7 ms·
I just realized that "3D graphics/flight sim" was kind of a hardware/tech benchmark back then (prior to the (PC) demo scene). Iirc my first MSFS was either 1.0
by krmblg 4y ago
I just realized that "3D graphics/flight sim" was kind of a hardware/tech benchmark back then (prior to the (PC) demo scene).
Iirc my first MSFS was either 1.0 or 2.0 (?) and I played a lot of subsequent titles that featured some more or less sophisticated 3D tech (Lightspeed, Microprose titles like e.g. F-117A etc, Gunship 2000, Strike Commander, Falcon (3.0?), Wing Commander, Comanche ("whoa, Voxels!")..
It was sure enough to save up for a CH Flightstick Pro and/or that Thrustmaster Stick "with the coolie hat".
But the first title that felt truly immersive in terms of 3D (albeit confusing at times) was Descent.
So I'd also assume this type of games caused some niche industries to flourish (both hardware and "consumer-grade military sim" software companies.
- tomduncalf 4y agoWow, yeah Descent was super impressive at the time
- solarmist 4y agoIt still is a benchmark. The latest and greatest sims are getting pretty realistic but will still bring any machine I've seen to its knees with everything cranked up.
- krmblg 4y agoRight, the latest FS graphical features can be cranked up quite good. There probably were also a lot of sims that really went for the most realism possible. However, after the era I referred to it was (is?) mostly FPS games that held this benchmark category (Unreal was the first title where my peers would buy dedicated or at least supporting graphics hardware for, like 3dfx voodoo) and soon after titles like Crysis were "the benchmark".