Hate it with a passion. Nothing says “realism” like pulling the 737 you’ve learned to fly into Atlanta where a Halo ship is buzzing about.
3 Likes
One could argue it never was either a simulator or a game, it was always both. Heck the definition of game states “activity engaged in for diversion or amusement”.
2 Likes
If you truly wanted realism though, you would either have multiplayer off, or not have the Halo ship downloaded so it’d just show up as a generic plane in multiplayer.
1 Like
Yikes, I wish I’d bought more popcorn before I started reading this thread…no, I wish I’d never started reading this thread!
3 Likes
Well, goodbye!
2 Likes
Yes, it’s all havoc since the op posted he likes that thing 
basically it’s the rant of the classic simmer community of 1986…
4 Likes
I think the halo ship falls into the experimentation? Well, i tried it and experimented with it. I think they has made it really complex to be from a game in my opinion. I’m looking forward for helicopters, gliders and the A310 coming soon 
3 Likes
All simulators are games, get over it.
3 Likes
But all games are not simulators. I just wish Asobo stay focused and still want to make this as realistic as possible
2 Likes
I absolutely love this ship. Only wish it could fly faster and higher, and deeper into space. Add Moon, Mars, Saturn etc as future world/solar system update, and we will happily have a space simulator as well.
2 Likes
People taking themselves and entertainment way too serious in here I see… humans will human.
Bring on the DLC!
1 Like
Could actually work. Would be nice to fly up in a replica of apollo 11 and then simulate the moon landing propperly. Should take exactly the same amount of time though
On the right hand console, bank of switches on the right above the screen, cargo door is the far right bottom one. Use the UI assistance to show control names and you can find things.
1 Like
I didn’t realize that the physics suddenly changed with the release of the Pelican….
The release of a fictional vehicle doesn’t prevent Asobo from focusing on simulator mechanics, nor does it mean the entire dev team has switched focus. A small team can easily work on something unrealistic and fun while everyone else continues working their assigned tasks.
1 Like
Well, i don’t even think it’s Asobo that made this thing. I’m not against it either.
1 Like
Back to XP for some…
https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/18797-halo-3-pelican-for-v1020/
2 Likes
Hmm on second thought… but yeah all joking aside, I am all for letting people have fun, as long as developers/ publishers still remember, this is not the next battle royale.
1 Like
Personally I believe that definition is correct to some extent, but when it comes to flight simulators, it is a little different. Nothing is really a simulator unless it is certified as a training tool in the industry. I think in the entertainment world, MSFS is still a video game. All versions of Microsoft Flight Simulator have always been about entertainment purposes. What I’m saying is, MSFS is not FAA certified. It isn’t. Compared to its counterparts like XP or P3D, it doesn’t come close.
XP can be certified by the FAA to a certain extent, so can P3D in some way. But I’ve never heard or seen this happen to a “simulator” published by Microsoft. MSFS is purely a product used for entertainment purposes, known as a home product. It doesn’t have extra features such as hardware and frame rate checks that transform it into a proper flight training tool. Which means, it is not FAA certifiable and it doesn’t have the extra features that makes it realistic enough to make it into a proper flight training software/tool. The moment a “simulator” does become certified (such as XP), it can be used as training tool. And that to me, is what a simulator is. Anyone also familiar with Redbird Flight Simulations, will also understand what a true flight simulator is.
Microsoft Flight Simulator, not matter how realistic it is, not matter whether you fly the Fenix A320 or not, is purely a video game. Of course, one can use MSFS as a “simulator” for entertainment purposes, just like XP can with the home version. However, using it as a flight training tool would be wrong. It would actually be crazy if you use it to supplement any real life flying lessons you have going.
So yea, the definition “simulator”, all kind of depends on what you have in mind and whether it is for entertainment or training purposes. After all, simulation is very much also a video game genre:
Interesting as P3D just like FSX and MSFS is based on ESP:
So, the simulation on P3D which is used for military training was actually created by Microsoft 
Yesnt - certifying something costs a fair amount of money. If you declare something to be used for consumers you save that money.
If you declare it’s for actual training the FAA knocks at your door and want things to be certified - imho just the FAA lable tells nothing about how good/bad the simulation is.
OnePlus would be a strange example for something comparable, they did not intend to get a IP class certification because it costs money and resources, so they skipped that and just told their phones are waterproof which they are as I own one 
Jack of all trades, master of none. This strategy can easily backfire.