You've already seen the night lighting. It's FTX Global.

There is no comparison between FTX Global night lighting and XP10's, nope.

You've already seen the night lighting. It's FTX Global

Not with their new lighting engine we havent'

 

If they rid the sim of those awful baked, blobby night textures that will be great

Not with their new lighting engine we havent'

 

If they rid the sim of those awful baked, blobby night textures that will be great

 

Again, JV has said it's a straight port of FTX Global with some LC updates (the general stuff, not OpenLC) and new airport texture pads.

 

I wouldn't expect baked night textures to go anywhere.

Again, JV has said it's a straight port of FTX Global with some LC updates (the general stuff, not OpenLC) and new airport texture pads.

 

I wouldn't expect baked night textures to go anywhere.

 

But he also said this.....

 

'If you want to cover the entire planet with a realistic facsimile of what is there in real life, the only viable system to use that would not require 750GB+ of data is one based on the Olsen landclass (LC) approach. This allows a whole-earth sim to be shipped in about 10-15GB worth of files. In FSX/P3D this Olsen LC system is limited to about 128 classes - far too restrictive to depict the vast terrain variety on earth.

 

There has been lots of banner waving and espousing of supposed current-tech engines like Outterra, Unigen, Unreal (insert name here), but those engines simply cannot scale to whole round earth models and push the insane level of geometry to the horizon as the 'old' FSX engine can. Despite 10 years of progress in gaming engines nothing can touch the FSX engine for far-horizon geometry rendering; the other engines are all mostly designed for limited area arenas. Even the excellent DCS engine is limited in its scope and relies on vast amounts of data per area.

 

What Orbx has been doing over the past decade is making our own 'FSX 11' by expanding past the 128-class barrier with hundreds of new classes. However this required us to hack FSX/P3D and that's why FTX Central exists.

 

What we have now with DTG's new sims is virtually unlimited land classes defined and engineered by Orbx so that a decade's worth of R&D is now boiled into a new sim as part of its core. That gives us a fantastic foundation to build upon without the previous restrictions we always had to code around.

 

Additionally there will be a lot of new tech in the visualization engine including new HDR, light scattering and other lighting enhancements. 

 

Does that explain what I mean by new technology?'

 

 

and this..

 

There is no need to use a new engine if the fundamentals are right. Tech can be layered on top of 25 year old code and work perfectly well. I don't get some of the naysayers and blue sky dreamers on various forums who are bleating for new engines, they don't understand that you need a proper foundation to build on first. 

 

We are right now investing in new tech to add more dynamic object manipulation capabilities to any sim engine, that's an on ongoing effort.

 

 

We are in the golden age of flight simulation that's for sure.

 

 

That says to me, there is alot going on they we don't know about yet....

Landclass tech is a fast and 'dirty' way to populate an area with somewhat plausible scenery, it has its pros and cons, landclass scenery might looks good during 2006 when fsx launched, but now is 2016, I really don't want to see a game to be released this year, come with those real world vector road, railway, stream, river cross on top of 2D flat roof texture or baked fake road texture, it's just awful.

The thing to always always always keep in mind about JV is that he has a business to run. He has a massive amount of skin in the game, and a certain spin that's to that business's advantage. Grains of salt are recommended.

 

Well, to be honest, grains of salt are recommended about just about anything anyone tells you; but most especially when vested interests and large amounts of money are in the room.

The thing to always always always keep in mind about JV is that he has a business to run. He has a massive amount of skin in the game, and a certain spin that's to that business's advantage. Grains of salt are recommended.

 

Well, to be honest, grains of salt are recommended about just about anything anyone tells you; but most especially when vested interests and large amounts of money are in the room.

 

+ 1

 

 

he thing to always always always keep in mind about JV is that he has a business to run. He has a massive amount of skin in the game, and a certain spin that's to that business's advantage. Grains of salt are recommended.
 
Well, to be honest, grains of salt are recommended about just about anything anyone tells you; but most especially when vested interests and large amounts of money are in the room.

 

While this is true, and I do not disagree, I dont think JV was being overly gushy.  I think his comments were quite measured.  My point is that there are a number of us here who state things as fact without any true knowledge about anything at all - especially when it comes to commentary about gaming engines, the capabilities or disabilities of FSX and other items.

