Scar, I would like to preface this post by drawing your attention to the fact that never once did I disagree with your assertion that the use of the term "simulator" to refer to this type of game is a misappropriation of the term. I don't know why you're so angry, but please, whatever you do, be angry at someone else.
I am pointing out that your argument is falling on deaf ears here, and that you are only making things worse by getting progressively more and more upset. Your liberal use of bold lettering, font size increases, and exclamation marks comes across more as a child throwing a tantrum than someone making a sane, rational argument. Which is a pity because whenever you're not losing your temper, your posts have been helpful. EDIT: The font size increases have now, thankfully, been edited out of your most recent post. This is a good thing.
As for your points, you assume that every engineer or scientist cares about how a genre of computer games is referred to. This is a bold assumption. As for my source, go back and read this thread. Nobody has backed you up. You assume again that I meant the whole world. I made the mistake of not qualifying my statement and I regret it now, but I meant specifically this thread. You're alone in here
, and I didn't mean to imply anything more than that.
As for the point about study sims, even you have to admit that there are different levels of simulation. Gran Turismo ostensibly is a car simulation, but it is nowhere near the depth of a study sim like DCS or Falcon. Even within air combat sims there are "lite" sims like Strike Fighters. The industry is improved by variety in terms of spreading the realism of simulations up and down the spectrum, not damaged by it. I hope that even you can agree with me on that.
Also, yeah, I regret to admit that I am not Jesus.
Edited by Ramrod, 20 March 2012 - 12:55 PM.