Current Status

[Garry J. Smith 1]

Hi Mathijs, Just in case your not aware of it I thought I would send you this link to a Press Release that came out the other day in regards to the Old ACE development team members. http://www.cascadegamefoundry.com/press-releases/ Could have a consequence on your plans. Regards

[riccardo74 2]

Hi Matt,

unitll now I don't understood if Aerosoft will start or will not with the new simulator Aerosoft Flight Simulator 2012. I red all previous post but I don't even understand it.

Will start the project or not?

Ciao,

Riccardo

[StORM48 4]

Excuse me?

Gee, if you go to your local book store, or library even, you will surely find quite a lot of great books for a very reasonable price. Sure, if you want to buy everything, you'll have to spend a fortune, but that can be said about most anything. Oh, and for your information, when I started to play around with Microsoft Flight Simulator, there was no such thing as interactive lessons.

I'm with FS from the very begining and, If you allow me - I'd say that some training was always been a part of the sim. At least with the first, serious of them - FS98.

On the other hand - how books can train you to behave in the air? How much rudder to apply, how to control speed and other basic and advanced maneuvars? Very little to none.

As someone familiar with real life flying, I just have to say that interactive flight training is the esseantial to make newbies interested. If it wasn't there for the last decade, many among us won't be flying at all.

Try to attend real life flying school and after you attended all the theory lessons, to fly the plane by yourself. It is very much likely that you'll hit the ground like a rock, no matter how much books you have been read until that moment. Thrust me, practice is everyting - theory is just a foundation that should support the practice.

Theory without a proper practice is just useless.

Accept or deny that, there's no influence on the facts.

Best regards & NHF.

[Rune_ENHD 9]

I so agree about the the interactive learning stuff, Please, WE NEED IT! I can't fly like a pilot, and I would really like to learn how to fly like a pilot does.

But we need "proper training" for that first, and it should be interactive, with lots of tutorials about navigating how to perform ILS-landing, and how to operate the different aircraft, using checklists, weather-reading and etc. etc.

These tutorials should start with a piston engine and the proper training for that aircraft type, continuing to the next type of aircraft when you are skilled enough to proceed with a different type aircraft.

But you should not be able to start training in a jet or turbine aircraft, before you have the skills required(Navigation and everything just like in the real world) to a fly basic piston engine aircraft(ie a cessna 172 or a piper or something similar) That would sort of introduce a "carer mode" when you think about it

But the career-mode should not be "the main part of this sim" just a learning-tool to use to enjoy AS2012 like a pilot would enjoy flying in real life, using procedures, checklist and everything a pilot need to know to safely fly a real aircraft.

That's what I posted on "Page 6 - post #108" with my concerns about The FS-series, what could actually be improved

Flight unlimited 1, 2, & 3 was very good here I think, You really felt that the instructor was there for you "like a friend" and not "the enemy" lol , he guided you trough a flight in rough IFR weather, and it was a really good imersion-feel it was just gray sky from takeoff to landing, you could clearly hear the wind and rain hitting the fuselage.. (that was only one flight from the training-section)

But as we are hitting year 2010 I feel something could made more easy with regards to learning in the sim..

Text-Books teory is "old-style" when we can get a interactive-learning experience instead.

But.. Aerosoft should not concentrate on this, they should hire a "pro-team" for that task, and concentrate on the "main core-sim"

As you said you would need all your partners and even the competition in FSX to be in on this task to make a new sim

BTW Aerosoft, It would be "Totally AWESOME" if we could get something like that "Winward Nimble" does, those videos really felt like you were interacting with "the mother-nature" and "not a game" even standard FSX-textures with those environment and lighting-effects would just be absolutely mindblowing for a new sim

But also that Rise of flight engine seems promising, what about R.O.F physics and Nimble atmospheric effects WOOW that would be something

Best regards

Rune_ENHD

[Arista 64]

I'd say that some training was always been a part of the sim.

Yep, you're correct - even FS3 had lessons. But the key here is interactive. FS3's lessons were just videos of an instructor flying, followed by try-it-yourself sessions. Not very helpful.

On the other hand - how books can train you to behave in the air?

Well, the original post referred to the Learning Center, which mostly consists of text book material. And while there is certainly a need for theory of flight type documentation, the material in Flight Simulator's Learning Center is shallow at best - for anything that goes beyond scratching the surface, you have to turn to third parties anyway. So, I guess I'm saying, either make it much more thorough than Microsoft did, or leave it out altogether.

