Depends on the mistake, with proper Threat and Error Management (TEM) mistakes or inactions don’t need to result in death or injury. Mistakes are made all the time, hardly ever does it result in death or injury, but that is off topic, I’ll leave you to ponder that .
A Level-D simulator doesn’t explode when you crash, there are boundaries of course of what you can achieve in a home simulator or even a Level-D. Completely besides the point that this is supposed to be a flight simulator and not a game, it should be as true to life as possible.
Take the icing effect for example, it was unrealistic with ice building up on side of fuselage, cabin windows, vertical stabilizer and top of wings, now people are complaining they want the “old” icing effect back because it looked pretty. If they keep listening to what people want it keeps ping-ponging between two extremes, they should make it realistic, this is the way it is, take it or leave it.
OK then…show me where it’s written that everyone should think like you do. Show me where it’s written that everyone should have their sim like you have it.
In short, show me where you were given the right to dictate to everyone else how things should be, because I don’t remember seeing it anywhere.
Its all in the title of the product my friend, FLIGHT SIMULATOR 2020. Nobody has to think like I do, nobody needs to have any say how things should be or should look like. That should all be dictated by physics and taking a close look at the real world.
[quote=“Nijntje91, post:67, topic:477279”]
Nobody has to think like I do, nobody needs to have any say how things should be or should look like[/quote]
Just look up the meaning of the word “simulator” and then again look at what I stated before, its all in the title. Also debunks your bomb under seat comment.
“A simulator is a program or machine that simulates a real-life situation , meaning that it creates a virtual version of it, often for the purpose of instruction or experiment, such as a flight simulator. … Simulators allow them to learn and gain experience in such tasks without the risks.”
This thread’s about the haze/fog (you give it a label of your choice). Many people don’t like it. I say give them a choice. You say lump it.
In that case, if we all have to do it your way, let’s ditch weather presets. You can’t control the weather in real life. Let’s prevent the sim from working if it detects that you don’t have rudder pedals. Let’s make it only work if you’re wearing headphones and a shirt with epaulettes.
People want to enjoy the sim, and not everyone enjoys it the same way.
Me? Yeah, I want realism. But I’m not going to dance to someone else’s tune. And a penny will get you a pound I’m not alone.
You take it way out of context. All I’m saying is this, Asobo’s solution to everything seems to be “lets give them a slider” before we know it the sim will be full of sliders and options to select anything from GTA V gaming mode to one second in icing conditions turns you into an ice cube mode.
Coming back to this topic, in my opinion, you shouldn’t be able to tune live weather, live weather should be true to live, or as close as possible at least. In manual weather you can set all you want of course. Problem is also the wrong use of the term “haze” on this forum, if we are taking about “2-4 miles” visibility then we are talking about fog or mist, not haze.
When I start the sim, I am greeted with some nice screenshots hardly any of them show obscuring fog like whats in the game right now. I’d like some nice clear visibility so I can see the scenery and pick out interesting known landmarks from a distance. Is it too much to ask to reduce the fog or have a slider to get rid of it ? Or is it simply just too hard for Asbo to incorperate and we are expecting too much from them ? Maybe they just do’t have the ability and we are being unreasonable.
But it would be nice if they would communicate to their player base on what they can and can not do with the fog . Good communication removes the ambiguraties that have come up over the fog and us players may get a better understanding and not be so toxic towards the fog.
@meh1951@anon50268670 I have to admit, I am seeing a trend toward making flying easy, rather than realistic.
While I admit that the “Haze/Fog” issue was poorly done in its first iteration, caused by an obvious miscode of the METAR vis parameter, we also know that this has been resolved in the SU7 Update beta. The integration of METAR clouds and visibility has truly been troublesome, but I am hopeful they will get it sorted.
Sadly there are far too many threads arising from the pure misunderstanding of the realities of aviation. I have often sat in the cockpit of a real plane, looking out at the weather, thinking, “wow, that really looks weird”. Clouds don’t always look “right”. Wind can swing unpredictably while on the ground, causing unexpected difficulties. Turbulence can suddenly flex the wings on your 172 to the point the weather caulking pops out along the fuse fairing. (true story)
I have a fear that we are going to keep dialing the reality meter toward the “feels right” side of the “slider”. There is a reason that most sim pilots are, sim pilots, and not licensed pilots. Flying is NOT easy. I really wish that those that are ground bound could actually experience the marvel of aviation in its raw form.
Simulation will never be able to give simmers the true sense of flying but we should not be compromising the aspects that we can simulate accurately. We would be cheating even the most casual of sim pilot out of a truly challenging experience that can offer a profound sense of accomplishment when that sim pilot successfully completes a flight in a realistic simulator.
Sure, we can have a preset to give us perfect VFR weather so we can enjoy the scenery when and where we want, but if you bought MSFS to experience flight, shouldn’t it actually give you a chance to experience flight, not just go fly. They really aren’t the same thing.
