Quote:
Originally Posted by horseback
While the motive might be considered admirable, where no data is available, it becomes a matter of the programmers' best guess and uneven treatment. Hence Japanese instruments that seemed to me to react near-instantly and much more accurately than their counterparts in aircraft from the country that supplied most of the licensed original designs.
In a flight sim where there is a one-eyed tunnel vision view instead of a full range field of view and an absolute dependence upon the instrument displays instead of a seat of the pants 'feel', accurate instrument displays in a full-real cockpit seem to me to be both fairer and more realistic than the current method.
I would assume that the 'correct' data would be available via Devicelink, which would confer an unfair advantage on those who were able to take the trouble and expense of setting up an accurate and/or (at least) legible cockpit display on a second screen. Isn't that the same class of exploit that the thrice cursed trim delay  was supposed to defeat and make the game fairer?
cheers
horseback |
Devicelink was set up to allow people to make and use their own instrument panels. It should reflect what you see in cockpit.
Do you have any difficulty making charges against Maddox Games and DT for not checking when you don't check what they have done? Just wondering.