20,741
edits
(→Intro) |
|||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
| date = Feb 3rd, 2016 | | date = Feb 3rd, 2016 | ||
| added = Feb 3rd, 2016 | | added = Feb 3rd, 2016 | ||
| script_version = 0.25 | |||
}} | |||
}} | |||
{{FGCquote | |||
|1= Some points a review could potentially talk about - stimulus material for reviewers: | |||
A check list of things that FG does well, and that other sims do not have or are not likely to have might help with write ups? (for instance the weather simulation, and the way it interacts with terrain to both affect flight and provde visual cues). Examples of aviation situations where FGs strengths at simulating come to the fore would help reviewers. I think the promotional value of specifying unique aspects should not be underestimated for a sim that people currently invested in other sims can try out easily. | |||
A list of links to evidence that give measures of the quality of JSBSim as well as accuracy of some of FG FDMs might help, as they can be dropped in reviews to great persuasive effect (e.g. [http://nescacademy.nasa.gov/flightsim/ this] link from an article in the tour section). | |||
FG reviews have to contain some reference of FG's opensource nature and what it means. What are a checklist of positives to include? Are there examples of issues in closed source projects that an open source engine would avoid? e.g. aircraft devs getting stranded by lack of engine development. | |||
(Is the [http://www.flightgear.org/about/features/ features] page up to date? Any journalist reviewing FG would look at that.. come to think of it screenshots on the front page are outdated). | |||
|2= {{cite web | |||
| url = http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=277089#p277089 | |||
| title = <nowiki>Re: How to write a FlightGear review (brainstorming) ?</nowiki> | |||
| author = <nowiki>vnts</nowiki> | |||
| date = Feb 21st, 2016 | |||
| added = Feb 21st, 2016 | |||
| script_version = 0.25 | | script_version = 0.25 | ||
}} | }} | ||