PDA

View Full Version : does more realisim = less fun



Badsight.
05-16-2005, 07:23 AM
i know a few arcade settings die-hards

more difficult settings cut back on their enjoyment , they like it fast & furious

so for them the handeling-on-rails of FB-PF as per v3.04 is fantastic

what if FB , or more to the point BoB , became less so & more accurately replicated real flight ?

would playing FB where its harder to be effective cut back on your fun ?

where you make less hits & where you are not able to pull off moves you can now , but instead have to have a more carefull approach to the game

i know Richard Burns Rally kicked rally game fun in the nuts for me , CMR while being arcade , is 10x less frustration which equates to more fun when im out to do so clean stages for half an hour

TgD Thunderbolt56
05-16-2005, 07:37 AM
does more realisim = less fun


It can.


I fly in RL and look forward to the "more realistic" FM's. I'm sure that for some it will take some of the fun-factor away and for others, they may need a bib to contain their excitement. I'm hoping for a nice balance between realism and playability...but then again, I thought that's what we already had.

I guess we'll see.


TB

VW-IceFire
05-16-2005, 07:41 AM
Depends on the realism involved. A 20 minute pre-flight startup sequence is more realistic but I'd hardly call that fun. Oleg has it about right in this regard...turn the engine on, get rolling.

As for the flight modeling. Look back at Aces of the Pacific...that was REALLY on rails. People have adapted to a much more sophisticated system several times now...they still fly the same arcade like way. I can see some initial complaints but people will either turn of whatever is troubling them (torque, stalls, whatever) or learn to fly with them.

All of those toggles are still going to be in place.

Tooz_69GIAP
05-16-2005, 07:43 AM
Depends what you are after. I prefer to fly full switch simply because I enjoy flying around hunting, and planning my attacks, etc. Whereas in the servers with wonder woman view and icons, and padlock, etc, it is harder to fly that way, and to me that is frustrating. There's simply no break to the action, and you have to constantly be looking around youfor the next maniac trying to ram you.

It all depends on what you are looking for.

As for BoB, I have a feeling the difficulty settings will be scalable as they are now so this question is maybe a little redundant. If the settings aren't scalable it would really surprise me!!

arcadeace
05-16-2005, 07:47 AM
To me this is a different angle on the old discussion, WW vs 'full real'. It'll always come down to the individual. I just want to have fun; I don't have TIR and I have to see, so I use distance icons. I have the money to get TIR but I'm enjoying the game with my current settings so I'm good, and that's me.

As far as BoB I think Oleg will have the same range of difficulty settings because he wants the sim to sell, right...

3.JG51_BigBear
05-16-2005, 07:48 AM
I think when I first started less realism was more fun but after playing the game for four years now it has to be full switch or nothing. I think in flight sims its important to start out with less realism so that the player can get a sense of how planes will handle and what the best setup is for their rig without having to worry about prop pitch and radiator flaps. As time goes on, realism options can be introduced and I think they make it more challenging and more fun. It'll always be important to have scalable difficulty so that the game can appeal to the casual player who plays a wider variety of games all the way to the hardcore players that dable in other games but always come back to the flight sim.

x__CRASH__x
05-16-2005, 07:54 AM
I'll never understand the excuse "I don't have TIR so I can't fly closed cockpit. I own a TIR 3 Pro, but I didn't like it, so I stuck with the snap view hat switch. I can kick a lot of butt, no matter what the other guy is using.(I'm going to give TIR some serious training when I get home)

My point is that it's the pilot's skill at what they have. Not any particular gizmo.

Anyway, I used to fly arcade all the time. Eventually I just got bored with it and longed for something more challenging. Cockpit On was a pain in the a$$. It took a lot of practice to get used to it and good at it. Now I prefer it. When I fly in arcade servers for fun now, I get bored because its just too easy. So I prefer the harder settings for the challenge.

fabianfred
05-16-2005, 08:20 AM
I am playing the Guadalcanal co-op series about VMF223 at the moment...
I've been converting the missions to 'single' play so that I can run them together as a campaign...
I've always liked single because I can use auto if I want, especially to view the action elsewhere and with the static cameras, and also use the speed up or down option sometimes...up to get through a boring flight...down to get through hot action which causes stutter..