How much rudder to apply, how to control speed and other basic and advanced maneuvars?

There are those who say you can't really learn to fly on a flight simulator anyway. I tend to agree with them.

As someone familiar with real life flying, I just have to say that interactive flight training is the esseantial to make newbies interested.

The essential thing to make newbies want to stay is the ability to shoot. No, seriously, of course there have to be some basic tutorials - every game needs that nowadays. But let's face it - as has been pointed out above, even virtual Rod Machado is not that good at teaching you how to fly. On the other hand, a really good virtual flight school would probably take quite a lot of time and effort to develop, with no apparent benefit to the hard-core simmers (who already know how to fly) nor the casual gamers (who mostly just want to go for a quick joyride around the block). The serious novices, who would actually take all the basic lessons, then all the advanced lessons, and then ask for more, are probably an - albeit important - minority. And I think they would be better served with a dedicated, high-quality add-on than with mediocre built-in stuff.

This whole question also depends very much on how the sim will actually be marketed. Some time ago, there was talk about a base platform product along with any number of specialized, high-quality functionality modules (aka. add-ons) that could either be sold as separately, or bundled together with the platform module to form various different configurations. One such functionality module might be a full-fledged flight school. The Student Pilot version, for example, would then include the flight school, but no airliners, while the Airline Pilot version would include all the (high-quality) airliners, but no flight school. And if you don't like the pre-made bundles, you would be able to mix and match the platform module with any other modules you like, thus creating your very own individual sim. Or you could later upgrade your Student Pilot version with the airliner module, etc. I have no idea if it would be an advantage or a nightmare to have several mostly similar versions of the same product in the marketplace, though.

The more traditional approach probably needs multiple levels of documentation, with various importance:

Manual of the sim itself - Essential

POHs for every airplane included, including checklists, panel and system descriptions, performance charts, etc. - Important

How to fly an airplane introductory texts - Quite important

Intermediate texts, including navigation, ATC, etc. - Nice to have

Advanced texts, including weather, regulations, charts, flight planning, etc. - Refer to selected third party material

Basic, fun how-to-fly tutorials or in-game videos - Essential

More serious tutorials, e.g. pattern work - Quite important

Advanced tutorials, e.g. IFR work, airliner flying - Nice to have

Hard-core tutorials, e.g. FMS programming, advanced mountain flying - Heck, no

FS-like, semi-realistic, semi-interactive flight school - Nice to have

Serious learning videos - maybe license and include a few select teasers, but refer to selected third party material for the most part

Full-fledged, fully interactive, realistic flight school - maybe include the first couple of lessons, again as teasers, but make the rest an add-on

Maybe include a coupon for one free (or discounted) add-on - the serious novice could pick up the flight school or a full-length learning video, while the seasoned jet jock might rather take a complex airliner or an ATC add-on.

Or something like that.

Theory without a proper practice is just useless.

But practice without sound theory is just as useless.

Judith

[Rune_ENHD 9]

Arista, you have some good points there, I feel Aerosoft should not concentrate on "this learning module" but they should instead delegate the right team/teams to these tasks

But leaving it out the learning would be a major loss

What I would like to have is less overhead with "dry textbook-teory" and much more tutorials for everything with interactive learning.

But less reading and much more examples, espesially in the simulator, and perhaps with acompanying videos from real-life if it gets to diffcult to see it performed in the sim..

And also you should be teached why and how you are doing it all.

But I disagree with the learning being so basic, we should be able to to do highly-realistic handling of aircraft operating procedures and all that.

But I see no reason to why it should be not be possible to learn "without all the dry-text"?? I am trying to "think out of the box here" so to speak..

I don't actually exspect this advanced training to beeing included in the retail-box, but it should at least be avaliable the same day or

week as the AS212 simulator is released, from a third-party partner/wendor of Aerosoft.

thanks for listening.

Best regards

Rune_ENHD

[Reco 3]

I have to admit that I am not good at flying. I just enjoy doing it. I have read books, looked at tutorials, flown the training missions in FSX with a nagging instructor and I have still miles to go in order to be an experienced sim pilot.

Iam not happy with the suggestion that I have to fly a lot of props before I can try an airliner. When I buy a sim I will like to do what I want to, even if somebody else think it is not the right approach. However a careere mode can be nice as an option.

For me, the best thing would have been a training "mode". When the training mode is active, the invisible trainer is helping you out. When I need to push a button, a voice tells me to do so. In addition to the voice, there should be a big red flashing light on that button in case I do not know where or what it is. I should allso have the option to turn on subtitles in case I do not understand or forget what the instructor told me.

