Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - RSS Headlines   RSS Headlines   Twitter   Twitter

On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans

In an audio interview with AVSim, talks with Microsoft's Jorg Newman and Asobo Studios' Sebastian Wloch about the upcoming revival of Microsoft Flight Simulator. An interesting element of this is highlighted by VentureBeat, where they note the discussion touches on how this oddly did not initially include plans for VR support until the prospect was raised by gamers. Word is this may not make it into the game for launch, but they seem committed to adding it as quickly as possible:
“Right after the E3 trailer came out there was a lot of people making that exact assumption, that ‘Oh yeah, this better be supporting VR right from the get go.’ It honestly wasn’t our plan. But we are listening, and we heard it, so we will try our darnedest to make it happen. Whether or not we’re going to pull it off for launch, we can’t commit to that at this point in time, but we are aware of the desire […] We will try to prioritize that over other things.”
View
25 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


25. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 15, 2019, 17:51 Kxmode
 
jdreyer wrote on Oct 15, 2019, 03:54:
Kxmode wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 23:34:
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 20:16:
Kxmode wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 19:04:
The thing is VR, not AR, is the best enhancement for a flight simulator.

That's not at all clear on the basis of first-gen headsets. Some issues:
* VR headsets are less sharp and have less clarity of image as compared to a 4K monitor. This renders instruments and displays harder to read and, in a combat sim, other planes and ground targets harder to distinguish. This was my number one complaint with trying out an Oculus with DCS: it was felt comparable to downgrading back to a 1080p display.
* Peripherals become harder to use. I do not have an extensive peripheral setup, just the Warthog HOTAS, but the switch panel integrated into the base of the throttle was basically unusable without taking both hands off the controls, using one to raise the headset a bit, and then glancing down with my peripheral vision to manipulate a switch with my other hand. The fact that the switch panel was rendered in game was little help unless the switch I wanted was at the edge of the panel.
* Head tracking has been a solved problem for about 15 years thanks to TrackIR and VR offers little real improvement. TrackIR isn't perfect, but once you have well calibrated input curves, and so long as direct sunlight isn't shining into the tracker's FoV, then it works very well.

What VR has to offer over a standard setup is immersion and depth perception, but right now it is simply less usable than the alternatives, albeit still a really cool experience. As the displays improve, I could see VR eventually becoming preferable to a 4k monitor + TrackIR. Until then though, it's a tough sell for a hobby where you never have enough pixel density.

2. I'm sorry, but your statement that "VR headsets are less sharp and have less clarity of image as compared to a 4K monitor" is wrong, and here's why. Valve's Index "uses a 1440×1600 LCD panel for each eye for a combined resolution of 2880×1600." 4K-UHD is 3840×2160 (this is the more common resolution for gamings) and true 4K 4096×2160 (this is the more common 4K resolution for movies and broadcasts). The index gives you a screen dimension that is 1000×560 less than 4K-UHD. When you're eyes see an image at 2880×1600, you will notice the better visual fidelity.

2. SMA said that VR headsets have less resolution than a 4K monitor, you said that's wrong, then you provided stats that 4K monitors have higher resolution than VR! Help me understand.

I highlighted the related comment above. It's not about "4K" per-say. It's about having a high pixel density that produces a high clarity image when positioned so close to the eyes. SMA wrote current VR headsets aren't capable of producing this. I disagree.
 
Avatar 18786
 



William Shakespeare's "Star Wars" Act I, Scene 1: Aboard the rebel ship. / Enter C-3PO and R2-D2. / C-3PO: "Now is the summer of our happiness / Made winter by this sudden, fierce attack!" / R2-D2 — Beep beep, Beep, beep, meep, squeak, beep, whee!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

24. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 15, 2019, 13:09 Bodolza
 
SDE isn't an issue with the current generation of VR headsets. Plus, the nice thing about VR is that if something is too small to read, you can just lean forward to get a closer look. The first version of Flight Sim I used ran at 320x200, so I'm not super concerned about resolution anyways.

I see the bigger problem with controls. There haven't been any good interfaces yet that let you seamlessly use both the VR controllers for things like flipping switches and HOTAS for controls. Something like Elite's gaze based system might work, but it's not truely analogous. It also doesn't help that we have so many different controller types in VR.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

23. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 15, 2019, 11:47 jdreyer
 
Beamer wrote on Oct 15, 2019, 11:43:
How close you are to a screen drastically impacts the effectiveness of a resolution. Something that looks excellent from 18 inches looks horrific from 1.8 inches.

