Flight simulators categories wording

Hi,

English is not my native language, that's why I'm asking this.

For FSX, P3D, X-Plane... is it correct to say "Civilian Flight Simulators"? Can you think of another wording?

For DCS, IL-2, Rise Of Flight... is it correct to say "Military Flight Simulators" or "Combat Flight Simulators" ? Which one is best? Can you think of another wording?

You've pretty much got it there.

"Combat Flight Simulators" is perhaps more common to describe the latter as you can still simulate military aircraft in civil sims.

Hi John,

Thank you for your reply.

Now I get the subtle difference between "military" and "combat".

You can simulate combat in those simulators you've marked as "civil", shoot weapons and destroy objects. P3D is used for combat training in professional applications, something not every "combat" sim can claim.

On the other hand we will be getting unarmed civilian aircraft for DCS (Yak-52).

So it's like trying to categorize music. You may try, but in reality everything is mixed up.

The Yak 52 was used by the military as a trainer, so that civilian label is inaccurate.

The A-10C was originally a procedural trainer for the US Air National Guard too, so as you say, this whole labelling thing is complex. Speaking in broad terms the first reply got it spot on. The Microsoft Flight Simulator was originally completely without combat capabilities, so it gets the civil label quite accurately. P3D is a spin off from that, so it can also be labelled the same. DCS World, IL2, Falcon 4.0 et al were all originally written to be combat simulations, so the label applies correctly there too.

Just because someone has adapted them to do stuff they weren't originally designed for doesn't change that definition, it just blurs it, and frankly that wasn't what the OP was asking was it.

We can however turn absolutely everything into a debate if we try.

Is flying F/A-18E in FSX@War over Libya a "Civilian Flight Simulator"?

Is flying unarmed Yak-52 over Las Vegas or Dubai a "Combat Flight Simulator"?

Prepar3D even has a dedicated version for combat scenarios. https://www.prepar3d.com/product-overview/prepar3d-license-comparison/

Though I agree that if you really want to categorize, the first definition is as good as you will get.

The Microsoft Flight Simulator was originally completely without combat capabilities, so it gets the civil label quite accurately. P3D is a spin off from that, so it can also be labelled the same.

Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator series (CFS) is also a spin off from Microsoft Flight Simulator. Does that mean you can't label it a combat flight simulator? ;)

I have the impression that ED doesn't want DCS to be restricted to the flight simulator branding and sees it more as a broader combat simulation, hence the name Digital Combat Simulator - DCS.

The official product description on Steam reads like this as well:

DCS World is a vehicle combat simulation game created by an inspired development team. DCS World uses a powerful engine that delivers realistic gameplay.

I'm pretty sure we will get high fidelity tank modules in the future and probably naval modules too.

I'm pretty sure we will get high fidelity tank modules in the future and probably naval modules too.

If only I were 20 years younger!! :megalol:

military is an organization, combat describes the action. besides the fact that 'combat' represents the broader scope, it also avoids association with any military proper, which is accurate because this is a civilian entertainment product.

Hello everybody,

Many thanks for joining my thread :)

The full story or the whole picture is that, beginning of next year, I will launch a forum dedicated to PC based simulators. The primary goal is to create a directory of available simulators (flight, space, submarine, others...) for newbies to simulation to make their choice, and for existing simmers willing to discover new simulators. It would be oriented on high level information and stand alone sims rather than discussion. Installation support, troubleshooting, addons, DLC...are not in the scope as there are already many specialized forums. That is why I need to define categories of simulators.

Neil said it all: I got my question answered. I indeed need bold and broad categories understandable by everybody and simulators will be categorized according to their original and main purpose. For example P3D will be categorized as Civilian.

Speaking in broad terms the first reply got it spot on. The Microsoft Flight Simulator was originally completely without combat capabilities, so it gets the civil label quite accurately. P3D is a spin off from that, so it can also be labelled the same. DCS World, IL2, Falcon 4.0 et al were all originally written to be combat simulations, so the label applies correctly there too.

 

Just because someone has adapted them to do stuff they weren't originally designed for doesn't change that definition, it just blurs it, and frankly that wasn't what the OP was asking was it.

 

We can however turn absolutely everything into a debate if we try.

That being said, the debate or additional answers are an interesting read, especially on this forum where conversations are well mannered and civilized :thumbup:

you can have military airplanes in a non-combat simulator... any sim thats designed from the ground up for doing combat in is a combat sim, so FSX with a mod that lets you fire weapons isn't really a combat sim...

CFS isn't just MSFS with guns, it has a whole scripting system, and AI and assets to go along with it, requires fundamental changes to the engine to work.

on that note, if a non-combat sim gets a mod that lets you do combat, the mod should be mentioned under the combat category, and not the original sim it's derived from.

Indeed Simicro, there is a real issue with categorizing different platforms. It is possible to really tie yourself up in knots trying to reach a definitive answer.

I guess the only real solution for a website is to cross reference items that fall in between two definitions.

some1, the answer to the Microsoft Combat Fight Simulator is also very simple given the original purposing approach. It is an entirely different item of software, and was designed from the outset as a combat simulation, so I don't get the point you were trying to make?

CFS isn't just MSFS with guns, it has a whole scripting system, and AI and assets to go along with it, requires fundamental changes to the engine to work.

Well, P3D also has scripting system, AI and combat assets, and of course weapons, so why you insist it is not a combat flight sim? :) It is also an entirely different item of software sold at a hefty price. From the features page:

https://prepar3d.com/product-overview/

-Dynamic Weapons System allows the ability to perform weapons-based training. Fully-configurable to support training procedures related to the employment of bombs, missiles, guns, and countermeasures are included, as are examples to show you how to implement them in your training.

-Customizable AI Behaviors enable the creation of scenarios that provide artificial entity interaction with the user. Behaviors include Attacker, Combat Air Patrol, Close Air Support, Pursue, Search, and Wingman.

-Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) capabilities can be used to connect to a DIS network session and integrate with other simulators.

-SimOperator networked Instructor Operating Station (IOS). Instructors can control multiplayer scenarios and modify role-players in real-time.

It may not interest a typical armchair flightsim enthusiast, but it shows that modern sandbox simulators blur the line between civilian and military, combat and non-combat applications.

Indeed Simicro, there is a real issue with categorizing different platforms. It is possible to really tie yourself up in knots trying to reach a definitive answer.

 

I guess the only real solution for a website is to cross reference items that fall in between two definitions.

Honestly I think I will keep it very simple with only one category for each sim (main and original purpose) as much as possible.

Before opening this thread, I knew that FSX has TacPack for combat purpose. But I've never thought I would categorize FSX as a combat flightsim.

If somebody ask for a modern jet combat flightsim, it makes sense to recommend DCS in the first place and not FSX.