POLL/QUESTIONAIRE - for new flight/combined simulator kick starter

[kelvinr 58]

How about

 

• what features & capabilities will it have?
• when will it be released?
• what will be its price point  - $5, $50, $500...?
• how compatible will it be with existing flight simulators?
• what support will it have from 3rd party developers?
• what operating system will it use - which version of Windows or Linux, or both? 
• what graphics system will it use -which version of DirectX or OpenGL, or both
• etc

 

 

Without at least some of that information it really isn't possible to give meaningful  opinion about switching.  I still use FSX and am waiting to see what direction P3D is heading with V2.0 before making any decision about changing to that.

 

 

 

As I said this isn't a marketing strategy at this point and I have formulated the basic questions in such a way for you to give your subjective feedback. This is a place for you to say what would enable you to support such a project and actually you have provided this in your questions.

 

I kick starter strategy has not been implemented yet I am solely working to see what particular things people are interested in which in the greater scheme of things would help shape the direction of a flight/combined simulator.

 

Thanks for your input, it is valuable. I know not much information is given of the platform although it is one that already has much attention for many people and in its current state has potential to succeed as this type of platform.

 

I suppose you could say that I am trying to assist the developers to gather crucial information about what people want from this type of platform and to see where people would invest their support.  There is no hidden agenda's here, it is what it is :-)

 

Cheers,

 

Kelvin

[kelvinr 58]

No offence to the Original Poster, but these threads are becomming more frequent; it seems a number of people are claiming to be planning the new FSX replacement.     Not to intend to be negative or dismissive but it's just hard to take these 'promises' with any credibility....     The OP tends to reign in a lot of naiive people who really then think that the new FSX will now be ready next year, hundreds of 'preferences' are listed, and then the thread dies......

 

I appreciate everything has to start somewhere; every plant starts as a tiny seed; and maybe it's just me being a mean, disillushioned old fart, but with these threads I tend to think "come back and show me something real and you'll have my attention". These threads instead tend to be falsely opitmistic lists of features that the OP claims will be part of their new platform.  

 

Also, Ryan is absolutely right; despite the claims made by people like Laminar, there is no such thing as 'real physics' or 'superior flight modelling' .......... literally no such thing.     Flight is not analogous to a PC screen, so everything is an 'interpretation', an 'opinion' .... eg this is what we believe is the most realistic flight sim experience.    

 

Or This is how we think the movement of an aircraft through the air, translates to movements on a two dimentional flat screen.

 

Real aviation is a science.

 

Creating convincing immersion in a flight sim, is an art.

 

(IMO of course :lol:). 

 

 

No offense taken. Your humble opinion is valued and I am aware of all those out there who are pessimistic of this sort of venture because of lip service from potential developers or lack of delivery. In this case the potential is very real and without opinions like yours any development can spiral out of view from the sim community.

 

As mentioned in previous posts this is no marketing strategy, if so it would be a very poor and failed attempt :-) and should one be proposed it would offer all the relevant information and background for people to make their own informed decisions about.

 

I completely understand your cautious yet skeptical approach to this thread but nothing is promised here in that there would be no cause for someone to feel let down by something that has not been advertised as a product to invest in just yet particularly via a Kick Starter strategy, this is purely getting your thoughts about the things you feel are in deficit with the current platforms that, if implemented in a new platform, may help you support.

 

If you had a dream which involved a number of things and those things were attainable, wouldn't this mean you would do what you can to make that dream happen? This is just so, to give developers an inside view into your expectation of a successful flight/combined simulator so as to shape the developmental process and possibly even the business strategy for the product.

 

Cheers,

 

Kelvin

I personally wouldn't donate money, at least not a substancial amount of money to a FS project of this magnitude with no guaranty of it ever getting done. Not to say that its not possible but like Ryan mentioned it would be a huge undertaking.

 

Another thing to consider is that if a big company like Aerosoft who once considered it, or Orbx who has a big developement team has never publically mentioned the idea of doing it, tells me that it would be such a monumental task that they dont want to do it.

 

Personally I am hoping that X-Plane gets there at some point or Outerra becomes an option as well. Both of these programs have taken years to get to the point that they are now, so starting from scratch seems like it would take at least 10 years to develope and mature.

 

Btw, wasn't there another 12 page thread not long ago with another fellow who said he was working on a new platform.

 

Remember, this thread will most likely go dead after the stage where enough information is received at least to provide further direction to the development process which I must say is already in place. You obviously know there are platforms out there to resolve what issues exist in historical platform(s).

