I can't believe that anyone had to ask what the point of the post was :huh:

To inform others about who made the licensing deal with Microsoft. The rest is... discussion.

Phil, for the most part I agree although this point doesn't make sense.  This is essentially how FSX and Flight both work, although they are camera-centered, and not player centered, but those are pretty much to the same.

 

I think these are the main requirements for an engine to be capable of being a "world" engine:

- Either full 64 bit floating precision through the entire engine, or the ability to render camera or player centered

- Either full 64 bit floating precision through the entire engine, or the ability to "slide"\transform the physics state to a new reference point

- Ability to have multiple physics worlds or the ability to have a non constant gravity vector

- Large draw distances

- Ability to stream content with different LOD by distance

 

I think for the most part the newest gen of FPS engine are pretty close to being able to be world-engines without major architecture changes.  No matter what engine you use, it is still a lot of work to implement the product specific features.

ok fair enough on camera-centered, but it still isnt a WGS coordinate system, so real-world object placement has to be implemented as a mapping on top of the base UE4 coordinate system.

 

in some key cases, it looks like the range limits of UE4 and its coordinate system do not map to the required ranges. thats a hard problem to solve, since those sorts of range limits tend to be part of the authoring pipeline as well as the rendering pipeline.

 

and nice to talk to you, virtually. :-)

Dovetail at least moves flight simulation along toward some more clarity. Most simmers fall in the middle with realism it hardcore scream their hobby ended. Capture that 60% to 80% of users with decent settings they will do fine. P3d is there for the hardcore if needed. The dovetail execs are well aware where sweet middle lies with flight simulation.

The dovetail execs are well aware where sweet middle lies with flight simulation.

 

 

How is it your so sure of this??? 

CPMP is a 3rd Party route. Not made by DTG

 

 You only have to run the CP Mountain Pass to realize what the FS franchise is in for.

For example, in regard to CPMP, no track sounds, loco sound re verb that sounds like it was recorded in a 44Gal drum, and notch 1 that will pull a 10,000 tonne freight  off the starting line like a Aston Martin.

Can you imagine a plane designed by them ?

How is it your so sure of this??? 

 

Because they did the same exact thing with train simulation.  They're not out for hardcore simmers money.. We're a thorn in their side.  They will funnel money out of the wallets of casuals.. Bank on it.

How is it your so sure of this???

Read interview with dovetail execs regarding how thier dlc trains hardcore users will scream if rivet is wrong on a train. They made a reference of how hardcore flight simmers are very similar. Figure dovetail screws up another will take its place. Not too worried got fs2004 as insurance.

How is it your so sure of this???

Read interview with dovetail execs regarding how thier dlc trains hardcore users will scream if rivet is wrong on a train. They made a reference of how hardcore flight simmers are very similar. Figure dovetail screws up another will take its place. Not too worried got fs2004 as insurance.

CPMP is a 3rd Party route. Not made by DTG

 

They are the distributor and have to assure the QA of everything that passes through them. Doesn't matter if the pope made it. They gave it their "Seal Of Approval" and shipped it.. They are to blame solely for any bugged, broken, and bad products passing through them regardless of who made it.

And I have to say that as a user of Train Simulator I have never been as angry as many users seem to have been with Dovetail. Admittedly I flew real planes but I never drove real trains so I don't have any idea what driving a real train is like. And since very few people ever will drive a real train I held Train Sim to a lower standard than Flight Simulator. It is more of a fantasy experience. But I have generally enjoyed Train Simulator. 

That is another 3rd party route, nothing to do with DTG, as well you know.

 

 And this is their newest in house developed DLC just released..

 

http://cdn.akamai.steamstatic.com/steam/apps/222622/ss_799f6ba8f7a7808f6de1c8512fe64cb9591241e1.1920x1080.jpg?t=1404994491

 

That is without a doubt the most abysmal mesh, texturing and 3D cab I've ever seen.. Seriously. WHAT IS THAT? That's the best they can do in 2014? They didn't even try.   FS9 VC's look better. 

They are the distributor and have to assure the QA of everything that passes through them. Doesn't matter if the pope made it. They gave it their "Seal Of Approval" and shipped it.. They are to blame solely for any bugged, broken, and bad products passing through them regardless of who made it.

 

An interesting supposition. I wonder who takes the blame for any "bad" DLC coming through the various Flight simulator marketplaces currently.

 

I would guess that stores should test all products, and withhold anything they find less than perfect.

 

But...

 

Those DTG (and other) products apparently sell very well, so perhaps other people have different criteria for satisfaction?

 

I suspect there are many things you love that I wouldn't give the time of day. And Vice Versa.

An interesting supposition. I wonder who takes the blame for any bad "DLC" coming through the various Flight simulator marketplaces currently.

 

The distributor. If some developer puts crap out under Flight1, Flight1 not only is held to account, they offer refunds. 

 

DTG should not be held to account for any 3rd party distributed separately but if they do approve something and take a cut on it by selling in through their steam store, they should be accountable for the quality. 

 

An interesting supposition. I wonder who takes the blame for any bad "DLC" coming through the various Flight simulator marketplaces currently.

 

Unlike FS market places where if you contacted the store they would direct you to seek support from the 3PD, in TS 2014 anything you purchase as DLC (through Steam) DTG are the support, they won't direct you to the 3PD.. Most of the 3PD don't even have websites or contact info to begin with.

 

http://www.engine-driver.com/article/show/15/the-railsimulator-com-partner-programme-work-with-us

 

Without using the RailSimulator.com Partner Programme, a third party developer wanting to release content on their own needs to be able to handle the packaging and distribution aspects, which can be expensive and involve getting your own server hosting on the Internet. They would also need to consider online payment services, shop catalogue systems and processes to handle customer support. When you publish via us you don't need to worry about any of this.

 

 

As far as that route goes. 

 

Wrong, the idea of the Partner Program is simply to give 3PD  access to the Steam distribution system. Also giving less financially viable routes access to a wider market.

The South African route is a welcome departure from the usual US, UK and German  Fare. Admittedly  the quality could be better, but often the people who make these routes are just gifted amatuers. 

They are the distributor and have to assure the QA of everything that passes through them. Doesn't matter if the pope made it. They gave it their "Seal Of Approval" and shipped it.. They are to blame solely for any bugged, broken, and bad products passing through them regardless of who made it.

Wrong

 

You say this yet their own literature says otherwise..  Funny how that works...

 

 

Once we've got that package we get it up to our Steam Beta Test team and simultaneously it is submitted for internal QA testing.  

 

 

 

 

Another important aspect that we handle for third party developers and is often overlooked when considering this kind of thing is customer support. We have a dedicated team of people looking after customer support enquiries, a vast number of queries can be dealt with by fairly common processes and we handle this without disturbing the third party developer.