started them out by playing in co-op mode...I must admit it was more fun as you couldn't pause for a coffee so had to do all the flying yourself....because of the time spent getting to the action with no time skip available I wasn't so blase about getting put down, more careful with my life
harder but more fun
I like to complain that the AI have much more ammo than we, so often choose unlimited ammo, but now tend to go for limited but unreal ammo so you have to try not to waste any ammo by squirting away when too far off, but still get a chance to kill without using all your ammo on a single plane and still having it fly away..

now I turn off icons, map icons, speedbar, minimap path etc too....
haven't been able to fly without cockpit for ages, otherwise I get vertigo...

the most unreal and annoying thing is the STUPID STUPID STUPID AI on our own side http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

LilHorse
05-16-2005, 09:20 AM
Full switch = full fun for me. I never liked icons and I actually got pretty good at navigating sans mini-map path. Also the more realistic the FM, DM, and ballistics the better as far as I'm concerned.

The thing I find missing these days are online wars. I always found it much more interesting when there was an actual mission to be acomplished. And you had to fight smart because if you got killed or bailed you were
out. Nobody seems interested much in this these days. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

tjaika1910
05-16-2005, 09:29 AM
For me,more realism = more fun

I have played occationally on arcade-servers like JG_Oldies. Good training but last time I really got busted.

Of curse I stay in the cockpit in that server and dont use the padlockthing whatever that is.

Unless it is too many buzzing around you can manage in such a server, using the mouse to look, not using outside views.

But mostly, I play on servers as real as possible with TS.

BUT: we have the possibility to choose. Offline a newbee can turn it really arcadish. Good thing, as I think it brings more people to the sim.

TAGERT.
05-16-2005, 09:35 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
i know a few arcade settings die-hards

more difficult settings cut back on their enjoyment , they like it fast & furious

so for them the handeling-on-rails of FB-PF as per v3.04 is fantastic

what if FB , or more to the point BoB , became less so & more accurately replicated real flight ?

would playing FB where its harder to be effective cut back on your fun ?

where you make less hits & where you are not able to pull off moves you can now , but instead have to have a more carefull approach to the game

i know Richard Burns Rally kicked rally game fun in the nuts for me , CMR while being arcade , is 10x less frustration which equates to more fun when im out to do so clean stages for half an hour Define FUN and then I will answer you question, but, I belive that during the process of trying to define FUN you will, or should, realise that FUN is relitive to the person. Two examples, some people find it FUN to make it as real as posiable, to deal with every aspect of realism they can, OTHERS need shinny shinny wizz-bang constant input and are use to Quake types of games where there is never a break in the action and they spawn faster then they can die. Those two discriptions are the two ends of the scale of flight simulation fun, most fall somewhere inbetween and near one end or the other.

TAGERT.
05-16-2005, 09:39 AM
Originally posted by x__CRASH__x:
I'll never understand the excuse "I don't have TIR so I can't fly closed cockpit. I own a TIR 3 Pro, but I didn't like it, so I stuck with the snap view hat switch. I can kick a lot of butt, no matter what the other guy is using.(I'm going to give TIR some serious training when I get home)

My point is that it's the pilot's skill at what they have. Not any particular gizmo.

Anyway, I used to fly arcade all the time. Eventually I just got bored with it and longed for something more challenging. Cockpit On was a pain in the a$$. It took a lot of practice to get used to it and good at it. Now I prefer it. When I fly in arcade servers for fun now, I get bored because its just too easy. So I prefer the harder settings for the challenge. Agreed 100%

T_O_A_D
05-16-2005, 09:44 AM
I can't imagine Oleg making it full hard no fun.

It will, I'm sure it will have toggles so the masses can enjoy it any way they want to. It's about the money, I would think.

Oh Crash you should get the TIR working, it the least you could do since they are willing to support your cause http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

If you need help just let me know.

Tooz_69GIAP
05-16-2005, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by LilHorse:
The thing I find missing these days are online wars. I always found it much more interesting when there was an actual mission to be acomplished. And you had to fight smart because if you got killed or bailed you were
out. Nobody seems interested much in this these days. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

There are several online wars happening. I don't fly all of them, but the majority do have various missions to be accomplished.

