it's an FSX that is relatively more stable and better optimized for contemporary computer hardware and software. And of course, it's 64-bit. Actively being developed and supported by an industry giant called LM. Plenty of add-ons and plenty more on their way. However, most people still say that aircraft and the environment still feel like they did in FSX. Out of the box realism, relatively speaking, is something that can be improved IMO.

 

LR is doing a great job with XP. They leveraged on the demise of the MSFS franchise and upped the ante to win over a large portion of the market share. Fairly stable, 64-bit and fairly optimized for modern hardware and software too. It's cross platform which is a major plus point. It's being developed by LR who are backed by some pretty big and powerful industry giants as commercial users of the platform. XP is being developed actively by LR. They're quite engaging with the community and are known to directly work with add on developers too. Now, there's a plethora of add-ons for XP too. Not as much as P3D/FSX. But still a lot. Plenty more on their way too. Different flight model. It has it's merits and de-merits. It feels more realistic and a well developed add on aircraft can be a lot more realistic FDE-wise in XP. I personally like the feel of it more. And I feel a little bit more realism, or at least a clear strive towards it, comes out of the box in XP. I heard there are big updates on the way like a new rendering API called Vulkan. XP feels better probably due to these differences. For me, at least.

 

I began my 'flight sim career' with an early MSFS title. Jumped ship to XP more than a year ago. Had enough of FSX. Thought about P3D but decided a change would be good for me. Sometimes I felt I made a bad move but I realized I needed to give myself more time to get used to it. I've gotten used to it and don't want to go back to the MSFS-based sims. With well over 10 years of simming experience, I still feel some sort of 'attachment' to the MSFS sims. I get those kind of thoughts once in a while. Often think about a world where MS didn't give up on FS. Regardless, the show must go on. And I've chosen XP to keep the show running. LM's P3D doesn't appeal to me as much as MS's sims did. Doesn't feel so 'welcoming' and 'cheerful' as vanilla FSX did. P3D doesn't feel like the people's flight sim. At one point even XP didn't. But it's changed and it's now more welcoming to newcomers to the flight simulation world.

 

As for who gets the crown that MS once had.. well it depends on what transpires in the next few years. Right now, there's a battle going between P3D and XP. I feel that if both cos. remain floating, they're gonna become the Pepsi and Coca-Cola of the FlightSim world. It's all probably gonna boil down to a matter of taste. There's a a new kid on the block called Aerofly FS. Looks promising and add on developers are showing positive interest. Will be interesting to see how it works out.

 

Seen the shutters come down on FSX. Seen a couple of FSX-based sims rise and fall quick. Seen a co. hoping to make the next great sim not even rising for a start. However, we still have sims that are being developed by their creators and being supported by an active add-on developer community. Whatever is going to transpire in the future, will be for the better. I believe so... This is all just my personal opinion and musing of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going off those screenshots, I'm not keen to be honest, I still use FS9 sometimes, I use FSX mostly, I also have X-plane11 with upgrades, I like the graphics in XP compared to FSX, I find XP harder to learn and not as flexible as FS.

When I first got XP I thought I would get in to it and sack FSX, but after a short time I came back to FSX to a sim I mostly understand and can tweak fairly easily.

 

No matter what flight sim comes next there will always be a learning curve, and t my age that curve gets harder lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not foresee another flight sim of the caliber of MSFS; FSX had roughly twenty years of development behind it, and the resources of Micro$oft. I suspect they pulled the plug because it was no longer profitable.

 

Compared to fighting games, arcade games, rpgs, etc., flight sims have a miniscule market of demanding fans, and long development times; not conducive to profit margins. In the time it would take a development team to create a new flight sim they could create a dozen mass market games, any of which would sell more copies than that sim.

 

Add to that changing tastes in gamers, who today seem mostly interested in the absolute best graphics available, even if it means cutting corners everywhere else, and who balk at any sort of "learning curve". The trend seems to be, rather than actually playing a game/sim, to make a video of everything you do to post to youtube.

 

And the term "sim" has become so diluted the past decade that many expect just another game. Where once it designated a realistic depiction, within the capabilities of a home PC, of some real world event - driving, flying, operating a submarine, playing golf, etc. - today it merely denotes a program that lets you do something done in real life, accuracy and realism seemingly irrelevant. (Just spend a few hours with the likes of "Euro Truck Sim" or "Farming Simulator" ...the latter does not even depict seasons.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That being said, I just found out about this, seems like a Flight Sim for Dummies, but it's at Microsoft's site...

 

 

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/p/airplane-flight-sim-2019/9n27zgzzdjvt?activetab=pivot:overviewtab#

 

 

Looks like hell. See that runway and airport?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a small game app from the Windows store, obviously not for us.

 

Yeah, that was my initial thought. Some basic "Sim" game. I would just call it a game and not a Sim. The cockpit looks like crap and I really don't think there's an FMC let alone a working HSI or even an ADI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not foresee another flight sim of the caliber of MSFS; FSX had roughly twenty years of development behind it, and the resources of Micro$oft. I suspect they pulled the plug because it was no longer profitable.

 

Compared to fighting games, arcade games, rpgs, etc., flight sims have a miniscule market of demanding fans, and long development times; not conducive to profit margins. In the time it would take a development team to create a new flight sim they could create a dozen mass market games, any of which would sell more copies than that sim.

 

Add to that changing tastes in gamers, who today seem mostly interested in the absolute best graphics available, even if it means cutting corners everywhere else, and who balk at any sort of "learning curve". The trend seems to be, rather than actually playing a game/sim, to make a video of everything you do to post to youtube.

 

And the term "sim" has become so diluted the past decade that many expect just another game. Where once it designated a realistic depiction, within the capabilities of a home PC, of some real world event - driving, flying, operating a submarine, playing golf, etc. - today it merely denotes a program that lets you do something done in real life, accuracy and realism seemingly irrelevant. (Just spend a few hours with the likes of "Euro Truck Sim" or "Farming Simulator" ...the latter does not even depict seasons.)

 

Yeah, agree with all the above. FS9 likely till the day I'm on the wrong side of the planet.

Same with many other sims like racing. Real progression has just stopped and now features are removed from days past.

I know you are also a racing fan jgf. GTR2 is as new as I get.

Mark Daniels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are some interesting flight sims actively being developed, eg AFS2, FlyInside, DeadStick. They all represent different approaches and limited in various ways at this point. Maybe one or more of them will start to gain an audience and grow into competitors of the top-tier sims, but for now they are small development shops and progress is slow. It's a difficult road though and the reward is not great, unless they can find a cash-rich customer to support the high development and licensing costs. P3D is basically being subsidized by government military spending. X-Plane has professional training customers. MSFS lived as long as it did mostly due to the benevolence of Bill Gates. Some of these newer sims can't make very much money on gamer sales alone, so they have to find a cash cow or remain small and develop slowly. If you know any billionaires that are into flight simming, maybe you can talk them into funding a large development team for one of these up-and-coming sims.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...They all represent different approaches and limited in various ways at this point. ....

 

That is the situation with all the new race sims the past few years. Each seems to excel in one or two areas but is otherwise lacking features or is no improvement on the "old" standbys - GTR2, GTL, NR2003, even the venerable GPL (twenty years old last Sept. but still with a thriving community and new tracks/mods being released) - so many stick with those old sims while awaiting a viable replacement.

 

I think that is the situation with FS9 and FSX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...