I just wish they include ATC :-)

 

 

I don't think that's really going to float anyone's boat here. For a simming club sure, but it all comes down to the execution of the programming. I thought the FSX/FS9 attempts were abysmal.

 

Yes, they were, so, we did a full virtual PPL course, as if it was real, instructored & mentored by real pilots as well as with national instructors. We .wanted to do things as correctly as possible, or less there's no point in learning at all.

 

I remember being vectored into a mountain in one of the FS's training. lessons.

 

 

https://steamcommunity.com/app/314160/discussions/16/412446890551915486/#c412446890553974782

 

 

The graphics engine is an evolution of the engine in Microsoft Flight Simulator X. Initially, we needed to overhaul it to support DirectX 11. Following that, we enhanced it with some up to date techniques such as globally applied high dynamic range rendering (HDR) and atmospheric light scattering.

 

 

So it's P3D v3 basically!

 

 

So it's P3D v3 basically!

 

No,

It is 64bit vs 32bit P3Dv3

It has Atmospheric light scattering, P3Dv3 does not have this

It supports physically based rendering (PBR)

 

In short, it should look much better if developers use the new features to the full.

So it's P3D v3 basically!

 

It's more FSX with a twist, so a variation similar to P3D but quite different. But in the end it's just an upgraded FSX. I hope Dovetail also fixes the FSX autogen like LM did.

I remember all the anticipation and expectancy that has surrounded every releqse of a flight sim for the last 20 years, and the dissapointed frustration when it did not work 'out of the box'. I have yet to remember one that has. Every time there is a release there is the cry of " why cant we have a 64bit version"? Well someone has done it so why are we downing it before its even taken off?. Weve still got about 6-8 weeks of this yet, lets not convince ourselves that its crap before we have even seen any screeners.

Remember, we are all still flying a 10+ year old sim engine, so for what its worth, I'm excited to see whats new. If you dont like, then dont buy.

There are items I would really like to see correctly addressed in the "Flight School" sim...

 

Basic aspects we all learn as student pilots, and experience along our pilot activity ( real world ) that would be great to have represented in the simulator as plausible as possible...

 

Things like that simple "From High to Low Watch Out Bellow..." applied not only to pressure, but also to temperature ( a detail we do not have in FSX, P3D, X-Plane, ... but for instance we do have in Flight Gear... ), the use of various types of checklists, inspection of the aircraft ( like some add-ons for FSX and X-plane allow...), all of the possible outcomes of combinations of malfunctions in the pitot system, and so on....

 

Something really didactic :-)

But in the end it's just an upgraded FSX. I hope Dovetail also fixes the FSX autogen like LM did.

 

I'm wondering what the default textures will be like. I remember the shock when I first saw the desert like textures all over the world when first playing FSX 

There are items I would really like to see correctly addressed in the "Flight School" sim...

 

Basic aspects we all learn as student pilots, and experience along our pilot activity ( real world ) that would be great to have represented in the simulator as plausible as possible...

 

Things like that simple "From High to Low Watch Out Bellow..." applied not only to pressure, but also to temperature ( a detail we do not have in FSX, P3D, X-Plane, ... but for instance we do have in Flight Gear... ), the use of various types of checklists, inspection of the aircraft ( like some add-ons for FSX and X-plane allow...), all of the possible outcomes of combinations of malfunctions in the pitot system, and so on....

 

Something really didactic :-)

 

I would like that too. And what about airspace? That's also a very important part of flying. I wonder how far this Flight School will go.

 

It has been mentioned before in this or another DTG thread; tonight there's a chance to ask questions directly to the creative director of Flight School, if you have a Facebook account.

 

https://www.facebook.com/events/825694477553315/

Probably the default textures may be very similar to FSX.

It might be, as the previous iterations were, a  simulation engine in which we will be able to enhance & add whatever suitable add-on/DLC scenery textures that will be available.

 

I'm sure it will not be a complete fully textured world that we are expecting. Yes, a whole world, just like we had with FSX, but needing add-on enhancements such as Orbyx gave us.

 

I'm sure, as well, that the Flight School could be very similar to the in-game lessons & tutorials that existed in FSX. Obviously tweaked & enhanced to make it into a stand alone game.

 

Pure speculation, actually.

As I am mainly a low and slow type of flyer,using P3dv3 and Orbx scenery,I now get a regular 50fps and to my tired eye,s it looks good,sharp,no AA issue,s and virtually no stutters and I can not remember the last time I had a oom,So after nearly 500 interesting post,s I am left  wondering what DTG 64 bit will actually improve for me?

Peter

 

Again using X-Plane's move to 64 bits as an example, a 64 bit engine might benefit low and slow pilots more than airline pilots, because it allows more detail on the ground. 

