Jump to content

Topic: What do you NOT use in FSX?


Recommended Posts

My English is not so good and i use my FSX in german, so i must try to translate it :lol:

I never use the Startpage (Startseite)

I never use the Recorder (Flüge aufzeichnen)

EDIT: Needed to delete a few things because i justed them in the meantime :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. save function (it's a good function though)

2. flight sim photos

3. Map (i'm flying multiplayer generally, an its not working)

4. Lessons (except basic flying tips)

5. news page

6. in aircraft list, details function

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi:

Since I am an almost exclusive IVAO flyer I don't use any function non related to IVAO flights, such as logbook, atc (by the way boring and in busy and "multirunaway" airports really never knows real rwy in use: examples, Madrid, Palma, Frankfurt), and since I started to use paying aircraft, standard MSFS planes (specially IFR) really suck. Since IFR flight planner is intended to be used to guide gps and atc, I dont use it either. Nevertheless I must recognise that in VFR I do use GPS sometimes.

I dont use gliders in MSFS for one reason: there are no thermic turbulences or any other kind of vertical winds. (Bankrupted Looking Glass Flight Unlimmited3 simulator did and it was a real pleasure to stay for hours up in the air without engine power).

Regards.

Antonio P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

To be honest, I don't use FSX because it's too heavy for my PC that runs FS9 very well.

What I would like to see is a simulation that gives more credits to the aerodynamics.

Although I fly on line (IVAO) a more realistic ATC (including a local tongue: when I fly in Germany I'd like a terrible German accent instead of a terrible US accent; no offence guys in either way) would be nice.

I'd rather see a scenery datatbase that is more realistic (airports and surroundings) than 40.000 airports that look the same. Maybe it is possible to let people choose which part of the world they are interested in (never fly in Africa or Asia). And yes, when you are on final and there is a motorway next to the runway, it's a winner to see some realistic traffic there as well (like the Leipzig scenery).

Nav frequencies etc. should be adjustable easily so whenever a VOR or ILS changes in the real world, you can adjust that yourself.

But above all, I have a lot off additional software (e.g. Project Magenta) and hardware (e.g. CPFlight MCP and radio's) for my flightdeck. The next simulator should be able to support them as well.

Just some thoughts,

JWS

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • I never done any of the training flights in FSX.
  • I used the 'learning center' perhaps two time in 4 years.
  • I just found out there is something called Pilot Records with photos and rewards

and I know I am not the only one. For anything inside FSX I have never used and that you can list I will give one free download.

Pilot records is quite good but in FSX what they should have done was have them available in MP. This is something I use in Falcon 4 Allied Forces as its always good to check out other pilots progress. The Learning centre I found to be quite handy but some of the missions are extremely difficult to qualify on as there is very strict limitations. The good thing about having the logbook in mp is also your rewards can be seen by other players in mp.

Just for comparison although I've beaten every single mission I'm still just a noob as far as the learning centre is concerned.

Cert1.jpg

Trophy2.jpg

badges1.jpg

badges2.jpg

medals2.jpg

medals1.jpg

And thats just some of the pages of awards compared to F4AF where in MP only one page is visible the other thing is it encourages people to try to get those awards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only use the free flight, setting, pilot records to see how many hours I'v done since i last had to install my FSX wich happens often with me and people I know, last but not least the multiplayer wich is a must have for FS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cannot recall ever accessing the logbook - not because it isn't useful to know what hours I have, but because it serves no useful function I can tell in relation to gains/benefits anywhere else.

Like many others, don't give a monkeys about `rewards` - unless they're sending cash!

However, I DO use the Learning Center occasionally, and recommend it to first-time sim users, but think You Tube is probably the best place for videos... look how the Accusim B-17 and P-47 benefits (in sales and marketing terms as much as training and education)...

Don't really think there's a lot in FSX currently that isn of limited or no use to anyone. Again, we are perhaps looking at it from the experienced user POV, which is not where the bulk of sales are coming from. But I see no reason why training could not follow real-world principles, and be hived-off to specialist service providers who can expand vastly on the barebones of the basic product.

As we say in the motorcycle training business: "Any rider can SHOW you how to ride. Only an instructor can TEACH you how to ride..!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Missions

Learning Centers

Weather (Only using realtime weather)

Multiplayer (VATSIM via Squawkbox)

FSX Music(Waste of HDD space)

Pilot Records / Awards

Failours (Why set a failour on a vatsim flight?)

Flight Analiyse (Would be awesome if you could make a more realistic one, like the one in simulators)

- Emil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

-Any of the default aircraft

Yes, great Idea, Lets have a FLIGHT simulator that comes without aircraft... [note sarcasm].

Although I agree that default arn't very good you still need them to call it a flight simulator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, great Idea, Lets have a FLIGHT simulator that comes without aircraft... [note sarcasm].

