No offence taken Efrain - just remember we are all counting on you to prove that XP is the best sim so we will be watching. Cheers jja

 

Hahahaha Yea, put all the burden on me! Hahaha It's all good, buddy. I really want to make XP work for me for same many reasons.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

 

 

Hi All - I've asked questions on FlyTampa's website, as well as Aerosoft's in respect to USCities. Might be worthwhile getting engaged with them directly.

 

These forums are great for open comms between users, but to get real change I think direct engagement with the developers is needed - ask the question if they've considered it, and make them realise there actually is a growing user base to make it commercialy viable for them.

 

I agree! And the big plus with XP is it seems that Team Austin can easily be reached and if enough people reach them with a common problem, something can be done from the root of the problem.

 

Case in point, I want to be able to start XP with the airplane in 3D mode but there is no option for that. There are only two options, either 2D panel mode with no panel or 2D panel mode with panel. I emailed LR and the next day I got a response saying that could be implemented in a future version.

 

Even if it never gets implemented, at least it feels good to know there is communication with the big wigs at LR.

 

LOL

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Hi All - I've asked questions on FlyTampa's website, as well as Aerosoft's in respect to USCities. Might be worthwhile getting engaged with them directly.

 

These forums are great for open comms between users, but to get real change I think direct engagement with the developers is needed - ask the question if they've considered it, and make them realise there actually is a growing user base to make it commercialy viable for them.

 

I really wouldn't be surprised to see Aerosoft start to roll out US Cities for X-Plane in the near future, based on their work on XP airports. Maybe it's just a matter of getting them XP-ready, while holding for a 64 bit stable RC. I don't have any of the cities, but if I understand correctly, they don't have night lighting. Maybe that's just one of the things they're working to add behind the scenes before releasing.

 

There's also licensing concerns, I'd imagine. Aerosoft contracts work out to developers to produce their products, and there might be some sort of legal dance they have to do to make these products officially available for X-Plane.

 

Just speculating at this point. Aerosoft is probably the biggest MSFS addon publisher to support X-Plane, so I think we're in for some good stuff over the next year or so.

Yes, it's wonderful to be able to communicate directly with the development team at Laminar. I did have the opportunity to meet the late Steve Jobs when he was at an event at Pixar studios in Emeryville a few years ago. He was an impressive individual. Tough and demanding, but had a clear vision of where he was going and was not afraid to demand "the best" from his team. I get a very similar vibe when I communicate with Mr. Meyer at Laminar. He has "the vision" and "the drive" to make things happen. Now if only the lawyers leave him in peace we'll all have something wonderful on our flight decks and reason to celebrate.

 

Ten Questions To Determine Flight Simulation Addiction (FSA):

 

1. Do you fly your simulator more than 1 time a day?

2. Have your simulation sessions become unmanageable?

3. Is your personal or business life interfering with your flight time?

4. Do you tend to think of problems in terms of how ATC will react to them?

5. Is your Flight Sim budget larger than the operating budget of the state you live in?

6. Do you sometimes lie to others and say "you're not flying" when in fact you're at FL400 on a 3,000 mile long-haul flight?

7. Do you believe you'll need the help of a 'higher power' to solve your flight simulation problems?

8. Do you feel the need to apologize to pilots when you have violated their airspace?

9. Would you rather browse an online simulation products store than view inappropriate magazines?

10. Is there anything else in your life that holds the same appeal as flight simulation?

By 2015, will XPlane become the new 400-pound gorilla on the block?

I think we would agree on most if we truly defined each 'argument'. I'm all for a 400-pound gorilla and if the gorilla was designed by a Steve Jobs of Flight Simulation there does not need to be competition, unless of course it's with the...other Steve Jobs of Flight Simulation ;o)Cheers, and let's hope AM is that SJ--I'm all for it! He certainly is the most visible entity poised to take advantage of no real competition as far along as he is. As I have said, I think moving into that position will depend on how visionary AM is. That he's done what he has it fair testimony, but IMO not enough evidence he has what it would take. Were someone w/ the legendary vision SJ demonstrated to take the reins of flight simulation one could literally start right up front with a mission statement that employed the elements I have referred to in other threads here. I'll summarize them here again:

• 64-bit, optimized for multi-core.
  
• Off-loading as much as feasible to DirectX functions in the GPU. The core engine must accommodate SLI/Crossfire, multiple GPUs, etc.
  
• Mesh & texture resolution to 1cm/pixel--or with no limitation, i.e. open-ended scalability. Increasing over this basic level of high resolution would be done in the next core engine upgrade. This is a guess, i.e., 1pixel/cm, as I haven't done the math to know whether this is the resolution to supply the user w/ real-world appearing graphics at ground level. The engine needs to be able to change the displayed resolution on the fly so that the LOD looks correct from any elevation including ground level.
  
• Robust weather engine that incorporates a very key feature of real world weather that I don't see in any products now, though perhaps XP-10 does this?: wind effects ON cloud formation. This is an area that would provide huge improvement in visual realism in whether. To see, for example, swirling winds cause clouds to swirl with those winds is something you see all the time from hurricanes on a large scale to smaller local effects. You don't see this in any FSX whether programs. No need to match exactly what winds in what areas in the real world are happening--just incorporate the concept and use metar data to trigger algorithms roughly compatible w/ real world realtime weather.
  
• A killer ATC component that enjoys the realism in terms of lack of concatenation (as you see in programs like Radar Contact) and offers much better interactivity between pilot and ATC.
  
• For aircraft: include a few basic ones to showcase what can be done on this core engine, that's all you need to release.
  
• Include a big database of real-world custom built 3D objects that make VFR flying doable to a high level right out of the box. As the other gent described, you need to have the major landmarks done to a very high level, then you can use autogen over satellite photo real and that may be good enough, leaving enhancement to 3rd party devs.
  
• Very rudimentary flight planner--leave the nice stuff to 3rd party dev.
  
• A very cool user interface. Rock-solid code design.
  
• Finally, all the SDK's needed to build scenery augmentation & aircraft, allowing weather & ATC to remain w/o a need for SDKs. Those features could be done to a level that there really is no need to add additional features until the next engine release.
  

This completes the basics of this core engine. I'm sure I've forgotten a few things, but you get the idea. Plan on this being the engine for AT LEAST 6 years and announce this up front. It sounds like XP-10 64-bit isn't that far off from these, no?

Yea but I have everything I want now with FSX. Cheers jja

 

Case in point, I want to be able to start XP with the airplane in 3D mode but there is no option for that. There are only two options, either 2D panel mode with no panel or 2D panel mode with panel. I emailed LR and the next day I got a response saying that could be implemented in a future version.

 

Even if it never gets implemented, at least it feels good to know there is communication with the big wigs at LR.

 

LOL

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

my xp10 always starts with the VC view with engines On, check your settings!

 

Yes, it's wonderful to be able to communicate directly with the development team at Laminar. I did have the opportunity to meet the late Steve Jobs when he was at an event at Pixar studios in Emeryville a few years ago.

Steve Jobs was an amazing person, I also met him before he passed away, it was weird how we met. I was visiting New York city and went to the Empire State building tour to the top and he was waiting behind me in line with his son. He wanted to teach his son how to be normal and not get ahead in line or take a helicopter to the top....he told me. LOL, a few minutes later when we reached the roof , he was surrounded by armed guards and reporters, it was crazy......He ignored me after I told him I own a Windows PC :lol:

I think we would agree on most if we truly defined each 'argument'. I'm all for a 400-pound gorilla and if the gorilla was designed by a Steve Jobs of Flight Simulation there does not need to be competition, unless of course it's with the...other Steve Jobs of Flight Simulation ;o)Cheers, and let's hope AM is that SJ--I'm all for it! He certainly is the most visible entity poised to take advantage of no real competition as far along as he is. As I have said, I think moving into that position will depend on how visionary AM is. That he's done what he has it fair testimony, but IMO not enough evidence he has what it would take. Were someone w/ the legendary vision SJ demonstrated to take the reins of flight simulation one could literally start right up front with a mission statement that employed the elements I have referred to in other threads here. I'll summarize them here again:

• 64-bit, optimized for multi-core.
  
• Off-loading as much as feasible to DirectX functions in the GPU. The core engine must accommodate SLI/Crossfire, multiple GPUs, etc.
  
• Mesh & texture resolution to 1cm/pixel--or with no limitation, i.e. open-ended scalability. Increasing over this basic level of high resolution would be done in the next core engine upgrade. This is a guess, i.e., 1pixel/cm, as I haven't done the math to know whether this is the resolution to supply the user w/ real-world appearing graphics at ground level. The engine needs to be able to change the displayed resolution on the fly so that the LOD looks correct from any elevation including ground level.
  
• Robust weather engine that incorporates a very key feature of real world weather that I don't see in any products now, though perhaps XP-10 does this?: wind effects ON cloud formation. This is an area that would provide huge improvement in visual realism in whether. To see, for example, swirling winds cause clouds to swirl with those winds is something you see all the time from hurricanes on a large scale to smaller local effects. You don't see this in any FSX whether programs. No need to match exactly what winds in what areas in the real world are happening--just incorporate the concept and use metar data to trigger algorithms roughly compatible w/ real world realtime weather.
  
• A killer ATC component that enjoys the realism in terms of lack of concatenation (as you see in programs like Radar Contact) and offers much better interactivity between pilot and ATC.
  
• For aircraft: include a few basic ones to showcase what can be done on this core engine, that's all you need to release.
  
• Include a big database of real-world custom built 3D objects that make VFR flying doable to a high level right out of the box. As the other gent described, you need to have the major landmarks done to a very high level, then you can use autogen over satellite photo real and that may be good enough, leaving enhancement to 3rd party devs.
  
• Very rudimentary flight planner--leave the nice stuff to 3rd party dev.
  
• A very cool user interface. Rock-solid code design.
  
• Finally, all the SDK's needed to build scenery augmentation & aircraft, allowing weather & ATC to remain w/o a need for SDKs. Those features could be done to a level that there really is no need to add additional features until the next engine release.
  

This completes the basics of this core engine. I'm sure I've forgotten a few things, but you get the idea. Plan on this being the engine for AT LEAST 6 years and announce this up front. It sounds like XP-10 64-bit isn't that far off from these, no?

 

Whew. Now THAT is a comprehensive laundry-list! The staff size that Laminar has today clearly suggests a lengthy timeline for ultimate development and refinement of XPlane. DIRECT-X 11 is a nod to Microsoft at the expense of MAC, Linux and the smartphone crowd. Presently, XP10 is using OPEN GL which lets the graphics go cross-platform to a much greater extent than FSX permits, AFAIK.

 

Modelling a totally all-new flight sim platform with all the elements you list above is far beyond the resources of most companies, excluding the monster firms like Electronic Arts. The budget for development for the modern shoot-em-up video game is in the millions of dollars. I doubt that Laminar has that much raw capital sitting around ready to invest into X-Plane in a short period of time. If they did, they'd have a considerably larger staff of programmers.

 

The number of people who would actually BUY a flight-simulation platform and then throw even more money into add-ons and hardware controllers for it is a far smaller market than the number of folks who buy an all-in-one video game like Battlefield 3, Grand Theft Auto, etc. Those games are a fully self-contained environment, and to my knowledge, do not generally lend themselves to a lot of add-on software sales. Yes, there are role playing games where a person can buy spells and powers and so on, but I'm just saying the complexity of building a game area the size of the ENTIRE EARTH, and modeling the graphics down to the dimensions you suggest is no small can of corn! Then to expect all of the scenery to inter-operate with myriad numbers of objects, across an infinite number of horizontal and vertical dimensions extending to the horizon- we are now talking a degree of difficulty that is almost unimaginable.

 

The human mind can easily imagine the scenery unfolding in real time, but as yet there aren't any computers as powerful as a single person's imagination! All of that texturing and rendering has to be done with mathematical models, wire mesh, polygons, and pixels. Enough to scare even Gandalf! When you consider this task logically, it's incredible that we have flight simulation at the level that exists today! Both FSX -and- XPlane are amazing!

 

Honestly, if we were to put into words our "dream" of the best possible flight simulation, we are really talking about a render-farm on the scale used at PIXAR to produce CGI animation for motion pictures. We want to see butter-smooth animation of multiple elements in ultra high-definition in REAL TIME. Ready for a shock? Even with a ROOMFUL of high end computers, it takes each PC/MAC at Pixar many hours to render ONE FRAME of film. Considering it takes 30 frames per SECOND to produce a movie, you begin to see the massive engineering obstacles facing the next-generation of flight simulation.

 

So the trade-offs happen, and some things have to be 'less than perfect'. Considering what XPlane is ALREADY doing, I think Mssr. Meyer deserves our respect and support. Even if you only buy XPlane as a way to encourage him- that has some validity. Lord knows Lockheed Martin, a NATIONAL DEFENSE CONTRACTOR hasn't exactly knocked our socks off with Prepar3D thus far, yeah? And LM has a LOT more financial clout than Laminar, no doubt!

 

Meaningful change will require someone brave enough to undertake a task that would stop most people dead in their tracks. I'm happy to take whatever innovation Laminar brings my way and applause to them for it! Without Laminar, our desire for a revolutionary new simulator would be extremely unlikely.

Modelling a totally all-new flight sim platform with all the elements you list above is far beyond the resources of most companies, excluding the monster firms like Electronic Arts. The budget for development for the modern shoot-em-up video game is in the millions of dollars. I doubt that Laminar has that much raw capital sitting around ready to invest into X-Plane in a short period of time. If they did, they'd have a considerably larger staff of programmers.

 

The number of people who would actually BUY a flight-simulation platform and then throw even more money into add-ons and hardware controllers for it is a far smaller market than the number of folks who buy an all-in-one video game like Battlefield 3, Grand Theft Auto, etc.

 

You have to keep focused on this very critical piece: this is a software engine that generates sales for MANY years to come and spawns 3PD's to sustain sales and interest. It's a core engine w/ some features implemented, not a standalone game like many titles by EA that have short lifespans and really virtually no 3PD support. Different animal completely. Once you built mesh to that resolution--it's done essentially for many iterations of core engine. When you build the core weather component as described--it's quite possibly done. You're not developing an entire story line like you have in the entertainment titles you cited. Just the key core components. When you try to estimate how many users are out there, you really can only start w/ those using flight sim software currently. What if...one could fire up XP11 for example, and truly be able to fly to enjoy scenery, in a very trouble-free environment that DID NOT take a degree in computer science to make run well. I think the audience for this level of product is much greater than w/ current software. I'd love to see Apple develop the sim quite frankly. Target it for training as well. Think super cool--an iOS of flight simulation. Maybe LR can't do this, but I fully believe there is a huge audience for this were it done to a level that you just plain had to have it ;o)

Noel, I would prefer Google to embark on a flight sim if Apple was to try and do it. Imagine Google's Flight Simulator with photoscenery for the entire world thanks to Google Maps? With 3D autogen thanks to the technology behind Google Earth? Now we are talking! haha

You have to keep focused on this very critical piece: this is a software engine that generates sales for MANY years to come and spawns 3PD's to sustain sales and interest. It's a core engine w/ some features implemented, not a standalone game like many titles by EA that have short lifespans and really virtually no 3PD support. Different animal completely. Once you built mesh to that resolution--it's done essentially for many iterations of core engine. When you build the core weather component as described--it's quite possibly done. You're not developing an entire story line like you have in the entertainment titles you cited. Just the key core components. When you try to estimate how many users are out there, you really can only start w/ those using flight sim software currently. What if...one could fire up XP11 for example, and truly be able to fly to enjoy scenery, in a very trouble-free environment that DID NOT take a degree in computer science to make run well. I think the audience for this level of product is much greater than w/ current software. I'd love to see Apple develop the sim quite frankly. Target it for training as well. Think super cool--an iOS of flight simulation. Maybe LR can't do this, but I fully believe there is a huge audience for this were it done to a level that you just plain had to have it ;o)

 

Again, I have no idea what the current worldwide market for a 'new' flight sim would be in total numbers, but it be dwarfed by the number of people playing RPG or shooter games. Flying is a skill. Microsoft made "FLIGHT' in a way that even non-pilots could be successful from day 1- and it fell on its face. Why? Because unlike the shooter games (where people can take out their aggression) - flight simming is more esoteric. Yes, for the avid sim enthusiast - it's an experience unlike any other (except the real thing) - but it doesn't have the world-wide draw ("curb appeal") that the competing video GAMES have.

 

Even if the simulator was available at markedly-improved eye-candy and flight dynamics, with real time ATC and weather and everything you could possibly imagine, the only ones who would flock to buy it are the people who love flying. Sure, you might likely pull some off the bench that were 'undeclared' pilot/enthusiasts, but my strong feeling is the total numbers would be a non-starter to justify the capital expense such a project would entail.

 

What does this mean to us? Likely APPLE or GOOGLE won't be coming to our rescue any time soon, though I loved Efrain's idea of Google using the Google map satellite imagery for the worldwide terrain. VERY SMART idea.

 

Apple will focus on its current model of selling iPhones and iPads and reaping a rake-off on everything sold via the Apple online store. They have minimal capital at-risk- because Apple doesn't build the GAMES (or make the MUSIC). It merely earns a nice commission every time a user buys anything using one of their proprietary hardware devices. SMART, very very SMART.

 

Unless you have some kind of strong interest in flying, you probably aren't going to dump $2000+ into a gaming PC fast enough to run the primitive sim games presently available, and you for sure are not going to put up for more than 5 minutes with any PC gaming experience that has you tweaking and adjusting the PC more than you're flying on it.

It merely earns a nice commission every time a user buys anything using one of their proprietary hardware devices. SMART, very very SMART.

 

Why couldn't we think of that, huh Rob? haha

Even if the simulator was available at markedly-improved eye-candy and flight dynamics, with real time ATC and weather and everything you could possibly imagine, the only ones who would flock to buy it are the people who love flying. Sure, you might likely pull some off the bench that were 'undeclared' pilot/enthusiasts, but my strong feeling is the total numbers would be a non-starter to justify the capital expense such a project would entail.

 

Don't forget, so much has already been done in terms of terrain mapping, all information for all airports, as you rightly acknowledge, Google map satellite imagery. There are about 500-600,000 certificated pilots. There are plenty more who never made it but would love a high level experience in the simulator. I wouldn't be surprised for every certificated pilot there might be 3 people quite interested in a much better personal simulator experience. So let's say of 4 million who either fly in the RW or like the idea, 1/4 will pick up the new killer sim app as described. You have a million sales. Let's say the core engine costs $149. No, this is not another game. It's a truly killer platform w/ a published mission statement. You've got $150M in gross sales. Ok, this is a huge and blind guess. But, think about it: a team of 10 people working on this to a very high standard part time, for several years, working on each of the core components. But it would take a miraculous visionary with huge knowledge about the basics already, and w/ some real passion to pull it off. Sounds completely believable to me, but not likely.

I agree, I think Apple and Google would not consider developing a new sim in the current economic market! What could happen, is Apple making a deal with LR to market and publish X-Plane, similar to what MS did with Bruce Artwick and SubLogic before taking the whole thing in house. This I think would be best scenario, as it would expand the market even further (At least with MAC's) with the extra exposure. Which may provide the resources LR needs to develop the features like better land class/scenery, seasonal textures, and ATC.

We need to befriend a rich oil tycoon from Dubai who likes flight simming...

I like that idea Efrain!