Right, even if your monitor and VR headset are the same resolution, the screen door effect can really turn people off.
 
Avatar 22024
 



The land in Minecraft is flat, Minecraft simulates the Earth, ergo the Earth is flat.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

22. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 15, 2019, 11:46 jdreyer
 
theglaze wrote on Oct 15, 2019, 11:04:
Through my VR experience, every time a developer reluctantly implements VR, the integration and execution is half-assed.

I expect they will put in, at the very least, a glossy demo mode that supports VR within some aircraft (and perhaps certain zones of Earth) so they can lure passerby’s with WMR headsets in the Microsoft stores. If you’re expecting better VR than that at launch, you will be disappointed.

VTOL VR is built from the ground up with VR in mind. It's actually a really cool near-future military aircraft sim. It's not as high fidelity as DCS World, but it's not an arcade game by any stretch. My biggest problem with it was that it didn't support HOTAS, so I had to fly the game by holding my VR controller upright which was tiring.

Combat Air Patrol 2 is also built from the ground up for VR. It's a cool Harrier sim, although it's still in EA.
 
Avatar 22024
 



The land in Minecraft is flat, Minecraft simulates the Earth, ergo the Earth is flat.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

21. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 15, 2019, 11:43 Beamer
 
How close you are to a screen drastically impacts the effectiveness of a resolution. Something that looks excellent from 18 inches looks horrific from 1.8 inches.  



-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

20. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 15, 2019, 11:36 jdreyer
 
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Oct 15, 2019, 08:26:
CJ_Parker wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 20:52:
Are you sure you know how VR works? If VR is properly implemented then you'd have an accurately modeled cockpit where you can flick every single switch with your touch controllers.

How will you manipulate a joystick/yoke and throttle with touch controllers in your hands? Will you set them aside when flying, then take your hands off the controls to pick them back up to manipulate instruments, dials, and switches? Or will you eschew a joystick and use the touch controllers to control a virtual stick or yoke? If the latter how will you provide resistance against the push and pulling of the stick/yoke when the touch controllers aren't attached to anything?

Again, it's not at all clear to me that that's an improvement over physical peripherals, which contrary your characterization as cheap are generally quite high quality (with the price tag to match) these days. Don't get me wrong, VR is very very cool, and its potential for simulation is gigantic, but right now its still mostly just potential even if its getting better.

I suppose it depends on your controllers, but the entire point of a HOTAS is so that you can operate them without looking.

Sims of older craft will certainly have lots of switches, but modern craft will have glass cockpits akin to using a computer anyway. A trackball on your HOTAS is all you'd need to interact with them.
 
Avatar 22024
 



The land in Minecraft is flat, Minecraft simulates the Earth, ergo the Earth is flat.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

19. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 15, 2019, 11:04 theglaze
 
Through my VR experience, every time a developer reluctantly implements VR, the integration and execution is half-assed.

I expect they will put in, at the very least, a glossy demo mode that supports VR within some aircraft (and perhaps certain zones of Earth) so they can lure passerby’s with WMR headsets in the Microsoft stores. If you’re expecting better VR than that at launch, you will be disappointed.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

18. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 15, 2019, 08:26 Scottish Martial Arts
 
CJ_Parker wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 20:52:
Are you sure you know how VR works? If VR is properly implemented then you'd have an accurately modeled cockpit where you can flick every single switch with your touch controllers.

How will you manipulate a joystick/yoke and throttle with touch controllers in your hands? Will you set them aside when flying, then take your hands off the controls to pick them back up to manipulate instruments, dials, and switches? Or will you eschew a joystick and use the touch controllers to control a virtual stick or yoke? If the latter how will you provide resistance against the push and pulling of the stick/yoke when the touch controllers aren't attached to anything?

Again, it's not at all clear to me that that's an improvement over physical peripherals, which contrary your characterization as cheap are generally quite high quality (with the price tag to match) these days. Don't get me wrong, VR is very very cool, and its potential for simulation is gigantic, but right now its still mostly just potential even if its getting better.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

17. Re: Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 15, 2019, 03:54 jdreyer
 
Kxmode wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 23:34:
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 20:16:
Kxmode wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 19:04:
The thing is VR, not AR, is the best enhancement for a flight simulator.