Check out Forgotten Skies (http://www.forgottenskies.com), or Tactical Air Combat (http://www.242sqn.com/TAC/) for a couple of decent online wars with a good community.

Doug_Thompson
05-16-2005, 12:36 PM
I'm opposed to fantasy just to please the customers. I firmly believe that if you go that route, somebody will invent a game even dumber than yours that's a LOT more fun.

I have no objections to scalable difficulty. I let the AI handle engine management when I play. But I know there are people out there who adjust their own fuel mixture and prop pitch, and respect them. I know they are better at this than I am, and can deal with that.

I like having a distinction between people who are good and people who are lucky and have good reflexes.

Tallyho1961
05-16-2005, 12:38 PM
For me the whole IL2 attraction has been more about learning how aircraft work and how to 'fly' them, than about knocking down enemies - although that part is great fun http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif - so the more real, the more better, as far as I am concerned.

With the exception of the previously noted 20-minute warmup, of course.

VW-IceFire
05-16-2005, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by Tallyho1961:
For me the whole IL2 attraction has been more about learning how aircraft work and how to 'fly' them, than about knocking down enemies - although that part is great fun http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif - so the more real, the more better, as far as I am concerned.

With the exception of the previously noted 20-minute warmup, of course.
For sure...I'm all for more realism. I'm looking forward to 4.0 because of the FM changes...I hear gunnery is harder, flying is a bit harder or more challenging, and you have to know a little more about what you're doing and you aren't allowed to do as many a-historical things as you were before.

But some things we don't need as its still a game that is entertainment and a distraction from the blase of our normal lives.

And I'm all for toggle switches...people need options to cater to the way they want to play. No matter what. I just prefer to turn most of the hard things on and see how the chips fall.

jugent
05-16-2005, 01:37 PM
More realism doesnt necessary mean die-hard.

For me the most fun would be if an 20mm HE inflicts as much damage as another, and a 7.9 mm MG-shot does as much damage as 0.303, and a hit in an inline engine makes the aircraft smoke and smear independendent of what plane it was.
When a HE-hit from the distance of 250m does the same damage as one from 25m.

Conclusion a game that I dont find any bias in.

WOLFMondo
05-16-2005, 01:45 PM
Depends on your personal defination of fun. For me full real is a source of constant frustration but when you do well theres a sense of achivement i.e. fun!

Grue_
05-16-2005, 01:59 PM
I've just started playing in a full difficulty squad and the feeling I get when I switch the engine off after a successful heart thumping mission is pure relief.

This is my kind of fun but the game has difficulty options to please everyone which makes the fun available to all.

Wilburnator
05-16-2005, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by Tooz_69GIAP:
you have to constantly be looking around youfor the next maniac trying to ram you.

Lol... and that maniac would be me. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

NorrisMcWhirter
05-16-2005, 02:04 PM
More _consistency_ would be BOTH more realistic and fun.

Cheers,
Norris

Tallyho1961
05-16-2005, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tallyho1961:
For me the whole IL2 attraction has been more about learning how aircraft work and how to 'fly' them, than about knocking down enemies - although that part is great fun http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif - so the more real, the more better, as far as I am concerned.

With the exception of the previously noted 20-minute warmup, of course.
For sure...I'm all for more realism. I'm looking forward to 4.0 because of the FM changes...I hear gunnery is harder, flying is a bit harder or more challenging, and you have to know a little more about what you're doing and you aren't allowed to do as many a-historical things as you were before.

But some things we don't need as its still a game that is entertainment and a distraction from the blase of our normal lives.

And I'm all for toggle switches...people need options to cater to the way they want to play. No matter what. I just prefer to turn most of the hard things on and see how the chips fall. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

With you 100% on the options - we all need to find our level. And to start full real would have killed my interest real quick. I added realism as I got more comfortable in the pit.

rnzoli
05-16-2005, 02:36 PM
No. I define "fun" as something interesting, challenging, but not completely out of reach. For me, that is Full Real, if possible. If not possible, I enter rooms with easier settings, but never with cockpit off. Arcade is great, too, I never look down at those people playing easy servers, but those easy settings are not fun for me at all. No problem at all, simply we are different http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

HellToupee
05-16-2005, 04:25 PM
more fun for me is externals and some sort of icons, externals because i like to watch whats going on also i like to look at my own plane admire my nifty skin. Icons because i like to know who my team mates are no just an empty sky of dots that simply only differ in what not to shoot.