Although I agree that default arn't very good you still need them to call it a flight simulator.

Yeah but I think with AFS we can expect great default airplanes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather than including dozens of mediocre aircraft, it would be better to have only a handful, but high-quality default aircraft. The purpose of default aircraft should be showing off what the sim is capable of, rather than sheer quantity.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather than including dozens of mediocre aircraft, it would be better to have only a handful, but high-quality default aircraft. The purpose of default aircraft should be showing off what the sim is capable of, rather than sheer quantity.

Yes. I agree. My opinion is to have two or three very good aircraft. The rest to be installed by the user, be it payware or freeware. And have the option of erasing the "base" airplanes if one wishes to do so without having problems with other add-ons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well..... as a beginner it made no difference for me.

I installed my flightsim and flow around, made some of the flight trainings and finally made my privat pilot (or whatever it was called). Had some bugs and wasn´t able to continue with the flight training.

Some time later I heard and read about add on airplanes and I downloaded some freeware and couldn´t see a difference to those installed by FS itself. That came later!

What I would like to say is: As a beginner I would like to have lots of Airplanes to fly with. And the quality of those installed in FSX for example is good is as good as it is. Imagine a totally beginner flying around with an airplane with engines like the PMDG Jetstream. In 3 Minutes his engines are burning and in 10 minutes he throw his FS away...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well..... as a beginner it made no difference for me.

I installed my flightsim and flow around, made some of the flight trainings and finally made my privat pilot (or whatever it was called). Had some bugs and wasn´t able to continue with the flight training.

Some time later I heard and read about add on airplanes and I downloaded some freeware and couldn´t see a difference to those installed by FS itself. That came later!

What I would like to say is: As a beginner I would like to have lots of Airplanes to fly with. And the quality of those installed in FSX for example is good is as good as it is. Imagine a totally beginner flying around with an airplane with engines like the PMDG Jetstream. In 3 Minutes his engines are burning and in 10 minutes he throw his FS away...

A flight simulator (even if it's for a bigginer) is to fly. If a person doesn't know how to fly, he can learn with it (even if he/she's young).

If it's a kid that would "throw" the FS away because his plane caught fire, he isn't a very big fan of planes or flying. Therefore no point in him buying the FS in the first place... :unsure: A flight simulator (in my understanding) is not a game like you'd play it in Nintendo or in a Play Station. It's a simulator -even though you can have fun using it-. Sure, I know some people use it as a game but anyhow, the majority know what they are doing while they are using it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Deputy Sheriffs

I never (or very rarely) used:

- flightplanner

- weather settings

- logbook, although I would like to have a good one

- learning center, instead I bought Rod Machado's Private Pilot Handbook to learn the basics (may be its an idea to bundle it, or something similar as pdf with your AFS)

Otto

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A flight simulator (even if it's for a bigginer) is to fly. If a person doesn't know how to fly, he can learn with it (even if he/she's young).

If it's a kid that would "throw" the FS away because his plane caught fire, he isn't a very big fan of planes or flying. Therefore no point in him buying the FS in the first place... :unsure: A flight simulator (in my understanding) is not a game like you'd play it in Nintendo or in a Play Station. It's a simulator -even though you can have fun using it-. Sure, I know some people use it as a game but anyhow, the majority know what they are doing while they are using it.

Well said. Fully agreed. I thought that FS was hard when I first started, but because I love planes I kept at it until I learned. I don't think that the default aircraft should be "dumbed down" for beginners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also agree. But maybe it could be an idea of including a 'beginners mode' that comes with simplified procedures, simplified systems.

Or, thinking of Space Shuttle Mission 2007 simulator, a mode that blends in tips that show you what to do next.

I am an FS pilot since 13 years now so that wouldn't be an option for me, but just imagine you're an absolute beginner.

A helping hand that shows you how to get started could be a good idea...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine a totally beginner flying around with an airplane with engines like the PMDG Jetstream.

Imagine a real-world student pilot in a real BAe JetStream - those engines would be burning, for real, and in less than three minutes, if the student has no idea what he's doing. That's the way turboprops are, and that's how they should be in any serious simulator. That's also why they tend to teach the basics in small, simple, piston engine singles, and why you have to undergo some serious drill before you're let loose in a turboprop... ;)

Judith

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine a real-world student pilot in a real BAe JetStream - those engines would be burning, for real, and in less than three minutes, if the student has no idea what he's doing. That's the way turboprops are, and that's how they should be in any serious simulator. That's also why they tend to teach the basics in small, simple, piston engine singles, and why you have to undergo some serious drill before you're let loose in a turboprop... ;)

Judith

I agree, Judith. If a beginner is able to fly a turboprop, the sim isn't realistic enough, IMHO. A beginner should only be able to fly something such as a Cessna 152. Then, once he's mastered that, he'll be able to move up to something more complex, such as a 182, and so on...