That's not at all clear on the basis of first-gen headsets. Some issues:
* VR headsets are less sharp and have less clarity of image as compared to a 4K monitor. This renders instruments and displays harder to read and, in a combat sim, other planes and ground targets harder to distinguish. This was my number one complaint with trying out an Oculus with DCS: it was felt comparable to downgrading back to a 1080p display.
* Peripherals become harder to use. I do not have an extensive peripheral setup, just the Warthog HOTAS, but the switch panel integrated into the base of the throttle was basically unusable without taking both hands off the controls, using one to raise the headset a bit, and then glancing down with my peripheral vision to manipulate a switch with my other hand. The fact that the switch panel was rendered in game was little help unless the switch I wanted was at the edge of the panel.
* Head tracking has been a solved problem for about 15 years thanks to TrackIR and VR offers little real improvement. TrackIR isn't perfect, but once you have well calibrated input curves, and so long as direct sunlight isn't shining into the tracker's FoV, then it works very well.

What VR has to offer over a standard setup is immersion and depth perception, but right now it is simply less usable than the alternatives, albeit still a really cool experience. As the displays improve, I could see VR eventually becoming preferable to a 4k monitor + TrackIR. Until then though, it's a tough sell for a hobby where you never have enough pixel density.

1. Augmented reality means you're looking at a three-dimension objects placed into your field of view (likely the room with your computer). You can't immerse yourself in a flight simulator with augmented reality. Virtual reality, on the other hand, puts you into a fully immersive environment.

2. I'm sorry, but your statement that "VR headsets are less sharp and have less clarity of image as compared to a 4K monitor" is wrong, and here's why. Valve's Index "uses a 1440×1600 LCD panel for each eye for a combined resolution of 2880×1600." 4K-UHD is 3840×2160 (this is the more common resolution for gamings) and true 4K 4096×2160 (this is the more common 4K resolution for movies and broadcasts). The index gives you a screen dimension that is 1000×560 less than 4K-UHD. When you're eyes see an image at 2880×1600, you will notice the better visual fidelity.

1. I would argue that AR might be even better than VR for high-end flight simming. The AR headset could project the world outside the windows of the plane (what you'd see outside the windows of the plan) and the instruments, while projecting your HOTAS, etc. down below so you don't have to take your headset off to interact with it.

2. SMA said that VR headsets have less resolution than a 4K monitor, you said that's wrong, then you provided stats that 4K monitors have higher resolution than VR! Help me understand.

Also, simmers often combine Track IR with a triple monitor set up. Even at 1080P, that's almost the same resolution as the Track IR (5760x1080) and 1440P surpasses it easily. Here's an example of one such set up, where the player can both pan around easily, see the outside world in exquisite detail, and interact with all of his gear.
 
Avatar 22024
 



The land in Minecraft is flat, Minecraft simulates the Earth, ergo the Earth is flat.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

16. Re: Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 15, 2019, 02:39 Orogogus
 
BIGtrouble77 wrote on Oct 15, 2019, 00:06:
I dunno, I have a Rift and the resolution sucks ass. Anything with an instrument panel with even the slightest bit of detail is going to suck. I can just barely stomach Elite Dangerous with my headset.

I mean, the Index isn't a Rift CV1. Resolution and image quality have only improved since then, except for blacks. I have a CV1, too, and I can believe that the blurriness problem has been getting better and better across the Vive Pro, the Odyssey/O+, the Reverb and the Index.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

15. Re: Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 15, 2019, 00:06 BIGtrouble77
 
Kxmode wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 23:34:
2. I'm sorry, but your statement that "VR headsets are less sharp and have less clarity of image as compared to a 4K monitor" is wrong, and here's why. Valve's Index "uses a 1440×1600 LCD panel for each eye for a combined resolution of 2880×1600." 4K-UHD is 3840×2160 (this is the more common resolution for gamings) and true 4K 4096×2160 (this is the more common 4K resolution for movies and broadcasts). The index gives you a screen dimension that is 1000×560 less than 4K-UHD. When you're eyes see an image at 2880×1600, you will notice the better visual fidelity.
I dunno, I have a Rift and the resolution sucks ass. Anything with an instrument panel with even the slightest bit of detail is going to suck. I can just barely stomach Elite Dangerous with my headset.
 
