Upcoming Flight Sims?

"tomcervo" <tomcervo RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote in message
news:7786c174-0ade-466d-8aac-16f9d093c3a6@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
I think the old sims started Easy Mode on default, and left it up to
the simmer to ratchet up the realism. They also had a simple but
attractive dashboard to draw you in. The IL-2 series has a front end
designed by an IRS agent.

Me thinks you look at the past through rose colored glasses.
 >> Stay informed about: Upcoming Flight Sims? 

"Briarroot" <Briarroot.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:13op0dgkrd9jiee@corp.supernews.com...
> Flight sims haven't been "killed" by anything within the sims themselves,
> they've been killed by the tremendously increased costs of development for
> *all* games. They always sold to a tiny market, but 10 or 15 years ago
> when development costs were so much less than they are now, that market
> was enough to generate a profit for a successful flight sim. There might
> be just as many flight sim fans today as there were back then, but we've
> become buried under an avalanche of millions of new PC gamers whose
> interest in the genre will never match our own, no matter how simple the
> sims get. As far as the major developers are concerned, PC flight sim
> fans are simply too few in number to bother with now. If the cost of
> developing a realistic flight sim and a typical shooter are the same, but
> the sim has a potential market saturation point of only 100,000 while the
> shooter's is 2,000.000, which product do you think they're going to
> pursue?

Yep, you understand the situation perfectly. Then we have people like Tom
Cervo and Denny Atkin who like to place the blame on us gamers for being too
demanding of the genre. Well, I would rather have no more flight sims than
some pathetic arcade game posing as a flight sim. But it ain't all that bad
because there are a few non-arcade flight sims in development right now. I'm
patient.
 >> Stay informed about: Upcoming Flight Sims? 

On Jan 15, 5:27�am, "*^&%$$#*%!" <some... RemoveThis @somewhere.invalid> wrote:
> Yep, you understand the situation perfectly. Then we have people like Tom
> Cervo and Denny Atkin who like to place the blame on us gamers for being too
> demanding of the genre.

Good company. Thanks.

> Well, I would rather have no more flight sims than
> some pathetic arcade game posing as a flight sim.

Define "arcade". Remember that every time that someone who's flown the
real thing in service tries a sim of same, he inevitably finds nothing
but the instruments to compare to the real thing. Real flying is a
total sensory experience that can not be simulated on a computer. It's
all "arcade", but some try more than others.

> But it ain't all that bad because there are a few non-arcade flight sims in development right now. I'm patient.

Me too. I'm still waiting for "Flying Nightmares II".
 >> Stay informed about: Upcoming Flight Sims? 

"Mark Gonzales" <enter_my_name DeleteThis @comcast.net> wrote in
news:5eadnY9dVMzrkhXanZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@comcast.com:

> "CJM" <cjmnews DeleteThis @removeme-yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:5uotbhF1jb4prU1@mid.individual.net...
>
>> When I started gaming in the early eighties, there were loads of
>> flight-sims around. Pretty crude by todays standards, but often good
>> fun. I used to love the career-based combat flight-sims like Gunship
>> and F19 Stealth Fighter. OK, a bit light on the simulation in some
>> respects, but very absorbing.
>
> Since you mentioned F19 Stealth Fighter, the follow-up F-117 was my
> all-time favorite flight sim...the stealthy deep penetration strikes!


DOS games seemed so much more entertaining.
 >> Stay informed about: Upcoming Flight Sims? 

*^&%$$#*%! wrote:
>
> "Briarroot" <Briarroot.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:13op0dgkrd9jiee@corp.supernews.com...
>> Flight sims haven't been "killed" by anything within the sims
>> themselves, they've been killed by the tremendously increased costs of
>> development for *all* games. They always sold to a tiny market, but
>> 10 or 15 years ago when development costs were so much less than they
>> are now, that market was enough to generate a profit for a successful
>> flight sim. There might be just as many flight sim fans today as
>> there were back then, but we've become buried under an avalanche of
>> millions of new PC gamers whose interest in the genre will never match
>> our own, no matter how simple the sims get. As far as the major
>> developers are concerned, PC flight sim fans are simply too few in
>> number to bother with now. If the cost of developing a realistic
>> flight sim and a typical shooter are the same, but the sim has a
>> potential market saturation point of only 100,000 while the shooter's
>> is 2,000.000, which product do you think they're going to pursue?
>
> Yep, you understand the situation perfectly. Then we have people like
> Tom Cervo and Denny Atkin who like to place the blame on us gamers for
> being too demanding of the genre. Well, I would rather have no more
> flight sims than some pathetic arcade game posing as a flight sim. But
> it ain't all that bad because there are a few non-arcade flight sims in
> development right now. I'm patient.