If the instruction from the voice is followed up with an explanation like: You allways have to do this before, or do it after this is set, etc, then I understand why I am doing it.

It is not the same as FS Flying School. The FS Flying School expect you to know what you are doing and correct you if you are doing something wrong and evaluate you in the end.

Reco

[Rune_ENHD 9]

I have to admit that I am not good at flying. I just enjoy doing it. I have read books, looked at tutorials, flown the training missions in FSX with a nagging instructor and I have still miles to go in order to be an experienced sim pilot.

Iam not happy with the suggestion that I have to fly a lot of props before I can try an airliner. When I buy a sim I will like to do what I want to, even if somebody else think it is not the right approach. However a careere mode can be nice as an option.

For me, the best thing would have been a training "mode". When the training mode is active, the invisible trainer is helping you out. When I need to push a button, a voice tells me to do so. In addition to the voice, there should be a big red flashing light on that button in case I do not know where or what it is. I should allso have the option to turn on subtitles in case I do not understand or forget what the instructor told me.

Reco

Well ok, I admit and realize (my fault) that It should be able "to have both" a "Sandbox-mode" as FS allways have had, and a "Career-mode/training mode" But in Career-mode you start with training in a piston engine aircraft

and you would advance progressively from there.

Thanks for reminding me that I sometimes also use a casual-flight in my own tempo, but I have been a casual simmer for too long I feel, and would like to get somewhere with my virtual career,

not just buzzing around in the sky all the time, but that is fun also sometimes

Excactly what I was trying to get through to the users & developers: the "why you do it" questions? , and the "when you do it" questions?

Things that pilots know, but we don't because whe have not yet received the training

[StORM48 4]

There are those who say you can't really learn to fly on a flight simulator anyway. I tend to agree with them.

This isn't quite true - my RL experience telling me different. The only thing which is different is gravity factor and fear. Everything else is truly realistic, as much as it can be.

Of course, ground theory included cannot be exceptionaly comprehensive. But, as good as that in MSFS will be a good start for the newbie.

3rd party stuff is always available if he/she tend to reach the perfection.

Best regards

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

What will be the essential difference between them?

A few thousand dollars, lol.

Basically the difference will be in support and in the way some kind of files are handled. For the standard customer we know we can't use some file types in the standard format as they will need to be 'compiled in real time' and standard users will not have the hardware for that. A professional customer does not mind spending money on hardware to reach the (silly) 60 herz there documents ask for.

One example... we are talking 2012 here and though we really seriously very much would need more then 3 Gb of internal memory we can not expect all our standard customers to run 64 bits Operating Systems. For a professional customer we can say he needs 24 Gb of mem and a solid state 500 Gb disk that makes a SATA connection sweat. So the pro version would expect less limitations.

Keep in mind this is all only mind games now okay?

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

I tend to agree - there is so much good learning material out there, both flight sim specific and for real pilots. However, that would probably mean losing most of the casual gamers market. Those who want to just hop into an F16 and do a few loops around the Golden Gate bridge need at least some kind of basic tutorial to get them started (i.e. push to make the houses bigger kind of things). The more advanced learning stuff, like a full-fledged interactive flight school for the more serious novices, could be left to an add-on. Humorist-turned-instructor included, of course. On the other hand, maybe Jeppesen, the King Schools, Sporty's, or someone else would like to come on board with a couple of sponsored learning videos in return for prominent advertising space.

Judith

I am spinning this off to a separate topic:

http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=29800

Good posts, thanks.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

I've been wondering about this. I think this would be a great feature. But since my knowledge of software development is pretty much zero, I don't know if it would be possible or not. Does anyone know how hard it would be to implement this? I'm very curious. I'd love to be able to take off from my hometown airport and hear pilots speaking with the accent of the Southern USA, and hear a German accent in Germany, etc.

Personally I doubt we could do it better then FSX does it. I do know we could make life a LOT easier for real human ATC and that's the best way out of this problem in my simple mind.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

I could not agree more

It's a non-topic. There is no way old add-ons will load without being recompiled. We plan to spend loads of time to make source files compatible. But compiled files (FSX scenery/FSX aircraft) will for sure not work. If anybody expects that, sorry. No way...