 

This happens every time on the threshold of new releases.  There is usually initial massive resistance to what is or is not being offered in the next sim.  A year later, everyone settles down and gushes about how amazing the exploited technology actually is.    

Landclass tech is a fast and 'dirty' way to populate an area with somewhat plausible scenery, it has its pros and cons, landclass scenery might looks good during 2006 when fsx launched, but now is 2016, I really don't want to see a game to be released this year, come with those real world vector road, railway, stream, river cross on top of 2D flat roof texture or baked fake road texture, it's just awful.

 

I agree. But the problem is, if you remove the underlying "city" textures, things can start to look really cartoony, i.e. XP10's default scenery. Even then, people remedy it in XP10 by using photoscenery underneath OSM data/buildings. 

While this is true, and I do not disagree, I dont think JV was being overly gushy.  I think his comments were quite measured.  My point is that there are a number of us here who state things as fact without any true knowledge about anything at all - especially when it comes to commentary about gaming engines, the capabilities or disabilities of FSX and other items.

 

This happens every time on the threshold of new releases.  There is usually initial massive resistance to what is or is not being offered in the next sim.  A year later, everyone settles down and gushes about how amazing the exploited technology actually is.    

 

I just like arguments that are internally self consistent. For instance; if you posit that tech can be layered atop ten year old code presumably to bring it to modern standards eventually, then isn't it a corollary that with suitable work fully modern code can also be updated to correct real or perceived flaws?

 

I have no urge to be tied to any particular program, and naturally resist any tendencies in that direction.

I just like arguments that are internally self consistent. For instance; if you posit that tech can be layered atop ten year old code presumably to bring it to modern standards eventually, then isn't it a corollary that with suitable work fully modern code can also be updated to correct perceived flaws as well?

 

No need to feel locked to anything.

 

The costs of doing each of those things isn't linear. That's the biggest factor. 

The costs of doing each of those things isn't linear. That's the biggest factor. 

 

The costs are already part of the equation when most modern engines are already heading towards whole earth models......... including Unigine.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of the DTG sim, and will certainly be purchasing it. The Orbx textures are a plus, but its also safe to bet that the underlying ten year old tech will still require lots of work to reach modern standards. (look at P3D)

 

This seems pretty much like a repeat of what DTG did with the original Kuju train sim, sprucing it up with yearly updates and generally doing a great job nourishing and widening the market. But keep in mind they have had to eventually move on to a modern engine. (Unreal)

 

I have no problem with having fun in the meantime, but nothing lasts forever. Not even the FSX engine.

I agree. But the problem is, if you remove the underlying "city" textures, things can start to look really cartoony, i.e. XP10's default scenery. Even then, people remedy it in XP10 by using photoscenery underneath OSM data/buildings. 

Yes! That's why new scenery tech need to be developed. XP10 osm approach is good, but it need to improve. Otherwise, ten years later, we might still seeing landclass scenery in esp engine.

I'm a long time fan of the Trains Simulator (Railworks) franchise. Everything said in messages above about Steam and DTG is true, more or less. Still, we can't have everything, have to please the masses to make a profit. DTG TS does just that even if the hardcore are using other trainsims, Open Rails etc. 

 

I'm going to stick with FSX but will buy the DTG game product too. 

They'll be getting my money...

The 'workshops' will provide lots of free stuff, if it works like TS2016...

Geez, there must be thousands of workshop addons for TS.

I'm a long time fan of the Trains Simulator (Railworks) franchise. Everything said in messages above about Steam and DTG is true, more or less. Still, we can't have everything, have to please the masses to make a profit. DTG TS does just that even if the hardcore are using other trainsims, Open Rails etc. 

 

I'm going to stick with FSX but will buy the DTG game product too. 

They'll be getting my money...

The 'workshops' will provide lots of free stuff, if it works like TS2016...

Geez, there must be thousands of workshop addons for TS.

 

If the dtg simulator addon policies will be anything to go by as TS - i leave it to you:

 

http://store.steampowered.com/app/24010