> > It amazes me sometimes that people define "reality" in 3D as being something > that looks like it was done with a video camera. To me its a more realistic > experience if the gauge I'm looking at can easily be used and is closer to > what it would be in size and perspective from my eyes sitting in the chair, > not the camera's little box on the screen. > Any simulator should have as it primary function SIMULATING as closely as possable the real thing. This applies to both the flight model and the controls and instruments.
The fact that most folks only have a single monitor complicates this greatly. The fact that most folks have controls that do not have the proper sizes and forces complictes this. The best way for a simulator (such as FlightGear) to approach this is to give the users the ability to add and interface with such programs at the project magenta instruments, or the "glass cockpit" being worked on by John and others. The ability to open and close additional views for operating controls (such as FLY and PS-1 do) is needed as well, for those who have to rely on a single monitor. The "photorealistic" instruments in some simulators are good to have, but (IMHO) not as importaint as proper flight modeling. I personally see NO need for the nice views of the airplane, and its moving parts as seen from other airplanes except if one is flying formation or shooting at the airplane. While this is nice to have for some limited purpose, it adds nothing to the realism of the simulator from the perspective of the person flying the sim. These efforts could better be used in improving the flight models, and the functionality of the sim to interface to other sims and external programs and more realistic views (such as those for KSJC). jj _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