[Alexander Wurz 42]

It's a non-topic. There is no way old add-ons will load without being recompiled. We plan to spend loads of time to make source files compatible. But compiled files (FSX scenery/FSX aircraft) will for sure not work. If anybody expects that, sorry. No way...

Then you missunderstood me - I was agreeing that there should be developement forward and not spending time in backward compatibilty

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Then you missunderstood me - I was agreeing that there should be developement forward and not spending time in backward compatibilty

No we are on the same track... Backwards compatibility only on the lowest level, so in 3dMax model, not in anything you see in the sim. Clean break with old files.

[janda 3]

ok, Mathijs

tell us what is real current status..? as topic

brds

Martin

[Pi@no 17]

(...) One example... we are talking 2012 here and though we really seriously very much would need more then 3 Gb of internal memory we can not expect all our standard customers to run 64 bits Operating Systems. (...)

Hmm, just speaking about the x64 compatibility, great !

I think AFS2012 MUST be coded in 64 bits... (and can run in 32 bits of course).

In 2012, most of the computers will have 6go of RAM or more... and coding in x64 is a decision that must be taken in the beginning of a project... I think you know why

So, please, do a x64-compatible simulator

[PNyman 0]

Yep, I also think 64bit is a no-brainer.

Most people today have 64bit processors, although all don't use 64bit operating systems.

By 2012 64bit will be the norm.

[Alexander Wurz 42]

I too think 64 Bit is mandatory for the nex Gen Flight Sim, Memory is getting cheaper every Day, so why not use it?

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

I think AFS2012 MUST be coded in 64 bits... (and can run in 32 bits of course).

Impossible. You can program in 32 bits and run in 64 bits but not the other way around. And that's my problem. I am sure that there will be a lot of people in 2012 that still run 32 bit OS's.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

ok, Mathijs

tell us what is real current status..? as topic

brds

Martin

Hard to describe but we are currently compiling more detailed documents on what the new sim will need to do. Before the end of the year this will be discussed with the partners we have selected for the game engine. Selection of that is the next big step.

[Pi@no 17]

Impossible. You can program in 32 bits and run in 64 bits but not the other way around. And that's my problem. I am sure that there will be a lot of people in 2012 that still run 32 bit OS's.

Hmm yeah... tue!

But, you can, in the code, define 2 versions for each system, and only adjust the version you want to compile (x32 or x64).

Hmm, for example, if you're coding in C:

//// IN THE .C //

void myfunction() {

    my_int var;

    return;

}


//// IN THE .H ////

// if you want to compile the 32 bits version of the program

#define TARGET_SYSTEM_VERSION_32

// if you want to compile the x64 version, just don't write the line up and write this

// #define TARGET_SYSTEM_VERSION_64


#ifdef TARGET_SYSTEM_VERSION _32

    my_int int64; // int64 it's only an example

#endif


#ifdef TARGET_SYSTEM_VERSION_64

    my_int int;

#endif


// and you only specify the  TARGET_SYSTEM_VERSION variable to compile the version you want

Don't know if you know the C ? And sorry it's been 2 years I haven't coded...

Of course it's only an example for the variables, but you must do the same thing for the function, etc.

I don't how know DirectX works, I never coded with it...

But I think it is possible to make 2 versions of a software, without the need to write all the code again,

if you know sinds the beginning that you want to have 2 versions

P.S. Sorry for my english !

[cameni 2]

But, you can, in the code, define 2 versions for each system, and only adjust the version you want to compile (x32 or x64).

Yes that is usually no problem with your own code, problems may arise with some 3rd party libraries used (but that likely won't be an issue here).

What can be more problematic is when you actually design the program to use the extended address space in 64 bit mode (or above 3GB that is available in 32 bit mode), then running it in 32 bit mode will fail in run time. This can happen easily - not having to deal with constrained address space is attractive, and can be hard to fix later.

Basically, if you want to support 32 bit version as well, you have to design it as a 32 bit program (with regard to the address space); compiling it in 64 bit isn't usually such a problem in itself. You lose one nice property of using the 64 bit mode, but you still may gain a slightly better performance.

[janda 3]

Hard to describe but we are currently compiling more detailed documents on what the new sim will need to do. Before the end of the year this will be discussed with the partners we have selected for the game engine. Selection of that is the next big step.

thank`s for that, but is there any chance to know which partners you have selected (game engine)?

brds

Martin

[etien 16]

64 bits is a no brainer to me... people who will buy your product should have a 64 proc by late 2012. 4GB will be too restrained. It is already limiting fsx and 64bit will allow enormous addons