"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

Those FS programs can be quite counterproductive and in some cases
destructive

Of course, but then if you thought you could learn to drive a car safely and
become a responsible user of an integrated road system after playing Gran
Turismo you'd be seriously kidding yourself. When I took PPL lessons my
instructor said he felt my instrument and control familiarity from playing
sims helped a great deal, but only to a certain extent, naturally. It
doesn't teach me how to use depth of field or how to "see" properly, and it
doesn't instill in me the responsibility I must learn to show to other air
traffic. But it gave me a few hours head-start.

What modern flight sim games excel at is dynamic environments. Military
sims generally simulate the performance of the vehicle being modelled in
almost scripted environments. I seriously doubt there's a "professional"
aircraft simulator out there that attempts even a tiny fraction of, say,
Falcon 4's wider campaign and arena modelling. I think the majority of home
games players would be thoroughly sick of the limitations of a professional
simulator in a matter of hours.

No-one's suggesting a game will teach you about the seriousness of your
duty, or the very real fear of dying in combat, just as Medal of Honor isn't
going to really teach you what it's like to storm the beaches of Normandy.

To answer the original poster's question: FS 2004 is a fantastically
detailed product for civilian flight, and Falcon 4 has yet to be beaten for
sheer wealth of features and attention to detail in the military games
market. But they are, in the end, entertainment products.

Si