Avatar 20018
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

14. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 14, 2019, 23:34 Kxmode
 
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 20:16:
Kxmode wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 19:04:
The thing is VR, not AR, is the best enhancement for a flight simulator.

That's not at all clear on the basis of first-gen headsets. Some issues:
* VR headsets are less sharp and have less clarity of image as compared to a 4K monitor. This renders instruments and displays harder to read and, in a combat sim, other planes and ground targets harder to distinguish. This was my number one complaint with trying out an Oculus with DCS: it was felt comparable to downgrading back to a 1080p display.
* Peripherals become harder to use. I do not have an extensive peripheral setup, just the Warthog HOTAS, but the switch panel integrated into the base of the throttle was basically unusable without taking both hands off the controls, using one to raise the headset a bit, and then glancing down with my peripheral vision to manipulate a switch with my other hand. The fact that the switch panel was rendered in game was little help unless the switch I wanted was at the edge of the panel.
* Head tracking has been a solved problem for about 15 years thanks to TrackIR and VR offers little real improvement. TrackIR isn't perfect, but once you have well calibrated input curves, and so long as direct sunlight isn't shining into the tracker's FoV, then it works very well.

What VR has to offer over a standard setup is immersion and depth perception, but right now it is simply less usable than the alternatives, albeit still a really cool experience. As the displays improve, I could see VR eventually becoming preferable to a 4k monitor + TrackIR. Until then though, it's a tough sell for a hobby where you never have enough pixel density.

1. Augmented reality means you're looking at a three-dimension objects placed into your field of view (likely the room with your computer). You can't immerse yourself in a flight simulator with augmented reality. Virtual reality, on the other hand, puts you into a fully immersive environment.

2. I'm sorry, but your statement that "VR headsets are less sharp and have less clarity of image as compared to a 4K monitor" is wrong, and here's why. Valve's Index "uses a 1440×1600 LCD panel for each eye for a combined resolution of 2880×1600." 4K-UHD is 3840×2160 (this is the more common resolution for gamings) and true 4K 4096×2160 (this is the more common 4K resolution for movies and broadcasts). The index gives you a screen dimension that is 1000×560 less than 4K-UHD. When you're eyes see an image at 2880×1600, you will notice the better visual fidelity.
 
Avatar 18786
 



William Shakespeare's "Star Wars" Act I, Scene 1: Aboard the rebel ship. / Enter C-3PO and R2-D2. / C-3PO: "Now is the summer of our happiness / Made winter by this sudden, fierce attack!" / R2-D2 — Beep beep, Beep, beep, meep, squeak, beep, whee!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

13. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 14, 2019, 20:52 CJ_Parker
 
Avus wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 18:08:
VR goggles is actually not a good simulator training tool (too cut off from the real world). Flight sim is not only about flying. It is also about instrumental controlling/learning. It is much better the pilot actually TOUCH these buttons/switches/levers.

Are you sure you know how VR works? If VR is properly implemented then you'd have an accurately modeled cockpit where you can flick every single switch with your touch controllers. No cheap Saitek (or MadCatz or whatever they are called now) panel can replicate the VR simulation of pushing the "real" buttons in the cockpit.

I agree that you need to be an advanced sim pilot if you want to properly use VR, however. You need to know the plane inside out. Most people will have to start with a screen (or surround setup) to learn the procedures. It will take many, many hours of learning in 2D before VR becomes a viable option.

Besides, people with five digit sim pits and projectors are not exactly in the majority or the main target audience. This new FS is coming out on Xbox and let's not kid ourselves here in spite of all the lofty promises.
The sim will have to have a casual appeal and a major reason why MS is even doing this is certainly to have an exclusive that Sony will not have on the PS5. It's a USP to have a new FS on the Xbox in addition to many more first party exclusives by the devs that MS has gobbled up over the past few years.

I'll believe in their advertised level of simulation when I see it. Like you, I am also more interested in the depth of the simulated systems, avionics, weather, AI (ATC & traffic) and planes (PMDG level would be ace) than in flashy graphics. It will definitely look good but that is not really what makes a great sim at the end of the day.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

12. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 14, 2019, 20:27 Bumpy
 
Porn-O-Matic wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 13:26:

You also know that if they rush to get VR support at launch, it will probably not be optimized and you're just going to see those same VR pussies get their panties all wadded up over THAT shit. OMFG, what-fucking-ever.

