I wonder if FSX has improved the celestial sphere. With thousands of stars and constellations many with different brightness’s, colours and sizes when cruising the world at night far removed from city lights the view must be spectacular.
I wonder if FSX has improved the tower selection. When tower is selected my viewpoint is actually in the control tower and not a non-descript location as in FS2004. I should be an observer standing in the control tower at the right height and be able to pan the view full circle using the hat switch, look up & down, zoom in & out, select any radio in the controlled airspace, switch from the tower to the approach room for a look at the approach radar and watch how flights are progressing in the controlled airspace. I could look at the airfield and airspace as the air traffic controllers would actually see it
I wonder if FSX has improved hardware versatility. When I connect more monitors, yokes & throttle the scenery and instrument screens separated onto two or more monitors automatically so a captain & first officer can fly together. Be able to use CH Yokes and CH Throttles together without one disabling the other. Default aircraft with all switches and instruments functional and not just eye candy. A co-pilot or captain shown in the adjacent seat depending on selection but always looking away from the viewer so the face cannot be seen.
Just wondering and eagerly waiting FSX's release.
Some interesting and well written ideas there. There isn't too much detail as to what FSX includes at the moment as its too early to tell - unfortunately we are just going to have to wait until later in the year 😞
Well you've mentioned many points and I will give you my take on it.
1. Celestial sphere- Yes, correct stars would be nice to see. I would even like it because I've always had an interest in celestial navigation. I think they'll make some improvement but forget trying to use a simulated sextant.
2.Control tower- In MSFS 2004, the tower position is movable. The view height from the tower is adjustable. You can't pan the view. I guess they figure that you would only look at your aircraft. You can place your aircraft at the correct tower position and look 360 degrees. The radio that the tower is on is the same that all of the aircraft within approx. 4 nautical miles and 2500 AGL are on so no selection is required. You could not see aircraft outside of these numbers very well anyway. All airports don't have radar approach facilities. That is an entire program in itself that is available.
3. Hardware versatility- I already use the CH Flight Yoke and the CH Throttle without any interface. I also have the CH Rudder pedals. You can already add more monitors. Dual sets of controls would be hard to incorporate and would not be very useful. Only one pilot can fly an aircraft at a time. Might be useful in a flight school setup but not for a general, home PC simulation. I like the flight crew visible in the cockpit part. It would not be hard to do and you should be able to switch point of views. I would like to be able to disable it if I get tired of looking at them. 🙂 I think you will see more detailed cockpits. I don't think you will see the level that the dedicated add on companies have risen to. Microsoft has to balance features with price and market. The add on companies are able to achieve what they do because they concentrate on one area or aircraft and then charge $50, in some cases, for that program alone. The price of Flight Simulator has been about $60 when it comes out. Now it's $30 at Wal-mart. If Microsoft incorporated most of the features that people want the program would cost $300. The MSFS market ranges from the hardcore(I'm one) to the eight year old. No mother is going to buy a $300 program for her kid. Microsoft would lose a large amount of sales just to satisfy a very small segment of there market. Think of it like a car. There are many after market parts and accessories for stock passenger cars. They make better engines, interiors, sound systems, suspension, Paint etc... If Ford incorporated all of the best features available, the hardcore may buy the $90,000+ car but most people would not. They would say that it's nice but I don't need all of the best. If I want better seats, I'll buy new seats. I think this is the same thinking at Microsoft. They will build a general, all around simulation at a price that everyone can afford and allow the hardcore users to buy after market items to customize it to their taste.
That's my take and I'm sticking to it. 🙂 I think that Flight Simulator X will be improved but I fear that some will never be happy with it. I understand the limitations that they have to contend with. I have every edition from 95 forward. I like each edition and I think 2004 is amazing. The next edition will be great. I just hope that people don't judge Flight Simulator X against a standard that can't be met, within the present limitations. I can't wait for it to come out. Let them take all the time they need; fix any bugs now instead of in a patch six months after release.
I hope that I have not offended anyone. 🙂