 

In 64 bit X-Plane we now have free high def terrain mesh files for North American and UK/Europe, and a few mountain and canyon areas with ultra-high def mesh files. It looks amazing... no more big flat chunks of texture when you look at nearby mountains. The landclass rendering like farmlands and forest also benefits from higher density terrain mesh.

 

X-Plane can also use street data and building data from Open Street Maps. Where the available data is more complete (better in the UK and Europe than USA at the moment), the look of towns and cities is far beyond what could be hand-coded, and the data is constantly updated to represent what's on the ground. If you like following roads, you follow actual road data in OSM. It takes a whopping amount of RAM to pull this off at high mesh/object density. For example, it's recommended to have 32 gigs of RAM for running the UHD terrain mesh smoothly. 

 

So in theory at least, 64 bits is better for low-and-slow flying than airline ops, where you never see the ground except near an airport.

 

Now, it remains to be seen how much of this might be in the default scenery or available as 3rd party add-ons in the DTG sim. It might not be the first priority, but the potential should be there with the larger address space. It also depends on available real world data. We don't have high def scenery all over the world in X-Plane yet, because the data just isn't there.

 There seems to be some confusion ... as I understand it, Flight  School being release in April is NOT 64bit and has NO SDK.  The 2nd DTG flight product to be release late this year is a 64bit product with an SDK.

 

As far as 64bit P3D ... LM made it clear a long time ago it will happen and everything they've been doing with V2.x and V3.x has been to get the base product setup so that can be a reality.  Beyond what is already known, I can't provide any more info, but LM will make an announcement when ready.

 

On the plus side, it's VERY likely (since they are using the FSX SP2 engine) DTG's 2nd flight sim product could have enough similarities such that 3rd party could deploy content for both with only very minor changes (similar to how it's currently done for FSX/FSX-SE/P3D).  So this could be a BIG win for 3rd party ... I hope so, because that's what we really need ... it would be great to see 3rd party devs having enough income to allow them to work full time on flight simulation products (this may also give them enough time to leverage some of the unique benefits on each platform).

 

The big question is will DTG be able to reach customers willing to pay more than $7 for content.

 

Cheers, Rob.

I really interested in how DTG improve the scenery rendering. I know that it's based on fsx, so will we still seeing landclass scenery like fsx, or road and railway cross on top of flat roof texture? Will they completely revamp the cloud rendering? I highly doubt on this one. Also, will the new sim release on 2016 still using the lightmaps method to simulate night lighting? Can we have true 3d landing and taxi lights, no more still the fake lightmap method. Also with 64 bit, I hope to see the autogen objects range to be much much further. Now in p3dv3, we can clearly see the autogen radius is not very far, beyond the radius are just not so sharp flat ground textures.

DTG should have taken the mostly developed "FSXI" code base

 

I think "just barely started to be developed" would be more accurate.  Although there was a lot of TS2 stuff in there.

 

Flight was the most advanced version of the engine.  Other than Flight model, all of the removed FSX features were still in the code base, just not being compiled.  It would have been some work to get them up and running with the new systems in Flight, but not too much.  Same with 64 bit and DX11.  Also still had TS2 stuff in there.  The vector scenery system in Flight that was used for elevated roadways and bridges actually came from work on TS2 for bridges and tunnels.  The HW instancing systems also came from work on TS2.

I think "just barely started to be developed" would be more accurate.  Although there was a lot of TS2 stuff in there.

 

Flight was the most advanced version of the engine.  Other than Flight model, all of the removed FSX features were still in the code base, just not being compiled.  It would have been some work to get them up and running with the new systems in Flight, but not too much.  Same with 64 bit and DX11.  Also still had TS2 stuff in there.  The vector scenery system in Flight that was used for elevated roadways and bridges actually came from work on TS2 for bridges and tunnels.  The HW instancing systems also came from work on TS2.

 

I felt at the time, and said so, that a lot of people might find later they had looked a gift horse directly in the mouth. In the end, way too few people, including MS showed much patience. The good news is that DTG is a company that has historically played the long game and stuck to it.

 

The better news is that flight school is explicitly an entry level product, with the promise of something more..... complex, coming later, which hopefully will head off at the pass any repeat of the reaction to FLIGHT

I felt at the time, and said so, that a lot of people might find later they had looked a gift horse directly in the mouth. In the end, way too few people, including MS showed much patience. The good news is that DTG is a company that has historically played the long game and stuck to it.

 

The better news is that flight school is explicitly an entry level product, with the promise of something more..... complex, coming later, which hopefully will head off at the pass any repeat of the reaction to FLIGHT

The main issue with Flight was that it was closed to external 3rd parties, and  they couldn't keep up with the DLC that was needed to keep it viable, and most of that was incomplete, cockpitless default level aircraft.. Had they opened it to 3rd parties, as well as freeware developers, Flight may have had a longer life.