Future of simulations 2010 discussion

[SlipBall]

quote
"At the same time a few users would like too much realistic control of aircraft using all the devices like in real life"


guilty.....

The future that I would like to see, would be a 24/7 on-line land, sea, and air WW II war.

[JG4_Helofly]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

quote


The future that I would like to see, would be a 24/7 on-line land, sea, and air WW II war.

Look here: http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/

[Jaws2002]

Originally Posted by JG4_Helofly

Look here: http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/

I was thinking about a modern one.

[bolox]

how many of those who think realism options are 'a waste of Oleg's valuable time' can't recognise the fun in doing something like this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSkWKjp52B0

the flight sim 'community' covers a wide spectrum and what seems a waste of time to you might be rather important to others.

I have no reason to doubt that Oleg will strike a balance: and it will be broader than some here would like

[imaca]

Originally Posted by bolox

how many of those who think realism options are 'a waste of Oleg's valuable time' can't recognise the fun in doing something like this?

I can't really recognize the fun in it, but I agree that:

Originally Posted by bolox

the flight sim 'community' covers a wide spectrum and what seems a waste of time to you might be rather important to others.

It seems to me there are roughly 3 overlapping groups in flight sim community; online players, who are focused on realistic damage/flight model and online modes of play, those who are more interested in avionic systems and navigation, and offline players, who want realistic AI.
Of these, I think online players are by far the most vociferous. Also online gaming seems to relatively easy to implement in comparison to , for example, the development of realistic AI. Consequently, I think online gameplay seems to be at the forefront of development, despite representing only 20% of the market.

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by imaca

I can't really recognize the fun in it, but I agree that:



It seems to me there are roughly 3 overlapping groups in flight sim community; online players, who are focused on realistic damage/flight model and online modes of play, those who are more interested in avionic systems and navigation, and offline players, who want realistic AI.
Of these, I think online players are by far the most vociferous. Also online gaming seems to relatively easy to implement in comparison to , for example, the development of realistic AI. Consequently, I think online gameplay seems to be at the forefront of development, despite representing only 20% of the market.

1. "online players, who are focused on realistic damage/flight model and online modes of play"

I disagree, the most vociferous online players are after variety and game balance not historical correctness. Yes their are huge arguments about historical damage/flight models BUT those arguments are motivated by issues of game balance and fairness NOT a true desire for historical authenticity. Basically the online crowd is ego driven and looking for a fair (or occasionally biased towards their own side) playing field where eventually they hope to stand out. They see it more as a sporting competition.

2. "those who are more interested in avionic systems and navigation"

That specific market is more interested in civilian flight sims. What these sort of people in combat sims are actually about is "immersion". For example the ones who want to authentically feel what it was "really like" for their grandfather who flew in the 8th airforce and so forth. These people are trying to recreate history.

3. "and offline players, who want realistic AI"

Offline players want much more than just realistic AI. They need believable challenging campaigns that do not send you on useless suicide missions or repeat the same mission types over and over. They want to see rewards for doing well without necessarily changing history ( even a standard video of a medal award would be better than what we currently get). Also offline players are the ones that are way more interested in the scenery and eye candy ..., how the cows look and where the castles can be found. They are likely to do daft things like take a 109 and fly the full length of a river on the Slovakia map at tree height just to look at the scenery. Offline players have a lot more commitment to long projects than other types of players as well. Online wars etc regularly flounder but offline players commonly play the same campaign over several years.

*****

I definitely agree that online players are far more vocal. Most IL2 players I know personally do not play online, they also rarely go to online forums unless a new patch or update is due and even then tend to lurk and not post.

However its important to remember from a marketing point of view that the opinions of reviewers and online players in forums makes a huge difference to general sales (even if the reviewers are idiots and online players a minority). You need to keep reviewers and onliners happy to get the initial sales and then keep offliners happy to maintain those sales through various versions .

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by bolox

how many of those who think realism options are 'a waste of Oleg's valuable time' can't recognise the fun in doing something like this?

the flight sim 'community' covers a wide spectrum and what seems a waste of time to you might be rather important to others.

I have no reason to doubt that Oleg will strike a balance: and it will be broader than some here would like

I think the technology shown in that video is fantastic! The people creating that setup, the software, and integrating the gauges are obviously very talented and dedicated individuals. (I wish I had half the talent that these people have displayed!)

But it does have limitations that I feel would limit it's effectivness in online combat. Having the fixed field of vision would severely limit your situational awareness.

This is not a problem with what these guys have made, it an inherent limitation of the display technology available at this time. If we put on a VR goggles, we loose the benefits of the physical gauges. If we use a technology like Track IR, we loose the benefits of the physical gun sight (Which is extremely cool in my opinion!).

When we get access to consumer 360 degree spherical displays these limitations will disappear, but then how real will flying a 109 in a spitfire cockpit be?

A big question would be should Oleg spend the development time and resources to cater for a single person in the process of creating a one off cockpit or should he attempt meet the major criteria that (over the 10 years+ of commercial combat flight simulator experience) he has determined to be important?

Shouldn't people like those that made that cockpit be the ones that need to adapt their project to work with the simulator (not the other way around)?

Cheers

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by JG4_Helofly

Look here: http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/

Thank's! that does look cool, and I will try it out for the 2 week period that they are offering...I hope that SOW develops in that direction in time