Generally on full real i feel more like a lone wolf than part of a team, team mates are simply alternate targets for the enemy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. Plus generally playing on the local server with icons and externals with only 10-15 players it feels like twice as many as 40 odd players in the full switch servers.

How ever i generally find full real much easyer to do well in http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

SeaFireLIV
05-16-2005, 04:31 PM
As others have said `fun` (I hate the way this word is used in the context of a flight sim or anything based on reality in a game for that matter) is open to interpretation. One man`s fun is another man`s unfun.

But I believe you can have something more realistic and still have...`fun.`

I won`t bother elaborating.

Bearcat99
05-16-2005, 06:52 PM
Originally posted by TAGERT.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by x__CRASH__x:
I'll never understand the excuse "I don't have TIR so I can't fly closed cockpit. I own a TIR 3 Pro, but I didn't like it, so I stuck with the snap view hat switch. I can kick a lot of butt, no matter what the other guy is using.(I'm going to give TIR some serious training when I get home)

My point is that it's the pilot's skill at what they have. Not any particular gizmo.

Anyway, I used to fly arcade all the time. Eventually I just got bored with it and longed for something more challenging. Cockpit On was a pain in the a$$. It took a lot of practice to get used to it and good at it. Now I prefer it. When I fly in arcade servers for fun now, I get bored because its just too easy. So I prefer the harder settings for the challenge. Agreed 100% </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is why I still use the mouse pan button of my X-45. For me TIR is something that enhances certain parts of the flying.. it adds immersion.. I shut it off when I am engaging a bandit and use the mouse hat.

I am flexible with settings... I dont mind icons.. but the pits are such a thing of beauty.

I think more realism=more immersion=more fun. I have been able to have a total blast with FB from 1.0 to 3.04 (on an upward curve) and all points in between. For me the fun factor goes beyond simply FMs... the DMs, graphics,AI (sniper or otherwise), scalability and of course.. my squadmates.. make all the difference between whether or not I am having fun or just wasting my time. I have yet to waste my time with this sim in that sense. It is always fun.. everytime I boot up from a QM to a fully manned Coop...

I am not qualigied to say what is more or less"realistic" but I do know what I like and IMO more realistic should be better than what we have now... which is more realistic than any sim I have ever flown in... and since I am familiar with some of the laws of physics I should be able to at the very least have an idea as to whether they are or arent more realistic... however since IMO they have consistently gotten more and more realistic wit each incarnation... I am confident that whatever we get ion 4.XX will be better than what we have now.

Badsight.
05-16-2005, 10:17 PM
i understand how settings are a big thing to most people , theres some setting most of us either really like or dislike , & im the same

but what im really trying to get at is how this game plays

if this game became harder to pull off the moves we can now due to it replicating real flight more accuratly , making it harder to be effective , would it lessen your "enjoyment" ?

for some i talk too , it probably would

ImpStarDuece
05-17-2005, 01:52 AM
I used to be an arcade flyer (pit off, icons and externals on), primarily because I had 2.04 when the rest of the community was on 3.04 and there were strictly limited servers.

Arcade was fun but things didn't start to do it for me until I got PF and started flying pit on servers.

There is something about not knowing if that dot over there is a freindly and not having perfect vision all around that makes a flight that more intense. I value undernose deflection shots, bouncing unwary victims and that creeping sense of paranioa that being at low altitude gives me.

I also feel that the pilots of 'full switch' servers tend to fight in more historically appropriate ways. You just get that more immersive, challenging, rewarding and, for me, overall more fun, feeling when you fly full switch.

arcadeace
05-17-2005, 02:04 AM
Badsight you're implying a more sophisticated sim = more difficulty. Various factors can't be modeled into our experience with current home PC usage. In real WWII combat obviously some of those would make it much, much more difficult in which we won't contend with. But some factors could make it easier, over the huge limitations of our current 2D deskchair challenge.

More accurate FMs may not mean greater difficulty. Plus, in BoB with TIR forward/backward head movement SA might be better. I think FB/PF is a higher step in sophistication than Il2 tho based on the same engine, but Il2 was more difficult for me flying, yet less difficult against inferior AI. The premise at this point that greater realism means greater difficulty in the totality of our experience is a presumption IMHO.

