Posts by John Hargreaves

    What's FS2 like in VR?

    Great work there mate, thanks for posting that here. I think you sum up the whole experience very accurately. To add to the discussion, I told my wife the other day I was saving up for a CV2, and she said 'what on earth for? You've only just got that one (CV1).' This shows us two things:
    1, Wives don't get stuff/think you're an idiot
    2, The CV1/VR is so good, that version 2 will be incredible.

    The resolution is about as good as it can be for current cpu/gpu power, but it will get better and it is the only weakness of VR currently imo. If you have even the vaguest interest in flying/driving/space then get one, it's the best toy I've bought for years.

    I'm thinking of getting RC 7, but I'm curious about what controller I can use. I have RealFlight basic, which comes with a USB RC controller, which reads as GP controller in windows. So I was wondering if anyone had any experience of this or had made a similar step and whether this controller might be ok. It looks very similar to the Icarus controller in the other thread.

    I don't think this controller works with the other versions of RealFlight, which is a bit disappointing as you'd think there would be an upgrade path to encourage you to stay with their system.

    I've been really enjoying the Aerofly FS2 flight sim, so I thought I might jump ship and go with the RC version too. Any advice appreciated, cheers.

    One thing I'd suggest, and I'm sure you'll have it well covered, is to emphasise the 'Early Access' part of the whole project. I think sometimes people don't quite grasp what that entails. There are many things that haven't been done yet, and it would be unfair to make direct comparisons with well established titles. Things like the photo water or the lack of ground traffic stand up poorly against more mature titles, but it's hardly right to criticise that at this stage. I'm looking forward to reading your review, I can see you've spent plenty of time researching it. Thanks in advance for your efforts.

    Not getting it right is certainly not limited to this DLC. Orbx, of all groups, do exactly the same thing and when called on the carpet about it, just ignore you or eventually lock the thread.

    I complained about one of the add on payware airports outside London where the very large high end auto design and manufacturing plant is practically in the landing pattern and half of the complex, maybe more, was not even coded. weird.

    Regards,

    Ray

    I think this brings up one or two things it's worth remembering. If we can post evidence of missing or inaccurate features, preferably supported by screenshots, that gives the devs the best chance of updating the details as and when they get chance. If FS2 is a success, there is more chance they will have the resources to patch and improve things, but a small dev team has to keep the cashflow going and get the sim up and running.

    With anything early access, you have to expect some less than polished elements, but our financial contributions by buying the DLC (which is pretty well priced compared to much on the market) help ensure the longer term success of the project. Remember that we haven't bought a finished game, we have bought into early access of a new project and there is a subtle difference. Feedback like this thread can be really useful to help the devs identify what needs improving, but if it gets to the 'calling on the carpet about it' then it tends to have a negative effect and is more likely to get ignored. I'd also suggest not thinking of it in terms of 'complaining' but bug reporting. I'm not having a go at Ray here, far from it, but it is something that often happens where people start to get very frustrated when no response comes from the dev team, so discussions escalate into slanging matches and accusatory posts, which doesn't help anyone.

    You should only enter into early access work if you are prepared to accept that it is a work in progress and that some features might or might not make it. What often seems like a quick fix may take lots of coding and may have knock on effects and introduce bugs elsewhere. I would guess most people are here because they want to see the next big sim, and FS2 is showing the potential to have a sniff of that. We can make a very positive difference as to how it develops.

    TL;DR If we keep it factual, back it up with evidence, and keep the feedback respectful and professional, there is a far greater chance that whatever bug is being reported will be fixed at some point, but there may be other priorities for the dev team in the short term, so please be patient.

    2 monitors here too, I have my main ultrawide for the game with an old 19" LCD at the side. It's a great combination, you can have a browser or task manager running alongside and visible. Works really well for those 6% FSX moments when you aren't sure whether the game has frozen when it's still loading after ten minutes, but you see the activity in tskmgr, so you don't lose faith. Sorry, I digress.