Of course, if he wants to try to fly a 747, he should have that option. But, if the sim is realistic enough, it shouldn't be easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I slightly disagree with some of the opinions stated above:

3 quality aircraft instead of 10?

The problem I see here is: which aircraft do you want to include? There is a wide range of simmers out there. Some like GA, some airliners, some military aircraft and some helicopters. Often there is only very little overlap between those groups. Limit the sim to 3 aircraft and you will loose a lot of potential customers. I think (like FSX) the sim should cover a representative range of aircraft. This should also be a good starting point for addon developers to develop flight models, gauges and systems. One thing great about FS is extensive amount of addon aircraft available. And not every freeware developer wants to develop a G1000 cockpit or a turboprop engine system from scratch.

Only highly realistic aircraft?

I agree with Enno here. Without really knowing I would guess less than 10% of the people who bought the PMDG 747 can fly it the way it is supposed to be. While the aircraft models should ultimately be as realistic as possible, there should always be the option to tune down the realism and some helping tools. In real life you have a flight instructor teaching you how to (and not to) fly an aircraft. In a sim you only have a tech-speak manual (if at all) and yourselves. If a product wants to attract a wide number of (laymen) customers and not only real life pilots and community people, it needs to give them as much support as possible.

When I was a child, I didn't want to fly a Cessna, I wanted to fly an F-18 or a 747 (mind, FS 2 at this time only had a little Piper). If you want to attract children and bring new people into the community, they should be able to fly these planes with lowered realism settings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I slightly disagree with some of the opinions stated above:

3 quality aircraft instead of 10?

The problem I see here is: which aircraft do you want to include? There is a wide range of simmers out there. Some like GA, some airliners, some military aircraft and some helicopters. Often there is only very little overlap between those groups. Limit the sim to 3 aircraft and you will loose a lot of potential customers. I think (like FSX) the sim should cover a representative range of aircraft. This should also be a good starting point for addon developers to develop flight models, gauges and systems. One thing great about FS is extensive amount of addon aircraft available. And not every freeware developer wants to develop a G1000 cockpit or a turboprop engine system from scratch.

Only highly realistic aircraft?

I agree with Enno here. Without really knowing I would guess less than 10% of the people who bought the PMDG 747 can fly it the way it is supposed to be. While the aircraft models should ultimately be as realistic as possible, there should always be the option to tune down the realism and some helping tools. In real life you have a flight instructor teaching you how to (and not to) fly an aircraft. In a sim you only have a tech-speak manual (if at all) and yourselves. If a product wants to attract a wide number of (laymen) customers and not only real life pilots and community people, it needs to give them as much support as possible.

When I was a child, I didn't want to fly a Cessna, I wanted to fly an F-18 or a 747 (mind, FS 2 at this time only had a little Piper). If you want to attract children and bring new people into the community, they should be able to fly these planes with lowered realism settings.

Good points. I agree with what you said about the number of default aircraft. A balance should be found between quality and quantity. I think that there should be one decent quality aircraft from each category. If you have too many, the quality will not be good (FSX); however, you want enough to satisfy the customers and show what the sim can do.

I also agree with what you said about realism. As usual, I spoke too quickly and misrepresented myself.;) I agree that the option to turn down the realism settings should be available. I just don't want the realism to be compromised. I have no problem with adjustable realism, as long as the max settings are realistic enough. In FSX, it seemed as if the default aircraft had toned-down realism even at max settings; I just don't want this to happen to AFS2013.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no atc (I prefer IVAO's ones), no tower mode, no kiosk, no video capture (I prefer fraps or cam to share).

No rewards used, some rare adventures, those we bought in our softs or find freeware are often more interesting.

Uneasy to change smoothly in external view, especially zoom, when making a video, to be upgraded.

Hand made weather is nice when you want to practise some exercies, like crosswind landing, or holding pattern with wind. Except this case, only real weather. So I think real weather should be a prioritary mode.

Thermics for glider should be better. Either you see, either not. unsatisfying.

Very hard to create things like thermals, to be improved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will be the odd one out and say this:

Go to the Learning Center and Play "Getting started" and then "I'm new."

Listen to it.

Microsoft knew the market they were aiming for: Everybody!

I understand the concerns of those more advanced Simmers and even real life Pilots out there, but I suspect a focus on hardcore simulation and/or an insistence that purchasers become "serious" about the minutia of flying is probably not exactly what made Flight Simulator the most popular and successful flight "Game" ever.

Aerosoft could well decide to target more narrowly at the hardcore Simmers only.....

But if so, I really hope that my instincts about what would probably happen are very wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use