One exception is Microsoft Flight Simulator, which if what I've read
is true, sells millions of copies. I suspect, however, that the vast
majority of those buyers spend very little time with it, while the
number of hard-core aficionados who actually know the sim well and who
download every add-on and fan mod is very small.


--
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the
blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of
misery." - Winston Churchill
 >> Stay informed about: Upcoming Flight Sims? 

I have no problems its a awesome game
 >> Stay informed about: Upcoming Flight Sims? 

tomcervo <tomcervo RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote in news:b26ece01-b09b-41cb-aaf6-
c2f54adb4b78 RemoveThis @v29g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:

> On Jan 15, 5:27�am, "*^&%$$#*%!" <some... RemoveThis @somewhere.invalid> wrote:
>> Yep, you understand the situation perfectly. Then we have people like
Tom
>> Cervo and Denny Atkin who like to place the blame on us gamers for being
t
> oo
>> demanding of the genre.
>
> Good company. Thanks.
>
>> Well, I would rather have no more flight sims than
>> some pathetic arcade game posing as a flight sim.
>
> Define "arcade". Remember that every time that someone who's flown the
> real thing in service tries a sim of same, he inevitably finds nothing
> but the instruments to compare to the real thing. Real flying is a
> total sensory experience that can not be simulated on a computer. It's
> all "arcade", but some try more than others.


Real flying has its drawbacks as well. There is a lot
of truth in the saying that flying "hour upon hour of
tedious bordom interspaced with moments of sheer terror".

Let's hear it for "arcade" games that have all the
flying without the boredom.
 >> Stay informed about: Upcoming Flight Sims? 

In article <b26ece01-b09b-41cb-aaf6-c2f54adb4b78
@v29g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, tomcervo.RemoveThis@aol.com says...

> Me too. I'm still waiting for "Flying Nightmares II".

Personally...

....I'd love to see a TORNADO 2.0 and a brand spank'in new look at a
Raptor-based sim.

-Surfer
 >> Stay informed about: Upcoming Flight Sims? 

On Jan 18, 1:02�am, Surfer <phi....DeleteThis@comcast.net> wrote:
> In article <b26ece01-b09b-41cb-aaf6-c2f54adb4b78
> @v29g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, tomce....DeleteThis@aol.com says...
>
> > Me too. I'm still waiting for "Flying Nightmares II".
>
> Personally...
>
> ...I'd love to see a TORNADO 2.0 and a brand spank'in new look at a
> Raptor-based sim.

There's part of the problem too. Back in the late 90's DI was one of
the better sim companies. But they followed up Tornado with a Falcon
sim--gee, not many of them around--and their next effort was an FA-18
sim, the same quarter that Jane's released theirs.
Tornado 2, or a Harrier sim or a Eurofighter sim, all UK AC, would
have been a shrewder choice than either of theirs, but somebody wanted
to crack the US market. Their best seller in the US probably remains
Tornado.
As well, DISH failed to include a dynamic campaign, a hallmark of
their earlier work--there was even a blank slot for it in the
interface, but the suits wanted it out by X-Day, rather than when it
was ready. THAT attitude, as much or more than anything else, was a
sim-killer: unready for release software. Why pay to test betas when
the Falcon mod community is more trustworthy?
 >> Stay informed about: Upcoming Flight Sims? 

Tom...

....I recently have been running Tornado on my 185 Opteron / XP box out
of DOSbox. One great sim.

Anyone here still flying Aces High?

-Surfer

In article <df012acd-aa10-4e17-b144-
b3f06cfb75bb RemoveThis @z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, tomcervo RemoveThis @aol.com says...
> There's part of the problem too. Back in the late 90's DI was one of
> the better sim companies. But they followed up Tornado with a Falcon
> sim--gee, not many of them around--and their next effort was an FA-18
> sim, the same quarter that Jane's released theirs.
> Tornado 2, or a Harrier sim or a Eurofighter sim, all UK AC, would
> have been a shrewder choice than either of theirs, but somebody wanted
> to crack the US market. Their best seller in the US probably remains
> Tornado.
> As well, DISH failed to include a dynamic campaign, a hallmark of
> their earlier work--there was even a blank slot for it in the
> interface, but the suits wanted it out by X-Day, rather than when it
> was ready. THAT attitude, as much or more than anything else, was a
> sim-killer: unready for release software. Why pay to test betas when
> the Falcon mod community is more trustworthy?
 >> Stay informed about: Upcoming Flight Sims? 

>Seen "PC Shooter" lately? That's all it is now, a lot of copy trying
>to convince you that this month's model isn't just the same run-shoot-
>boss battle as last month's. They're freaking out about Bioshock
>because it's as good as System Shock, from 1995!

System Shock = 1994
System Shock >>> Bioshock
 >> Stay informed about: Upcoming Flight Sims?