FlightGear Reaches v2.0

distantbody writes "The flight sim project FlightGear has reached version 2.0. From the website: 'Highlights of this new version include: Dramatic new 3D clouds, dramatic lighting conditions, improved support for custom scenery, and many many new and detailed aircraft models.' Full list of improvements here. And of course the screenshots. The release coincides with the release of SimGear v2, the 'set of open-source libraries designed to be used as building blocks for quickly assembling 3d simulations, games, and visualization applications' on which FlightGear is based."

Comments

slashdotted?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because the main site seems to be struggling, here's the wikipedia page.

Re:Their web server?

[euyis]

FlightGear planes don't really burn or break up after a crash...

Re:Their web server?

[Nuskrad]

FlightGear planes don't really burn or break up after a crash

According to the Wikipedia article, starting fires when planes crash is a new feature of 2.0.0

Re:Great work, FlightGear team!

[Anonymous Coward]

FlightGear is still being maintained.

Re:Great work, FlightGear team!

[bami]

Enough is enough! I've had it with these motherfucking tentacles on this motherfucking plane!

windows only

[farble1670]

and they forget to mention, version 2.0 is only available for windows. the linux and mac versions are still at 1.9.x.

Re:windows only

[advocate_one]

A) Most Linux users are capable of compiling their own apps, its rather common since most Linux distros come with a compiler, and you've almost certainly compiled things in the past for that app that doesn't work right on your distro or in your setup or whatever it happens to be due to the millions of possible combinations of distros and base software distrubtions, you can assume nothing about the environment you'll be running in when you distributed compiled binaries 'for Linux'. Packages for a specific distro are another matter, much easier to deal with for a particular version.

got news for you the vast majority of Linux users do not know how to do this anymore... most distros do not need you to get down and dirty in the command line to install software... the package will be there in the repositories, not necessarily the absolute latest, but a recent stable one.

Re:Great work, FlightGear team!

[SplashMyBandit]

We get your point. However I don't know about FSX being 'better' in much other than graphics and community size. FlightGear and X-Plane may not be as pretty as FSX when the latter has all the options turned up but at least they are playable on regular hardware. FSX is a *total dog* on anything less than ultra-expensive hardware and even then you still can't turn everything up to ultra. Plus FSX doesn't work on anything other than Windows, unlike X-Plane or FlightGear. I also personally found the flight model of FSX to feel wrong compared to my own real world flying - it feels 'hackily optimised' for the sake of performance (the usual MS story I guess). X-Plane has a much more realistic feel when you spin or stall-turn. For example the flight path marker on the Acceleration F-18 doesn't work right. I guess plenty of people have not flown in real life and so can't tell how crap FSX really is compared to the suposedly 'inferior' competitors. Finally. Longevity does matter. The Tortoise wins the race, not the Hare. So far MS has been the tortoise, improving SubLogic FlightSim continually even when it was initially inferior to other sims at various stages. Now MS have growth woes and they've dropped the ball on FSX. The golden days of FlightSimulator are over and they're not coming back. I'm afraid you'll have to get used to it - I'd suggest trying X-Plane or FlightGear.

Re:Great work, FlightGear team!

[BitZtream]

Have you seen x-plane 9? It beats MSFS in every way, including graphics now.