Realflight 6 Physics
- Thread starter mulicheng
- Start date
phrank
Well-known member
Oooh, battle of the credentials. I love that show.... In this corner, we have... 
Thing is, people get bored or lost track of the purpose they purchased or "found" the sim in the first place.
RealCrash (yes it's still better than the comp)
RealScale (getting there, Aerofly just came out with a beautiful version, KE version? Maybe if there is $$ there.)
ReallyCoolStuff (some real creative stuff at the swaps indeed)
What next? Add more stuff to keep interest in the software. Oh well.
Thing is, people get bored or lost track of the purpose they purchased or "found" the sim in the first place.
RealCrash (yes it's still better than the comp)
RealScale (getting there, Aerofly just came out with a beautiful version, KE version? Maybe if there is $$ there.)
ReallyCoolStuff (some real creative stuff at the swaps indeed)
What next? Add more stuff to keep interest in the software. Oh well.
Boof69
Well-known member
I find it funny that it's people other than the designers that want all these new features added. Maybe it's because we know how many hours that fully functioning gauges would add to a project once he/she made the choice to do so. If they ever did add it they would need to raise the poly limit by around 5k, for me anyways. Right now RF has read only telemetry data but making it writable to gauges would be all they would need to add. The modelers would provide the geometry and the telemetry would animate them. With that said would the addition really profit KE in the end? Probably not. The time would be better spent adding the ability to add engine sounds. Jim said this was very possible, but RF6 was released without it. That would get some excitement going. I started a thread before 6 came out asking what would be your one wish for an added feature to RF and the overwhelming majority stated importable sounds.
Maj. Numbskully
Well-known member
Heres my 2 minute solution/suggestion
make the Nav guides represented with gauges instead of text !
a generic I.P. if you will , bonus is that if its not your cup of tea ....turn it off
modelers would also not have to waste polys making gauges and EVERY plane in your stable would now have a pseudo IP......even G3 models
make the Nav guides represented with gauges instead of text !
a generic I.P. if you will , bonus is that if its not your cup of tea ....turn it off
modelers would also not have to waste polys making gauges and EVERY plane in your stable would now have a pseudo IP......even G3 models
Last edited:
Question is... Will RF be implementing an ILS system for any given field / airport - (w /lighting)? Though, I'm thinking most here are only flying VFR anyway.....
Maj. Numbskully
Well-known member
Hab you need to learn how things work here....when you make a joke its best to use the
or some here will think you're serious !
I know, what was I thinking
12oclockhigh
Banned
My point is; Why is my idea SOFTWARE BLOAT and another (your idea) not?
Everyone that hates the combat capabilities of Real RC Flight is full of themselves. They are enjoying the reduced cost of being able to sell the product to more participants and the enhanced ability of KE to create better software. So what if more kids are flying? You can always hide or mute the ones that un-nerve you. They are the future of this activity, accept it. So why is combat not BLOAT?
Anyone flying RC today with telemetry today, knows it's usefulness. I am not about to explain why I want the gauges in the cockpit to anyone but the developers. It is not a frivolous request, of which KE is welcome to ignore.
I listen to my customers, I am not the only one with good ideas.
Everyone that hates the combat capabilities of Real RC Flight is full of themselves. They are enjoying the reduced cost of being able to sell the product to more participants and the enhanced ability of KE to create better software. So what if more kids are flying? You can always hide or mute the ones that un-nerve you. They are the future of this activity, accept it. So why is combat not BLOAT?
Anyone flying RC today with telemetry today, knows it's usefulness. I am not about to explain why I want the gauges in the cockpit to anyone but the developers. It is not a frivolous request, of which KE is welcome to ignore.
I listen to my customers, I am not the only one with good ideas.
Last edited:
jeffpn
Well-known member
I don't like combat. I think combat is bloat. I think it's too far outside the scope of an RC sim. Does it increase sales of RF? I have no idea. I have not seen the sales figures. Every month or so at rcg.com, people ask what the best RC sim is. I have never once heard anyone say, "Get RF, it has combat." I think combat is just a diversion for anyone who has RF. I doubt combat was the tipping point for a purchase decision.
As for your telemetry idea, it's already there, and customizable. Just hit 1.
Nobody makes 'frivolous requests.' Some people make popular requests. Others make requests that few or nobody likes. If you only want responses that are gaga over your idea, you'll never know if it's really a hit with alot of users. If your idea is popular, you will get discussion. Voice chat and combat are proof of that.
As for your telemetry idea, it's already there, and customizable. Just hit 1.
Nobody makes 'frivolous requests.' Some people make popular requests. Others make requests that few or nobody likes. If you only want responses that are gaga over your idea, you'll never know if it's really a hit with alot of users. If your idea is popular, you will get discussion. Voice chat and combat are proof of that.
Last edited:
flexible
New member
I still want streamer cut for custom content. Cockpit view combat is a kids game, not a bad thing, just not real world RC. I have no problem with it. What ever floats you're bloat.
On the other hand, streamer cut with foamies is real world RC. You can see it at RC fields all over the country. We already have all the tools we need right now, but one, an aerodynamic % on streamer cut in the editor. It only expands the market to give it up.
You don't get ahead and stay ahead by staying (PAT). You will be left with you're memories of what once was.
They said electric planes was a bad idea, that would never take off. O yea!
On the other hand, streamer cut with foamies is real world RC. You can see it at RC fields all over the country. We already have all the tools we need right now, but one, an aerodynamic % on streamer cut in the editor. It only expands the market to give it up.
You don't get ahead and stay ahead by staying (PAT). You will be left with you're memories of what once was.
They said electric planes was a bad idea, that would never take off. O yea!
12oclockhigh
Banned
Has anyone ever tried to create a plane with a towed banner? That would be pretty seriously cool... but the advertising potential in MP? Wait a minute, that was bloat ware! never mind.
opjose
Well-known member
rotflmao!!!
That just doesn't really do it for me. Sure lots of things go flying, and there is even smoke and flames. It's all generated excess not related to the plane parts though. All added particles that weren't there to begin with. In fact, if you turn off rendering of particles and enable Kablooey, you find that there is no other differences.