    Yes, a pop up window for the map would be great, have it floating on another screen. That would be a very desirable feature if it wasn't too hard to code.

    I went from a GTX970 to a GTX 1070 and it was really worth it. The 970 was right on the edge of being powerful enough for VR, but the 1070 breezes through most things you throw at it. Most modern games in 2D can be run on max settings, anything from Tomb Raider/The Division graphically intensive games through to sims like project cars and Dirt Rally. FSX and its offspring are certainly limited by the age of the code, but any proper modern title will be coded with modern hardware in mind, so the GPU is definitely made full use of.

    I think there is plenty of life left in an i7 at 4.5ghz, as cpu power is only increasing by a trickle these days each new generation, and there are some quite modern games that still don't make full use of multi core processors (DCS I believe).

    In VR we are still a way off having powerful enough systems to eat the thing for breakfast, but you will certainly have a very good experience with a 1080. I think cpu/gpu makers have become a bit complacent in recent years as there has been little to demand greater firepower from them; who cares if you get 100 or 200 fps in Crysis 3?

    FS2 is a nice modern game engine, and on my system I have recorded up to 450fps (in 2D) when flying high over mountains, and it still looked beautiful, so there is plenty of headroom for adding more objects/clouds/weather etc.

    In short, I would upgrade to the 1080 now and do the cpu next time round.

    I haven't tried the Aerofly RC sim, but ironically that is what brought me to this game. I have RealFlight basic and it's a really good simulation of RC planes and very enjoyable. It even comes with an RC type controller. I was browsing the Steam sale for a possible upgrade for this when I found FS2, so I ended up buying that instead after seeing the videos and putting 2+2 together and realising that this was 'Project A' on the OrbX forums. I figured if they were coming on board, this sim is going somewhere.

    My system specs in my signature would be a decent starting point for a gaming PC, it will handle most things out there and works great with Oculus Rift. I used the Thrustmaster Hotas X joystick for a year when I first got into flight sims and for £30 it's a great piece of kit.
    To start I'd recommend say a 24-27" 1080p monitor depending on space, and you don't need a separate soundcard, use the onboard and upgrade later if you wish (definitely worth it + the best headphones you can afford IMO).

    I would also recommend a FFB steering wheel if you intend to play driving sims, it makes a massive difference to immersion. Once you go down the rabbit hole of PC gaming you will be poorer but happier.

    I would add the New Yorker Hotel on 34th St opposite Penn station/Madison Sq Garden to that list, it's one of those iconic NYC buildings from that beautiful Art Deco period. It's currently on the grey and white stripey office building texture, but there are some buildings in FS2 NY that use a stone texture that would swap in and look good. There's a famous neon sign on the top, which is in the FSX Manhattan X version on Steam. That would look good for night flying.

    Logitech with the G29 and Thrustmaster with the T300 both make really good quality and good value for money FFB wheels, so the tech is there already. Maybe it's because flight simming has been a bit quiet for a while as a gaming genre and a little bit of a niche. Hopefully a title like FS2 will make it a bit more accessible and popular with a wider audience. Project CARS has proven that a well thought out sim can have broad appeal, even on consoles, and has sold well over a million copies.

    Jay - amazing piece of kit there mate, very impressive.

    I'm actually surprised by the lack of FFB flight controllers, the difference it makes in driving sims is amazing, and I can't imagine any racing sim not having FFB support, it's such a fundamental part of the experience. The amount of effort involved in hooking up the physics to the FFB is incredible, but once it's all balanced, it elevates the whole experience to another level entirely. I think flight simmers are missing out a bit really.

    It will be interesting to see how this develops going forward.

    Are there many FFB joystick options out there? I know in racing sims FFB wheels are pretty common, and FFB programming in race sims is getting incredibly sophisticated, but I don't get the impression it's the same/as popular in flight sims.