Real Flight G3

What is it about this hobby that attracts so many guys named, "Ed?"

Anyway, Ed Cregger originally described this phenomenon in his first post on this thread. If you fly a plane directly at you in level flight, it will dip immediately after passing through where you are "standing" inside the simulator. He thought it was a fault with the G3 flight physics in particular.

Since I have both G3 and the Nexstar G2 Special Edition, I tested it and both versions do it. It's not particular to the Nexstar, but trainers seem to be the easiest planes to fly level through the center of the simulator. I tested it with the PT40 and the Twinstar on G3 as well as the Nexstar.

Reply to
Ed Paasch
Loading thread data ...

Hi Ed P. ;) I understand Ed. I was trying to explain that it does not occur in my G2 USB Interlink. It seems that it may occur only in the NexStar version - or am I missing something? (Quite possible ;-)).

Reply to
Ed Forsythe

Being an ex pattern flier, albeit of modest skills, I am extremely aware of when a model deviates from its anticipated flight path. No, this does not make me an expert.

However, G1, G2 and G3 models do dive toward the ground on most (maybe all) model renditions after they pass nearby or through the pilot's position. The effect is most noticable in the pilot's position, but diminishes steadily as the model's distance increases from the center of the viritual sphere universe. If you look directly overhead, you can see the opposite side of the "sphere" that I'm referring to.

I'm not knocking the sphere paradigm at all. It may be the only way to make such a virtual environment that is practical to implement with the computers we have and their capabilities.

There are quite a few good features about the Real Flight programs.

I'm probably just a cantankerous old fart that is resistant to change. Shoulda kept my mouth shut and not bothered anyone with it.

Ed Cregger

Reply to
Ed Cregger

| Things like G3 do not make sense to me. I don't understand why someone | having G2 as a successful product, not that it is perfect, would come out | with something like G3 and then tout it as though it was improved.

The graphics are much improved (G2's graphics sucked compared to other games even when it first came out.) There's a few new features -- if I recall correctly, we now have better thermals, slope soaring, more dramatic collisions, etc. (Personally, I refuse to buy G3. I already paid $280 for G2, I'm not paying another $200 just for fancier graphics, and their $25 upgrade rebate was an insult.)

Like any other business, Knife Edge is in the business of making money. Everything else is secondary. If they can do this by releasing a buggy product before it's ready and people will still buy it, well, then they're still making money. Perhaps even more money than if they'd finished the product and shipped it. Unfortunate, but reality.

G2's graphics were very dated, and things like XTR and Aerofly were taking more and more of their business (with much improved graphics over G2) so Knife Edge had to put out something if they wanted to keep selling stuff.

Personally, I've found that if you compare G2 and G3 to games that came out at the same time, they've been quite lacking. It's quite obvious that they're no where near as polished as other, more mainstream games -- even the low budget flight simulator games (like Jetfighter X: Jason vs. Freddy or whatever) probably sell far more copies than G2 or G3.

In any event, Real Flight now has some serious competition, and it'll probably either improve greatly or die out. It's easy to do little when that's all you have to do, but they'll have to do much better if they want to remain the 800 pound gorilla.

| To my line of reasoning, it is an abomination. Nothing has been | "improved" except things that do not count toward making it a better | simulator. It is as though the original idea of offering a simulator | for flight training has turned into eye candy for morons. Is that | the future?

Future? This is the present! Games are coming out with much fancier graphics but with relatively little effort put into things like gameplay and such.

| Are we seeing the dumbing down in action? Is this what the progeny | of the drug generation deem entertainment?

drug generation? I'm not sure who you're trying to insult here.

In any event, games of all sorts have been doing this -- as computers and graphics improve, more programming effort is put into flashy graphics and effects and less into improving gameplay and stories and such. And people eat it up. | Sorry for being so "negative". But I didn't start this - Real Flight | did and Tower took my money, knowing full well what they were | selling. Or did they?

Most people seem reasonably happy with G3, it sould seem.

Tower might very well give you your money back if you complain loudly enough. I've never found their customer service to be anything less than excellent, and while it's generally rare that places will accept returns on software, Tower might just do it.

Though I wouldn't complain _too_ much about how your vertical stabilizer broke off. They're probably just making the simulation more accurate by simulating a poor glue joint like you occasionally find in ARFs :)

| This is my last post about G3, or any other Real Flight product.

Uh-huh. :)

Reply to
Doug McLaren

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.