 

This thread is not talking about starting a platform from scratch, it is an existing software in development that, with opinions and ideas from people here, can move the process further from where is currently sits.

I'm sorry to say this, but I can't imagine to spend a large amount either, maximum would be about 20€! This might be where the main problem is - the community isn't large enough to donate a sufficient amount of money, and I trust Ryan's calculations on the costs. Besides, even a company as large as Aerosoft cancelled their plans on developping a new sim.

Another major problem is that - unless full compatibility with the current FSX addons - there won't be many who can be motivated to move on, simply because of the amount of money spent on addons already. So, regardless of how much I like all those refreshing ideas of an up-to-date new flight sim, I hardly believe that any of them will become reality.

 

Lack of optimism is completely understandable given the current situation with existing sim platforms. No one expects anyone to just hand over money for something without first seeing what they are investing in and/or even having a chance to play with it during its development.

 

Again, this thread is about what would enable you to support a kick starter project and by the sounds of your comments if you were able to port over existing addons this would at least perk your ears up to even wondering further about what such a platform could then offer you!?  You also would want to see something tangible and if so, it sounds like this would also make your ears rise. This is just an observation :-) Reading between the lines here.

 

Thanks for the comments.

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

FSX made us (FS9 simmers) buy complete new hardware to run that 'new' simulator with settings not even maxed out.

 

Investments ranged from about 600 USD (for late followers similar to me) up to 3.000 (USD/EURO/GBP - whatever) for early adopters and/or simmers aiming at 'maxing out'. Now I'm being asked to think about a new piece of base simulator which will draw further investments in addons and hardware (again!).

 

Looks like my honest answer won't please you, I'm afraid ...

[kelvinr 58]

 

How about

 

• what features & capabilities will it have?
• when will it be released?
• what will be its price point  - $5, $50, $500...?
• how compatible will it be with existing flight simulators?
• what support will it have from 3rd party developers?
• what operating system will it use - which version of Windows or Linux, or both? 
• what graphics system will it use -which version of DirectX or OpenGL, or both
• etc

 

 

Without at least some of that information it really isn't possible to give meaningful  opinion about switching.  I still use FSX and am waiting to see what direction P3D is heading with V2.0 before making any decision about changing to that.

 

 

 

 

As I said this isn't a marketing strategy at this point and I have formulated the basic questions in such a way for you to give your subjective feedback. This is a place for you to say what would enable you to support such a project and actually you have provided this in your questions.

 

I kick starter strategy has not been implemented yet I am solely working to see what particular things people are interested in which in the greater scheme of things would help shape the direction of a flight/combined simulator.

 

Thanks for your input, it is valuable. I know not much information is given of the platform although it is one that already has much attention for many people and in its current state has potential to succeed as this type of platform.

 

I suppose you could say that I am trying to assist the developers to gather crucial information about what people want from this type of platform and to see where people would invest their support.  There is no hidden agenda's here, it is what it is :-)

 

Cheers,

 

Kelvin

[mgh 89]

What would convince you to support the development of an Outerra-backed and -based flight or combined simulation platform?

 

 

I couldn't be convinced on the present evidence to give this "flight or combined flight simulation platform" (whatever that may be) any support,  and certainly not financial support.

 

I have not been able to find any Outerra videos showing detailed airports or urban scenery. Also I've never seen Outerra running in the context of a flight simulator  while processing all the other essential elements of a flight simulator such as systems, weather, AI ATC etc etc. Can you provide links to any of these?

[SierraHotel 987]

"Since Outerra has been mentioned a couple of times here, for the sake this research let me refine Kelvin's question:

What would convince you to support the development of an Outerra-backed and -based flight or combined simulation platform?"

 

Initially proof of commitment i.e. capability of the team, track record etc, backwards compatibility with FSX, 64bit and latest graphics. As Dave (Q400_Flyer) said in his post a flight sim is as much about art as it is about scientific principles! Perhaps that's why I find it so hard to like X-Plane, sure the graphics are great and it's 64bit, but there is just something missing, it doesn't have the soul that FSX has.

 

 

EDIT

 

It's a big fat YES from me. Bring it on guys, my wallet is ready........

 

Outerra Demo

http://www.outerra.com/wgallery.html

[groentesoep 22]

Hi Kelvin,

 

I must admit that my first response to reading this topic was sceptic like Q400_flyer. But I appreciate the way you respond to the comments that are being made, so I wiil throw in my $ 0.02.

