I am a #5.

 

I see the thought of FSX being a SIM is not the case for some it's just a game. Each to there own.

 

No I don't, but you would think that being that FSX is just a game to you. Each to there own.

Apparently MS also thinks it's just a game and abandoned it a long time ago...

Apparently MS also thinks it's just a game and abandoned it a long time ago...

That doesn't make it a game. Not to mention Lockheed Martin doesn't think it's "just a game."

5, and worse, I always look for rw routes/aicraft so I can depart from my last arrival airport. I never just start a flight from anywhere at random.

At least for me, the fun in flying airliners in fsx, is becoming immersed in as much aviation realism as possible.  This means real-time weather is a must, real flight plans, real departures and arrivals.  I don't fly 747s into Tegucigalpa, but I'll happily put a 757 in there.   If I'm flying for my VA, I always try to find a real-world route, and if that fails, then I get one from vataware if possible.  

 

Of course, we all practice approaches, landings, maneuvers, etc, but there is no reason why any of this can't be done in a realistic manner.  

 

My biggest concession to realism would be, in a long haul flight (trans-Atlantic, trans-continental) when I'm not on vatsim, I'll watch a movie or something during cruise. Why have time compression when you've got The Avengers to watch?

 

My 2 cents..

 

Completely wild guess here, but you don't have any children, right?  :lol:

Personally:

Never increase sim rate

Always use RWx

Not necessarily using real world routes, but still using routes that are planned realistically

Not necessarily using proper airlines on routes: this would mean I would have to be based somewhere. I did this for a while (EHAM), and I got bored. I find it much more fun to fly from destination to destination with any airline. I don't care anymore. 

Sad to see that snobbery and One-True-Way-ism are alive and well in the flightsim community.

 

I probably hit somewhere around 3.5 on this spectrum, broken down like this..

 

Never increases the sim rate - just a personal preference.  I like to experience the whole of a flight real time.
Sometimes use real world routes - depends on your definition of "real world route".  I don't fly SIDS and STARS, but I quite often fire up FlightAware and copy a flight from my local airport.
Sometimes use proper airlines on routes - if doing the above, I'll try to get the right aircraft model, call signs and livery.  If doing a speculative "where do I feel like going?" flight, I'll use whatever livery and flight number takes my fancy, including the default fictional airlines.  
(Almost) always follow real-time or weather - the rare occasion when I don't would be if I was flying at night (in the real world) and wanted to do a daytime flight.  Using the old "real world weather" function would lead to a jarring mismatch.  That said, I've just picked up ActiveSky 2012 which supports historical weather modelling, so that problem goes out the window.

 

My approach is that it's very much a sim rather than a game, but operating within certain limitations based on (a) the FSX platform's capabilities (b) the software and hardware capablities of my flight-sim setup © the simple fact that you're sitting in a room looking at monitor screens, completely lacking most of the subtle sensual feedback  a real pilot would get and most importantly (d) my own developing but still limited skills as a sim pilot.

 

I fly a mix of default aircraft, top quality freeware and simpler payware, I don't have the money to spend on top-end complex payware and to be honest at my current level I don't feel the reward for mastering more complex systems would justify the extra effort and expense required.  I follow checklists and procedures, albeit simplified ones to reflect the simulated systems.  I've setup everything I can to create an immersive feel (voice recognition to talk to ATC, cabin ambience, physical layout of controls, etc), something which is always going to be an ongoing work in progress.

 

"Each to their own" is exactly right.  We all have our own criteria for what makes a compelling and immersive simulated experience.  But to assume that people who don't do things the same way you are treat their flight simming as a casual game is ignorant at best, and at worst downright snobbish.  Plus it does wonders for encouraging newcomers to the hobby.. encouraging them to find a different hobby, that is.

 

Finally I have a sincere question for those of you who answered "5 all the way".  How many of you communicate with ATC by voice, either using a live service like VATSIM or speech recognition like MCE or VoxATC, and how many of you still use keypresses?  The reason I'm curious is that it was the biggest immersion-breaker for me and the first major upgrade I went for.

 

Dr V

5 for me. My routine is to check where ATC is online on VATSIM, pick a couple of airports rhat I preferrably have payware airport sceneries for, head over to Flightaware to check what flights are flown between those two airports and then pick a flight flown by a payware add on aircraft I have in my hangar. Also I have to be able to pronounciate the callsign without hurting my tongie...