Yeah, this but in a more calm voice.

Sure VR can be slapped in for the 'ohh look at that' thrill but to do VR properly so you can read and control all the controls of a complex airliner is going to be a huge undertaking to get 'right'.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

11. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 14, 2019, 20:16 Scottish Martial Arts
 
Kxmode wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 19:04:
The thing is VR, not AR, is the best enhancement for a flight simulator.

That's not at all clear on the basis of first-gen headsets. Some issues:
* VR headsets are less sharp and have less clarity of image as compared to a 4K monitor. This renders instruments and displays harder to read and, in a combat sim, other planes and ground targets harder to distinguish. This was my number one complaint with trying out an Oculus with DCS: it was felt comparable to downgrading back to a 1080p display.
* Peripherals become harder to use. I do not have an extensive peripheral setup, just the Warthog HOTAS, but the switch panel integrated into the base of the throttle was basically unusable without taking both hands off the controls, using one to raise the headset a bit, and then glancing down with my peripheral vision to manipulate a switch with my other hand. The fact that the switch panel was rendered in game was little help unless the switch I wanted was at the edge of the panel.
* Head tracking has been a solved problem for about 15 years thanks to TrackIR and VR offers little real improvement. TrackIR isn't perfect, but once you have well calibrated input curves, and so long as direct sunlight isn't shining into the tracker's FoV, then it works very well.

What VR has to offer over a standard setup is immersion and depth perception, but right now it is simply less usable than the alternatives, albeit still a really cool experience. As the displays improve, I could see VR eventually becoming preferable to a 4k monitor + TrackIR. Until then though, it's a tough sell for a hobby where you never have enough pixel density.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

10. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 14, 2019, 19:04 Kxmode
 
Avus wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 18:08:
SirKnight wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 12:37:
I don't understand why this wasn't obvious since the start of the project. OF COURSE a flight sim needs VR. There's a piece of software that lets you use VR with Flight Sim X and it's amazing how much more real it feels to be sitting in the cockpit and looking around naturally with your head. Sims are a perfect fit for VR.

Because hardcore/professional flight "simmer" don't prefer VR.... Professional flight simulator need/prefer real instrument panels and multi-screen setup. VR goggles is actually not a good simulator training tool (too cut off from the real world). Flight sim is not only about flying. It is also about instrumental controlling/learning. It is much better the pilot actually TOUCH these buttons/switches/levers. I think MS did the right thing not to spend the initial development time into VR. Map details, plane/aerodynamic physics, atmospheres/weather physics are much more important and MS actually have no less than 5 development teams working on these.

Many professionals train on simulations that emulate a real-world plane. It includes a cockpit that is to scale with all the instrumentation as tangible objects that are not on-screen. The VR in a flight sim would simulate the real-world physics of looking around and interacting with the instruments. It's still not on the level of a professional simulator but would get it closer.

Avus wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 18:08:
Flight sim and even driving sim DON'T need VR!! It is still a gimmick tools at this point.

VR would be a massive boon in that it follows the real-world physics of looking around. Pilots and drivers do this all the time without thinking.

Avus wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 18:08:
Some of you who cheap shot MS above have no idea how serious MS develop this version of Flight Simulator.

https://youtu.be/MOPIjzzH1G8

Here are some high tech stuff for it
* Map available: Only ONE map - the Planet EARTH via Microsoft Bing! 3D objects (AI create trees & building...) stream from MS servers!!
* Water affected by wind, created wave
* 32 lays of atmospheres and clouds form depend on them
* full day/night and yearly cycle. Position of sun and moon and stars map correctly.
* aerodynamic physics completely rewritten
* and many more....

I will say this "game" is MUCH MORE technological advance than Star Citizen.

I don't believe anyone is "cheap shotting" Microsoft's commitment to developing a modern flight simulator. They're critical of Microsoft not making VR an integral part of it. The reason may have to do with Microsoft's commitment to AR via their Hololens tech that hasn't taken off as big as VR has. The thing is VR, not AR, is the best enhancement for a flight simulator.
 