Its certainly desirable as it enhances immersion, and if that means greater challenge so be it for me. I definitly want more accurate, realistic AI. But the experience of 'flying' doesn't necessarily have to be more difficult if its accurate to reality within our very limited sim parameters. For sure this will be debated as we're in the midst of playing BoB.

msalama
05-17-2005, 02:04 AM
would it lessen your "enjoyment"?

For me, the answer is a definite NO. Quite the contrary, actually, now that you mention it...

rnzoli
05-17-2005, 04:56 AM
Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:
I used to be an arcade flyer (pit off, icons and externals on), primarily because I had 2.04 when the rest of the community was on 3.04 and there were strictly limited servers.

Uh-oh... I have v1.22 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif ,with even less selection of servers (hosts). Recently, out of frustration with the merciless bloodbath on easy settings, I started to open a dedicated v1.22 server with FR. I thought no one would come...but to my surprise, a few people actually do (and some come back regularly) - even on v1.22!

(What I can not understand: why some people curse and complain about the FR settings in the room already? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif)

carguy_
05-17-2005, 05:44 AM
To some extent.I`m glad most coops offer speedbar cuz I`m unable to read gauges.
So full difficulty ruins it for me.I need speedbar or I can`t fly properly.

About hardware and sticks.I probably have the crappies setup of you all but I`m doing pretty good in realism coops.I think TrackIR would make my flying better but its not worth 100 bucks for me.

reverendkrv1972
05-17-2005, 11:57 AM
I have fun regardless of wether I'm in my m8 from works easy server,or flying in FR...or anywhere inbetween http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I've been skinning quite a bit lately so externals are cool,I can pick holes in my latest skin,or visualise more details I could implement,or get rid of.

then if the easy settings arent doing it for me,or I have plenty of time on my hands,i'll hit TS & fly Warbirds,or another 'harder' server.

It's all fun,especially when there's a good crowd to fly with http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Rev

JG54_Arnie
05-17-2005, 12:27 PM
Depends. Pressing 20 buttons before you can actually fly and having to press them in the right order is boring. But having realistic FM can only mean you see less unrealistic movements, are getting closer to the actual engagements in WW2 with tactics that work just as well as back then. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

han freak solo
05-17-2005, 08:49 PM
Originally posted by JG54_Arnie:
Depends. Pressing 20 buttons before you can actually fly and having to press them in the right order is boring.

Yawn. See I'm bored already.

Sitting in a real machine pulling levers, punching buttons, flipping switches isn't boring. But doing it on the computer can be like taking a sleep aide.

Same with long distance travel. IRL quite interesting. On the computer, SNORE. My short attention span won't let me fly stuff like FS2004. I'd just trim it up and go watch a movie.

Back to Badsight's query, I hope this sim doesn't get more than 5% more difficult. A sim is always harder to me than the real machine anyway, because YOU CAN'T FEEL WHAT YOUR DOING.

Any sim. Airplane, car, or motorcycle.

blakduk
05-17-2005, 09:42 PM
As with most questions, the answer is quite difficult and very dependent on numerous factors. 'Play' is actually a survival mechanism that humans are particularly programmed for- it allows us to enjoy mastering new skills and keeps us concentrating on novel problems. If however the task is too difficult and we dont get any positive feedback during our endeavours it quickly becomes a tiresome chore and we soon stop indulging in it. A lot of people get concerned with kids playing for hours on electronic toys, but once they have mastered them they quickly get forgotten and are never played with again. The trick is to get the learning curve to be not too steep but not too shallow either (or its not a challenge and we tend to get bored). With arcade style play its more fun at first but quickly mastered- that's where scalable difficulty comes in. Games like Pacific fighthers get the balance pretty right so that once people have mastered the basics they can take on new challenges to flying the aircraft- for most of us it takes years to even contemplate going full real. I dont go full real because i dont have the time to develop that level of skill (and i'm a slow learner).
The answer is- go as full real as you want. It should be challenging enough to be fun but not so difficult as to be disheartening.
NEVER FORGET THIS IS A GAME!!!!

Freelancer-1
05-17-2005, 09:46 PM
Does more realism=less fun?