They obviously need to get the visibility right so it matches the METAR or Meteoblue, or whatever source they are using. But I also think that a lot of people assume 10 or 20 km visibility means unlimited visibility, as on the ground you would have unlimited visibility in such a case.
Someone having no experience in aviation, going up there for the first time would likely judge the visibility being 1 km, where in fact its 10 km or more. I can tell you, in northern Europe, its quite rare to have unlimited visibility and have a clear horizon in flight. If you don’t like that, with manual weather you can adjust it to your liking.
It’s interesting how there seems to be two divided groups on this board. One wants less realism, the other wants more realism. Who should Asobo listen to? To be fair, I think those who want less realism would probably agree (I would hope) that the solution would be more settings, not just stripping features for everyone. I could get behind that. But I really hope Asobo isn’t prioritizing those who are asking for less realism and complexity thinking it would appeal to “the average gamer” and increase sales if they went that route. As a business, they have to do what they have to do to stay afloat, but a big part of me hopes they listen to pilots and meteorologists over casual gamers.
Ultimately, there is no need for sliders on much of this. Just a simple two position toggle for simmers or gamers and I certainly know which position I would put that switch to.
There are NOT two distinct groups here. Any one of us can be a simmer or a gamer depending on how we feel on any given session. What you label as a gamer may in fact be a user that has just discovered the hobby. In time they may have $20,000 wrapped up in simpit but today they struggle with a mouse and keyboard.
When I tear up the sky with the Pitts and my 3 year old grand daughter on my lap, am I keeping her interest, allowing her to enjoy the wonder of flight, or am I gaming?
Labels simply make it impossible to have discussions that end with understanding. Labels just mean that eventually the moderators step in an close a discussion because we can’t be civil.
This “haze” magically appeared over Venice in the span of maybe two seconds. Went from basically clear to this. That was a couple days ago. This implementation of “haze” is as awesome as the logic for “Press any key to continue…”.
But this is what defines this game from a Level D simulator from the real thing. In this game and others like it, you have no real consequences for flying in <5nm visibility and it should (in my opinion) be left at the “sandbox” level where you’re left to you’re own devices to see how a plane handles in various situations (or the best the game can do) and you should not use these experiences in a real plane (which goes without saying). And I agree should have working icing mechanic or realistic handling when an elevator fails etc for the sake of staying in line with sandbox-level simulation. Having fun with the fact we’re flying in conditions no sane pilot would ever fly in.
A Level D simulator will physically familiarize a pilot-in-training with “real life” situations, generally due to being the “closest” you can get without getting into the real plane. The most consequences you might suffer for crashing is possibly more classroom instruction or having to pay again and again to pass a particular test. It’s whole point is to train you to actually become a pilot, not give you a weekends worth of entertainment. You treat it as if it were the real thing so that when you do get in the real thing, you know what to do in a given situation.
In real life, well, obviously you could lose your pilots license or…kill yourself and/or hundreds of people flying in bad conditions if not properly trained.
MSFS was never intended to compete with what a professional ATP school may provide. I’m not saying we can’t mod the ever livin out of MSFS to achieve a 1:1 realistic level but we need to realize the whole loaf of bread is coming, we just gotta make do with the half loaf we have. I’ll admit as much as anyone else in this thread we don’t have a perfect representation of haze/fog in this particular sim, but it’s not the worst it could be and it can only get better (well…i mean…yknow…).
TLDR: We can take “simulator” to it’s literal definition with this game until we’re blue in the face. Reality is if you’re having fun setting up realistic weather scenarios for which to fly through, then it’s a game. If you’re treating it seriously where as if you’re learning what to do in a given situation, then it’s a simulator.
You take my post out of context. The discussion was whether we need a slider so users can tone down haze in live weather. To which my response was, I don’t want a slider for everything, live weather should represent real world weather as close as possible, if you want to adjust haze (probably mist or fog, most people here aren’t talking about haze) you can do so in preset weather, there is a slider for everything there.
I’m also not happy with the current representation of live weather, thats not the point I’m trying to make. Its hit or miss currently. As a start, visibility should match the METAR or MeteoBlue data. I flew to Stockholm yesterday, should be OVC004, it was BKN above 2500 ft, could see the runway from approach altitude already. Day before visibility in sim was maybe 300 m in the sim, suddenly became a CAT II approach. It all looked pretty, but far from the actual weather.
Well, if you’ve flown IRL, you would know that the “live weather” might or might not be the same as what you were told in the METAR or even on ATIS, and you should be prepared to deal with that. Once IRL missed approach and had to divert to alternate when the tower was reporting VFR…pesky little fog bank!
If you want the weather to be a certain way when you arrive…use the menu and dial in what you want. If you want a real lifelike experience, leave it on “live weather” and deal with what it is when you get there.
.
