[aldo_14]

but, y'see it doesn't simulate space travel; there's no modelling of physics, engine thrust / fuel, oxygen / co2 supply devices, reactor system dynamics, local-level damage.......etc.

All it simulates is linear translation along an axis+some rotation/speed stuff.  It's as much a space simulation as Half Life 2 is a walking simulation.

[Japong]

If you're going to simulate that,  then you're going to have to deal with at least Newtonian physics as well... you know, inertia, in space, and the fact that all of ships fly like they're WWII fighter planes, pitching and yaw-ing in space.  

This is always something that astounds me on these boards.  People will always carry on  and on about canon and "that's not the way things work in the FS universe" but jesus, the FS universe is physics and reality-light at best. No one would ever mistake this game for an actual space flight simulator (read : NASA).  

The game is designed to be fun. Complaining about being able to hear sound in space is like complaining about being able to rocket jump in Quake deathmatch - "YOU'D BLOW YOUR LEGS CLEAN OFF! You should have to take time out to bandage yourself instead of running over a health pack!" Sure man. You mod the game so it plays like that, the rest of us will be over here having a good time.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Japong
If you're going to simulate that,  then you're going to have to deal with at least Newtonian physics as well... you know, inertia, in space, and the fact that all of ships fly like they're WWII fighter planes, pitching and yaw-ing in space.  

This is always something that astounds me on these boards.  People will always carry on  and on about canon and "that's not the way things work in the FS universe" but jesus, the FS universe is physics and reality-light at best. No one would ever mistake this game for an actual space flight simulator (read : NASA).  

To be fair, that bit is really about consistency with the game series rather than factual reality.

[Nuke]

ships in fs2 fly nothing like WWII fighter planes. aerodynamic flight involves the balencing of the 4 forces of flight (weight, lift, drag and thrust), while spaceflight is more about controling a natural drift. in both cases, great care is taken to keep craft under control. freespace does not require this, so the player can focus on combat. theres no way to loose control of your ship in this game, while in cfs3, theres always the possility of smashing your plane belly first into the ground because of a wing stall. this would not be acceptable for most people who play freespace.

[NGTM-1R]

We never said FS was an accurate simulator.

[Carl]

Originally posted by kode
if you don't want the sounds, effin edit the effin .vps.

or better yet, unplug your speakers.

[Overlord]

Originally posted by aldo_14
All it simulates is linear translation along an axis+some rotation/speed stuff.

Meaning it's still a simulation.

[aldo_14]

In which case every game ever made is a simulation, so the term 'simulation' is completely useless as a descriptive or distinguishing term.

[Japong]

Nuke : I'm saying the fighters in FS fly far more like a WWII dog fight than "actual" space combat - if that were ever to happen.

The FS fighters turn and roll after each other, trying to get on each others tails, and fire guns -you get a wide array of airplane maneuvers that really shouldn't work in space happening as well.  This is the kind of behaviour that would never ever work in space using any kind of traditional propulsion system.  Real space travel (and space fight, if you must) would be a lot more like 2001: A Space Odyssey than Star Wars.

There would definetly be no guns,  if there were any they would aim independently of the nose of your ship at the very least. You'd be moving so incredibly quickly it would be near-impossible to see your opponent until they went rushing by you, which of course you wouldn't hear, and everything would be quite dark (I think, I'm not really sure though... the colourful nebulae backgrounds are usually a no-go though).  Combat would be done almost exclusively with missiles, and be like air combat circa 2004: you'd get a radar blip from WAY beyond visual range, launch your missile,  see it streak off out of eye shot, and 20 minutes later find out it hit. Either that or you never detected the guy, and he blows you up, which would simply happen out of the blue.

Of course, this lack of realism makes the game far more fun,  as spending as much time slowing down your ship via having to turn around and produce thrust in the opposite direction, or firiing retro-rockets, would be a headache, and make guns useless, as all the ships would be able to strafe in any direction. The "space" part is modeled by removing gravity from the airplane physics - so yes, no stalls, spin outs, smashing into the ground...

[Flipside]

It's a frigging game FFS!

It's not a simulator, if you want to play a space simulator, buy Space Shuttle for the Spectrum and spend many happy hours pressing buttons to transfer air/fuel all over your ship and burn up in re-entry. Or Frontier where you joust with enemy ships at 300km/s and take 15 minutes to turn round for the next run.

All FS is is a FPS set in Space rather than in a building, it never pretended to be anything else.

[kode]

FPS = Fist Person Simulator

[Flipside]

First Person Shooter, at least as far as I was aware.

Look, it's like the Sims 2, it's advertised as a 'Life Simulator' but it isn't, that's sales talk. If it were a life simulator then there would be murders and gangs and drug dealers etc, but there isn't, why? Because it would reduce the accessability of the game.

[Carl]

well...maybe in an expansion pack...

[Flipside]

hehehehe I look on the Sims site sometimes, the current favourite still seems to be 'I want my Sims to have horrible accidents and be disabled so that they can roll around in wheelchairs, and it would sooooooo funny if one fell down the stairs....'