Uh...Maybe

Lets wait and find out.

Badsight.
05-17-2005, 10:30 PM
han freak solo , your saying the same things i have had related to me from others

& JG54_Arnie , i totally agree & this point about less unrealistic manouvers might not go down so well with the less historically minded FB players

this game has fans of all ages & some have it just because its another game to play

that aside , all players have v3.04 & it allows , as all versions before it , you to pull off unrealistic manouvers

with v4.0 coming with what is said to be inertia replicating actions , we might see less manouverability at low speed close to stalling as we can do now

this further withdrawl from being merely a "game" towards a better simulation will undoubtedly have haters as well as fans

TAGERT.
05-17-2005, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
i understand how settings are a big thing to most people , theres some setting most of us either really like or dislike , & im the same

but what im really trying to get at is how this game plays

if this game became harder to pull off the moves we can now due to it replicating real flight more accuratly , making it harder to be effective , would it lessen your "enjoyment" ?

for some i talk too , it probably would Well that is kind of a DUH isnt it?

Realising that FUN is relitive, then ofcorse *some* will be upset when you draw a new line in the sand of realism.

Kind of like raising the bar on pole volting.. Some will make it over, some wont.

As with anything in life, it will be up to the user to decide if he wants to meet the challage, or stand on the sidelines and beyach about it.

Badsight.
05-17-2005, 11:19 PM
ok , so after that , would it or wouldnt it for you TAGERT

JG54_Arnie
05-18-2005, 12:22 AM
The question is how high that barrier is also. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Should be interesting to see how it works out! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

SeaFireLIV
05-18-2005, 01:33 AM
I`ve heard some real-life flyers say that flying an aircraft for real is actually [I]easier[I/] than in a simulation. So, who knows, more realistic could mean more...`fun`.

Did you know some WWII aircraft had a `safe` for their guns? If you forgot to take off the safety the guns wouldn`t fire? Novice real life fighter pilots would go chasing bombers and thinking, "These guns are amazingly quiet!"

I wish we had a `safety`; I can just imagine the new boys on line thinking the same thing. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Guess it wouldn`t be more `fun` for them though.

TAGERT.
05-18-2005, 08:10 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
ok , so after that , would it or wouldnt it for you TAGERT I have been flying flight sims for well over 10 years.. Every year they get more realistic.. Every year I step up to the challenge.. With such a trend, my guess would be that *I* would consider more realism more fun.. In that I have yet to find a bar that was too high.

But that is relitive to me (aka personal)

Others found sims like Red Baron I too *realistic* for them and stopped having flight simulator *fun* 13 years ago.. Some will find this new FM too *realistic* and stop having *fun* today.

But as a sim maker you can not *cater* to the fringe players that squeeze in an hour on a flight sim inbetween 5 or 6 hours of Quake or Doom.. That is not your market base.. Those types will allways fade away.

All you can do is provide enough options for those wize-bang Quake types to turn everything off.. In the hopes of making a few bucks off of them should they buy it and play it as a shoot-em-up arcade Quake type of game. But dont go out of your way to cater to thier needs.. like providing two FM's to choose from.. Because those types are just going to turn OFF every realism option anyways. In that the majority of the people that buy and play flight sims (aka market base) play with nearly full real settings and will step up to the challenge to have *fun*.

In summary, F the Quake players.. they will run off as soon as the next Half Life mod comes out anyways, cater to your base. Knowing that the base (aka majority) equates *realism* with *fun*

mynameisroland
05-18-2005, 08:11 AM
from my perspective I hate the limitations of interpreting a 3d dimensional world on a 2d screen. I think visibility is the most important aspect of this game. We fly all of the time like we are blinkered, frame your vision just now on your monitor then notice how much of your peripheral vision you are missing. So our full real settings are blinkering pilots visibility. In RL the vision out of a cockpit is much better than that depicted in game, the sense of inertia, gravity, fatigue ect are all missing. 'Full Real' certainly makes it more difficult but until I get Track ir Im not wasting my time trying to use the cross hatch button on my joystick in vain to crane my vision around to my 6 every 5 secs. Also if you are not on TS you end up flying around for 25 min intercepting 'Friendlies' and then get kicked randomly because server dumps on you.