 

I am very pro-Kickstarter, so in principle I would fund a simulator project on there. But..... you would have to come with a very convincing story, like most sucesfull Kickstarter projects have to. You can't show a couple of 3D renderings and say 'This is how our sim is going to look.' In my opinion, there should at least be some kind of pre-alpha version to show.

 

Secondly it should show enough promise for me to justify basically throwing away hundreds of dollars in FSX add-ons. Judging on the Outterra screenshots, the new sim would probably make a lot of addons obsolete (Orbx, GEX...). But as I said before, for me to back such a project would require more than a couple of screenshots.

 

There are a couple of types of add-ons that I (would) buy for fsx:

- weather related;

- general scenery related (GEX, UTX, Orbx, FS Global);

- specific airport scenery related;

- flight planning related;

 

I think that a new simulator should make at least the weather related and general scenery related add-ons (largely) obsolete. Especially the weather depiction should be largely improved as a large part of flying (to me) is anticipating on and handling of the weather.

[VeryBumpy 272]

1) Would you support a kick starter project for a new flight simulator or combined simulator platform?

 

2) What would your expectations be for a new flight simulator or combined simulator platform?

 

3) What would convince you to switch to a new flight simulator or combined simulator platform?

 

 

1. Yes.

 

2. Bottom line, it would have to be definitely improved in ALL aspects of FSX.

 

3. See line 2.

 

Note: not interested in combined sim (not even sure what it is exactly), just want a modern FULLY featured FSX.

[skully 1,046]

Who wouldn't support the development of a new flight simulator?

Now asking for investments from the flight simulator community is a whole different matter and I feel would be a grave mistake from a business and personal sanity standpoint.

I can only imagine the harrasment a development team would receive from certain members of said community investors.

We have seen time and again the developers that have been run off or closed their doors when they sought community involvement.

You could expect non stop personal attacks on a daily basis on each and every aspect of what your team would show.

These things are best kept behind closed doors given the "entitled" nature of some people.

 

A better approach would be to seek investment capital, manpower and expertise from current succesful developers and maybe other game developers.

Perhaps even Austin Myers could be conviced of going into "another direction".

 

I think the main goal of a new flight simulator would and should be a highly realistic world and it seems you are on that path.

Aircraft,flight dynamics and weather would be a small part of the development time compared to building the "world" in a realistic and immersive manner that would make other simulators obsolete.

 

One could see a mega conglomeration of current sim developers as the way to the future. So many do "their thing" so very well.

Can one imagine default aircraft having the visual models of Carenado/Captain Sim- the flight dynamics of Real Air- the systems and avionics of PMDG and Reality XP- the airport and world scenery using the teams from FSDT, Fightbeam, ORBX and many other talented shops brought together under one roof?

[JimmiG 244]

Since Outerra has been mentioned a couple of times here, for the sake this research let me refine Kelvin's question:

What would convince you to support the development of an Outerra-backed and -based flight or combined simulation platform?

 

Of course, the very next question is - will there be enough convinced simmers willing to crowdfund such a project, given the expected amount of funds it would require (which depends on the answers to #1)?

 

If you start off with combat (much larger target market) and then add GA, aerobatics etc. the sim should be able to pick up some momentum. Then you can start adding more complex simulations. This is how many niche flight sims such as Flight Unlimited, Hangsim/Vehicle Simulator and more recently AeroFly FS came to be. They don't try to do everything, but might expand in the future.

 

I have tried the Outerra demo and it already has the basics for a "free flight" GA simulator. It's already getting fairly comparable to Aerofly FS. The scenery engine needs to be expanded (actual cities and vector data), but this is necessary anyway for the project moving forward (endless rolling grassy hills are pretty, but not realistic).

[cameni 9]

I couldn't be convinced on the present evidence to give this "flight or combined flight simulation platform" (whatever that may be) any support,  and certainly not financial support.

 

I have not been able to find any Outerra videos showing detailed airports or urban scenery. Also I've never seen Outerra running in the context of a flight simulator  while processing all the other essential elements of a flight simulator such as systems, weather, AI ATC etc etc. Can you provide links to any of these?

 

Gerry, thanks for your (indirect) answers to the questions Kelvin posed. As I understood it, you are basically saying that you aren't interested to support any such development until it has already implemented all the essential elements. That's perfectly fine, and I actually expected the majority of the replies to be somewhat along these lines. If that's truly the general sentiment then crowdfunding isn't a way for this, and it would require a classical investment to get things done in this field.