Avatar 18786
 



William Shakespeare's "Star Wars" Act I, Scene 1: Aboard the rebel ship. / Enter C-3PO and R2-D2. / C-3PO: "Now is the summer of our happiness / Made winter by this sudden, fierce attack!" / R2-D2 — Beep beep, Beep, beep, meep, squeak, beep, whee!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

9. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 14, 2019, 18:08 Avus
 
SirKnight wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 12:37:
I don't understand why this wasn't obvious since the start of the project. OF COURSE a flight sim needs VR. There's a piece of software that lets you use VR with Flight Sim X and it's amazing how much more real it feels to be sitting in the cockpit and looking around naturally with your head. Sims are a perfect fit for VR.

Because hardcore/professional flight "simmer" don't prefer VR.... Professional flight simulator need/prefer real instrument panels and multi-screen setup. VR goggles is actually not a good simulator training tool (too cut off from the real world). Flight sim is not only about flying. It is also about instrumental controlling/learning. It is much better the pilot actually TOUCH these buttons/switches/levers. I think MS did the right thing not to spend the initial development time into VR. Map details, plane/aerodynamic physics, atmospheres/weather physics are much more important and MS actually have no less than 5 development teams working on these.

Flight sim and even driving sim DON'T need VR!! It is still a gimmick tools at this point.

Some of you who cheap shot MS above have no idea how serious MS develop this version of Flight Simulator.

https://youtu.be/MOPIjzzH1G8

Here are some high tech stuff for it
* Map available: Only ONE map - the Planet EARTH via Microsoft Bing! 3D objects (AI create trees & building...) stream from MS servers!!
* Water affected by wind, created wave
* 32 lays of atmospheres and clouds form depend on them
* full day/night and yearly cycle. Position of sun and moon and stars map correctly.
* aerodynamic physics completely rewritten
* and many more....


I will say this "game" is MUCH MORE technological advance than Star Citizen.

This comment was edited on Oct 14, 2019, 18:38.
 
Avatar 58298
 



“I am not a Mac user unless under duress.” - John Carmack
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

8. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 14, 2019, 14:27 BIGtrouble77
 
SirKnight wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 12:40:
BIGtrouble77 wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 12:09:
The last MS Flightsim I bought was v4.0 around 1990. After 30 years of virtually no interest, I think I'm all in on this one. Seriously looks like a massive step forward from every other flight sim out there.


Flight Sim 5.0 was a pretty massive jump from 4.0. 5.0 is the first one I bought and it has always stayed as my favorite, or at least close to the top. Even though later versions got even more detailed and better in every way, there's still something about version 5 that I really like.

I recently bought a new sealed copy of 4.0 on ebay. It says it's from 1989 and is on 5.25" floppies. I hope my only 5.25" drive I have left still works. While I do have other methods to get it on that old machine, I like doing it the "right" way.
I definitely got my copy in 1990, but it did come out in '89. I distinctly remember the manager at Egghead software trying to talk me out of buying it.

4.0 is easy to find online if you can't get the floppies to work... having the box and manuals is still awesome.
 
Avatar 20018
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

7. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 14, 2019, 13:26 Porn-O-Matic
 
Since I jumped on the VR bandwagon about a year ago and got a HMD of my own, one of my biggest pet peeves are the spoiled little pissy-pants VR bitches who make bullshit statements like, "I won't buy it if it doesn't support VR", or "I refuse to play 2D games now."

Fuck those snot-nosed cocksuckers. Fuck them up their stupid asses.

As awesome as VR can be (and I have over 60 VR games so far) I'll be the first to tell you that it's not THAT great, not by a long shot, and it's certainly not anywhere NEAR great enough to make me give up on 2D gaming or refuse to buy a game that doesn't have VR support. I am FAR more disappointed that FS 2020 won't have helicopters at launch than I am about not having VR. Besides, the frame rate and resolution clarity of my 1440p gaming monitor is going to be more satisfying than even the best VR headset anyway.

You also know that if they rush to get VR support at launch, it will probably not be optimized and you're just going to see those same VR pussies get their panties all wadded up over THAT shit. OMFG, what-fucking-ever.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

6. Re: On Microsoft Flight Simulator VR Plans Oct 14, 2019, 12:40 SirKnight
 
CJ_Parker wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 12:40:
SirKnight wrote on Oct 14, 2019, 12:37:
I don't understand why this wasn't obvious since the start of the project.

Microsoft.

'nuff sed


This is true. lol
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >