This is what our flight sims could look like

[tttocs]

Hmmmmmm.....I guess I missed the last line of your post. Agreeing to disagree is fine too! :lol:

 

Just to be clear because it looks like you may have misunderstood my tone - I didn't mean my closing in a snippy way. It's just that we're both down to restating the same position over and over with different verbiage.

 

Back to my broccoli...

 

Scott

[HiFlyer]

Just to be clear because it looks like you may have misunderstood my tone - I didn't mean my closing in a snippy way. It's just that we're both down to restating the same position over and over with different verbiage.

 

Back to my broccoli...

 

Scott

 

Nope, you were polite throughout (which is not always the case!) and I myself was speaking generally and never personally (not my style)

 

And all and all I am hopeful of change, better graphics and all.... if only because I believe the status quo cannot possibly hold. :unsure:

[gizmosellsbunnys]

These concepts are good but then you got to build the code to fly the planes. Accept FSX will be with us for the next 5 to 10 years, and replacement will be X plane, google earth simulator over time will have decent flight sim anyways, flight gear too. FSX is like 1950s telecaster still plays well after all those years. Flight simulator like cooking pizza some want just cheese and others want every meat in the book with Chicago style crust. All take the thin crust with pepperoni with dipping sauce

[Tabs]

Actual in-game Crysis 3 screenshot:

 

http://www.abload.de/img/cellj3smy.png

 

We're a bit behind in sim-land unfortunately...

[pegger74]

There's low flying and there's low flying!

 

I can understand the need for grass to aid the whirlygig drivers...but if you are getting up close and personal with the moss growing on rocks...you just might be at the end of your low flight! :lol:

[Rocky_53]

I can understand the need for grass to aid the whirlygig drivers...but if you are getting up close and personal with the moss growing on rocks...you just might be at the end of your low flight! :lol:

Absolutely, there has to be a certain point for detail quality beyond which the quality becomes redundant, and then only becomes a nuisance draw on CPU resources. If anyone has some of the 30cm airports that are now becoming commonplace with Orbx, then you'll know what I mean. Taxiing around Stewart in PFJ and looking out of the cockpit returns a degree of detail that is unbelievable. Even getting really close to the hangar and buildings shows an almost hi def experience. So IMO we don't need any further detail in the scenery IF it becomes more of a draw on a system's resources.

[mgh]

From clicking the about tab on YouTube:

 

"Ai3D Realtime simulation tools are based on "game technology". The viewer can walk, drive or fly anywhere in the scene, and control the sun, weather, options and layers, interactively."

 

But not necessarily on a PC. I suggest it's more more likely that they used a workstation. A fully featured Dell Precision work station comes in at over £4000 ($6000)

[HansRoaming]

But not necessarily on a PC. I suggest it's more more likely that they used a workstation. A fully featured Dell Precision work station comes in at over £4000 ($6000)

 

Initially I'd say what's the difference between our sim rigs and a work station given the high end cards and overclocking we do (plus the markup that goes with a 'workstation') but good point, I've emailed Ai3D and have asked them. I also emailed Unigine pointing them to this thread and got a thanks for making us aware from the CEO.

[UAE77L]

Maybe something like "Flight Simulator Skyrim X"

[HansRoaming]

Focusing on the physics and simulation side vs graphics we've not reached the peak as no one is doing real time computational fluid dynamics yet however looking at the physics depth it's quite good already especially when you consider the number of actors involved. A few AI planes is nothing compared to say deformable scenery and so on. We're getting good physics and systems simulation even within FSX and it's prevalence to restrict itself to one core.

 

If you look at modern sims, they tend to be CPU bound rather than GPU bound so right now there is ample headroom to improve the graphical and immersive side of things (we are visually dominated animals after all) without requiring a leap in hardware capability.

[Clem Wu]

Yeah, seeing a city would be nice! But then the components would be quite intensive as an average city has countless movements at any given point.

[Nat Harrold]

Hi

 

I was directed here by one of your members. I am one of the 2 'bosses' at Ai3D. I run the Brisbane based stuido in Queensland. Thanks for the nice words in this thread. You can ask any questions about our use and experience with Unigine or our work and I will answer as best I can.

 

Ai3D have been using Unigine for the last 5 years and it is still our primary choice of engine for a number of reasons. Mainly because it is customisable to different situations, sizes and levels of detail and hardware capability. *(and it can handle truckloads of geometry and textures)

 

But not necessarily on a PC. I suggest it's more more likely that they used a workstation. A fully featured Dell Precision work station comes in at over £4000 ($6000)

 

We do use PC's of various configs. Certainly not the latest tech, would be nice to afford it. Some of the guys here are still using 260GTX! A typical pc here is equipped with i7, 8-12GB ram (though this is more used for other pre-rendering / and other software involved in the production of models and textures), 750W psu and maybe a 4 or 5 series nvidia gpu if they are lucky.

[HiFlyer]

But not necessarily on a PC. I suggest it's more more likely that they used a workstation. A fully featured Dell Precision work station comes in at over £4000 ($6000)

 

I am not sure why that would be necessary....... Nothing in that video that Grand theft auto IV couldn't wipe the floor with, and that game is most certainly real-time. Interestingly enough, the video below is from nearly two years ago, and on near ancient technology. Another sign of how far sims are behind, Could you imagine these graphics in Train Simulator..........? :wub:

 

Of course the settings and resolution are kind of insane.... but with this video, that's the point.

[HansRoaming]

Hi

 

I was directed here by one of your members.

 

...

 

We do use PC's of various configs. Certainly not the latest tech, would be nice to afford it. Some of the guys here are still using 260GTX! A typical pc here is equipped with i7, 8-12GB ram (though this is more used for other pre-rendering / and other software involved in the production of models and textures), 750W psu and maybe a 4 or 5 series nvidia gpu if they are lucky.

 

Hi Nat, thanks for engaging in this thread, I was the person who emailed you and I forgot to put my forum ID down in the email so you'd know who it was that invite you here.

 

It's what I thought, the hardware you're using is pretty standard and the results you're getting easily achievable with the overclocked beasts some of us have.

[Nat Harrold]

Nothing in that video that Grand theft auto IV couldn't wipe the floor with

 

very true, though consider the difference in budgets and timeframes required to do this.

 

In the video on the page at the top, nothing cost more than 25k aud to produce (which included design).

 

GTA IV - $100,000,000. USD