 

With Outerra we aren't working on a flight simulator. Our primary goal, focus and expertise is the world rendering engine capable of supporting a wide range of simulators and games. All the flight simulation elements we've shown are just for demo purposes. If you try the Outerra demo, you'll notice that it's mosltly using the GPU, while the CPU is being used minimally. This intentional design is to allow simulators and games to utilize the CPU resources for things like the systems simulation, AI etc.

 

Right now we are running the JSBSim flight dynamics engine in the tech demo, together with a separate physics simulation library for ground vehicles and objects. As I said, it's all just demoing the integration possibilities, and doesn't predetermine anything.

The goal with the existing OT footage was just to show the potential of an engine designed from beginning to utilize the GPU, able to scale with the GPU performance growth as opposed to the stalling CPU performance increase, and leaving enough free resources to run a complex simulation/game code alongside. Of course it's not finished yet and it doesn't show everything you would want to see in the final simulator. Of course the development of a flight simulator would require assembling a skilled and capable team, would take years of development by itself (excluding the core OT tech development that's independent).

 

Since we are constantly receiving suggestions to make a (flight) simulator based on OT, in talks with the flight sim fans who approached us I just wondered if there's a will in the community to support such a development, and under what conditions it could ever happen. That's everything there is behind Kelvin's topic here - and that's just him taking the liberty to gather the opinions on this forum, to be able to answer my inquires to him. He also posted the same topic on his home forum over at  New Zealand Flightsim Forums where he got a set of responses that are quite informational and insightful. Posting it here in the same form without a proper lead-in was probably not very fortunate though.

 

*A combined simulation platform - a platform able to run multiple simulation systems within a single environment, for example able to combine aircraft, ground vehicles, railway, watercraft and space simulation into one world/environment. A platform in the sense of enabling other developers to write simulation and content plugins for it, without needing to reimplement the world rendering each time.

[fs4fun 366]

A new FS platform would need to be:

• Open and extensible, with an SDK that supports freeware development tools as much as possible. All simulator subsystems must all support pluggable replacements or extensions: Aircraft, weather, engine modeling and other aircraft systems, flight physics, ATC, traffic, scenery and so on. It must allow the existing developer community to migrate their products to the new platform.
• API's should be networked to support running with multiple computers to distribute load.
• Able to support real world navigation including modeling real airports, navaids, nav data, airspaces, airways etc.
• Georeferenced global terrain system with real world elevation data, landclass, roads, buildings, vector data etc. Support for photo scenery.
• Support for real world weather based on real METAR reports. Able to model surface weather and winds aloft, cloud layers, icing, wind shear, turbulence, gusts etc
• Flexible and programmable support for controllers ala FSUIPC. Support for cockpit builders. Support for multiple displays.
• Multiplayer support: VATSIM/IVAO etc, shared cockpits. Support for ACARS gauges and other flight logging tools needed by VA's
• Support recording and replay of flights

Obviously, it would need to support modern hardware, multicore systems, GPU's, 64-bit etc. The trick would be to rally the developer community to support it, then users would follow.

[Jim Young 2,356]

1) Would you support a kick starter project for a new flight simulator or combined simulator platform?

 

Yes.

2) What would your expectations be for a new flight simulator or combined simulator platform?

 

Similar capabilities as FSX (which I think has set the FS standards) with continual upgrades for the latest tech (especially DirectX).  Support for 64 bit OS's.

 

3) What would convince you to switch to a new flight simulator or combined simulator platform?

 

It would have to meet or exceed FSX development.  If I could see a flightsim that was easily configurable as FSX, I would at least purchase the program. 

 

Best regards,

Jim
 

[mgh 89]

Gerry, thanks for your (indirect) answers to the questions Kelvin posed. As I understood it, you are basically saying that you aren't interested to support any such development until it has already implemented all the essential elements.

I didn't say that. What I said was "I couldn't be convinced on the present evidence..." primarily because none has been presented about what it would actually offer.

 

 

As you didn't respond to my specific question, are we to assume that there are no Outerra videos showing detailed airports or urban scenery nor of it running in the context of a flight simulator processing all the other essential elements?

[cameni 9]

Right, there are no videos of OT showing detailed airports or urban scenery, nor of it running in the context of a flight simulator processing all the other essential elements.

 

Present evidence = already implemented (to me).