let's say an architect could show off a proposed building design within a reasonably accurate mock up of it's surroundings

 

Architects and others already do that with specialised visualisation applications.

Exactly!

Exactly!

 

Then why should they need an application with a built-in flight simulator when they can use a specialist suite such as

 

AutoCAD Revit Architecture Visualisation Suite combines Autodesk Revit Architecture, Autodesk 3ds Max Design, Autodesk Navisworks Review, AutoCAD Architecture & AutoCAD software applications. This product suite gives you unmatched flexibility for understanding and communicating your designs, from concept to the final presentation. Reap the rewards of improved project understanding and increased client satisfaction gained through persuasive, compelling visualisations.

...and software wind tunnels, but I'll bet they would replace those specially expensive programs with a more mainstream product in no time.

 

no one's suggesting "they need an application with a built-in flight simulator". AutoCAD a good example, don't start my mate off about it...

 

if we are progressing toward a planes boats cars and trains sim, then it's only natural they will continue to improve beyond that in ways like the software wind tunnel example - then in turn they will be desirable to a broader range of markets.

but I'll bet they would replace those specially expensive programs with a more mainstream product in no time.

 

Why do you thinks no one's developed such a product already with all the features architects need?

If you have a mouse and keyboard, then Windows 8 is essentially no different than Windows 7, with the exception that when you click on the start icon at the bottom left, you get a screen of tiles instead of a hierarchical menu. The desktop provides exactly the same look and feel from Windows 7 and you can choose to use the full screen "metro apps" if you want to do so. Performance is practically identical with some new improvements in functioanlity.

 

Wy is that so hard for people? It never surprises me how some of you will cling to old versions of anything. Remember when people wouldn't go Windows 7 and clung to XP? How about the FS2002 people who just knew that FS9 was an abomination never to be tried? I also remember the (to me) very recent revolt against anything FSX because of the hardware requirements and the pre-SP1 performance.

 

Some of you are just stuck in the mud and refuse to change for anything. Sorry...I'm enjoying my Windows 8 laptop and my Surface. For my flight simming, I have a Windows 7 system that I'll upgrade when all teh dinosaurs finally come along for the ride, just like with Vista and Windows 7.

Why do you thinks no one's developed such a product already with all the features architects need?

I don't and I've said nothing to suggest I do. - If you look, I'm just pulling an example out of the bag to discuss the emergence of new software technologies based around simming.

Flight was a good learning experience for MS. Lets hope that they have learned something from it.

 

Cheers

jja

I hope so, or at least send it to LM. What about this report on airport fencing, I wonder what that's like to fly over on a windy day. I'm suggesting an all encompassing product say ESP2 for argument's sake, that enables the simulation of almost anything, where your exhaust goes as in the fencing example, but in a mainstream application suite.

If you have a mouse and keyboard, then Windows 8 is essentially no different than Windows 7

 

If Windows 8 is essentially no different to Windows 7 what compelling reason would a desktop user have to buy and install it.

Remember when people wouldn't go Windows 7 and clung to XP?

 

You skipped Vista too, huh?

 

Hook

I don't use a mouse now with my new touch screen I just hold my arm in mid air all day and point at it - only joking.

If you look, I'm just pulling an example out of the bag to discuss the emergence of new software technologies based around simming.

 

I wouldn't confuse FSX (be it flight or world) with real world solid modeling ... these applications exist today and could never be used for anything other than very specific task. Be it SolidWorks ($15,000+ per license and another $20,000 if you want some highly accurate fluid/flow modeling add-ons) and then there is Cinema 4D (which is not a solid modeling, it's surface modeling like we have in FSX) which can present a rich simulated world ... but the key element you might be missing is that both of these products can only accomplish accurate rendering/simulation after many many many hours/days/weeks of rendering on render farms (think 64-256 CPU servers) to produce a short animation and in some cases a single frame.

 

Solid modeling with physics (including understanding of materials and their characteristics) could never run "real time" on today's computers ... I doubt it could be done 30-50 years from now ... so there is no way FSX could evolve into that field. Beyond entertainment and training, there isn't any value in FSX.

 

But, that doesn't mean opening FSX up into a larger "world" simulator isn't possible ... it's just entertainment that hits a much wider audience. I brought this topic up with a friend I have at EA (Electronic Arts) who was working on "The Sims" (and I think he still is working on The Sims and/or the new SimCity). I suggested they produce a "World" simulator and bring together all their products into a single world product ... you can buy specific pieces to those products and more importantly you can provide a community a standard process of making content that can be uploaded and sold under the EA umbrella. Effectively making "the world of users" a resource for EA while at the same time they can make some money from it also and in turn user products bring in more interested users.

 

My EA friend liked the idea but their biggest challenge is content organization ... I had not thought about it, but he enlightened me ... EA have millions (actually more like billions) of 3D objects produced over the years from various projects, their internal library is massive!! Their texture libraries are staggeringly large (boggles my mind) ... just managing these libraries is a 24/7 challenge. One of his challenges was trying to leverage all the existing content in new projects ... rather than keep re-inventing the same wheel.

 

What we're really talking about in the development of any 3D world in a 2D space (your monitor) is surface modeling in real time with a dash of physics and some code to emulate whatever reality you are trying to accomplish. It's Polygons, texture mapping, bump/normal/parallax mapping, pixel/vertex/geometry shaders, simplified physics (code), network (code), input (code), management (code). Now, I'm NOT trivializing this at all, I'm just saying it's the same process be it a flight simulation or racing simulation or 3D shooter.

 

Bringing this topic back some, in all honestly I think it's probably better that Microsoft NOT get involved in gaming at all with it's current executive group including Ballmer running the show. Take a look at this wiki article on Microsoft Game Studios: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Studios look at the history from 2006 to 2013 -- you'll see a long trail of confusion ... open/close/open/close. If I were in a small gaming company that got bought by Microsoft ... I'd find a way out as fast as possible. For whatever reason Microsoft just don't get it, but it sends a bad message to other companies, who think "because Microsoft failed doing a flight simulation, we'll fail doing a flight simulation" ... a message of fear rather than a message of executive incompetence.

 

Rob

Yeah, that's what I mean, you don't need a render farm to work out if an object blows over, but taking things to conclusions suggests that true physics be incorporated eventually. I'm not sure if it's something MS should do but surely they should have the capability. In terms of physics in my experience quite often more and more cpu bandwidth is given to an old solution, instead new solutions that use far less cpu horsepower are emerging.

I never even seen a demo of what they were working on with that Train Sim...Shame it is Vaporware now.

Well, I did see some demos of Trains2 and the base platform that was created for it to share with FSvNext, and eventually a cars and trucks and ship operations sim.

 

I also saw at the same developers conference in Orlando, FL some demos of many of the animation advances that were slated for the next FS, including fully independent and articulated suspension systems, similar to the UNIMOG's performance in Otterra's demos.