New MS Flight Sim shown at E3

[HiFlyer 9,343]

12 minutes ago, irrics said:

@HiFlyer

 

Interesting stuff, we will just have to wait and see.

I personally just refuse to believe with this long to go still that they would do such a poor implementation of night lighting for the final product, especially in the context of how great the rest of the visuals are. 

 

I amgoing to stay hopeful and positive.

This thing isn’t even releaseing for probably a full year if not more. 

I didn't consider it a negative statement really. Just looking at possible limitations of the tech they are using. Drzewiecki design tried to ameliorate the situation by providing custom textures for some buildings, but the result was, in my opinion pretty hideous.

Watching the video, you can see the similarities, though in the intervening years the tech has advanced considerably in mitigating scanning errors which resulted in melted buildings. Also resolution has become higher, and colors are much more lively.

 

[OzWhitey 3,353]

7 minutes ago, vin747 said:

I wonder if MS folks are reading thru these forums and feeling the pulse of the target audience.. Hope we are their target audience and not the GTA teenage crowd! 

The thread has gotten better, but if I was MS and read the first few pages, it wouldn’t enthuse me to engage with this community. I think ACES had the same experience here after the release of FSX.

If we want to be the target audience, we need to be a bit more positive and open to change. I’m sure that there will be parts of this new sim that we don’t like, but overall this is a brilliant piece of news for anyone who loves flight simulation.

[overspeed3 410]

I think if and when this new MS FS ever really gets closer to being the real deal, (specifically on a PC platform), a lot of current payware 3rd parties just might be think of having a little fire sale

[irrics 1,517]

6 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

The thread has gotten better, but if I was MS and read the first few pages, it wouldn’t enthuse me to engage with this community. I think ACES had the same experience here after the release of FSX.

If we want to be the target audience, we need to be a bit more positive and open to change. I’m sure that there will be parts of this new sim that we don’t like, but overall this is a brilliant piece of news for anyone who loves flight simulation.

Totally agree. 

Microsoft is killing it as a company of late and I think they’ve earned some rope to run with here. 

 

Over on the OrbX forums it is largely ridiculous. It’s like people forgot that the entire OrbX business was BUILT on MSFS over time. 

 

Also, if they’d spend a few moments comparing TrueEarth WA footage from Seattle to just the snippets from the MSFS 2020 teaser, they’d realize that TE is eclipsed already quite honestly, at least from what my eyes saw.

 

I have nothing against OrbX, but we should all be excited about a ground up platform fresh start at this point.  It’s time.

 

With immense resources and the right leadership, anything is possible here. 

Edited June 11, 2019 by irrics

[nehuge6348 22]

6 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Since I'm getting involved in 3D modeling for P3D and XP, I took a closer look at the video being presented, as pointed out it is very "google" earth like in how objects are generated.  The video was made with "quick" clips not allowing for too much time let a scene sink in so I made some freeze frames showing some of the issues:

AI Road Traffic Issue

AI Road Traffic Issue Zoomed (floating above terrain and driving thru each other same issues as we have now)

Odd Tree Textures and Building Top Sat Dish

Odd Tree Textures and Building Top Sat Dish - Zoomed

Runway Under Water

Runway Under Water Zoomed

I'm not trying to be negative at all but I'm sure some will take it that way ... but I know if I can see it everyone else will eventually see the issues also.  It's obviously a compromised solution which is fine and will fit the bill for some and not others.  

If you take a look at the airports in the video, they are clearly of much higher quality and hand crafted ... since I doubt Microsoft could have created 40,000 airports world wide with higher detail custom models, then it's very likely they will be available as DLC at a later date ... if DLC exists, then it's highly likely an SDK will exist ... so the question I'm most interested in ... will the SDK be made available to those of us (myself included) that would like to produce content for this product?  

Cheers, Rob.
 

I'd say that is a tad nit picky. If a car is going through an intersection and the other cars are also going through at the same time and running through each other, then you should be paying more attention to ...I dunno....flying?

That stuff is meant to be peripheral immersion, not spot-on-perfect.  There are too many variables in terrain (elevation, curves, objects) to ever get exact.  

Edited June 11, 2019 by nehuge6348

[GCBraun 2,390]

3 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

You seem convinced that there will be third parties. Examination of all other recent video games yields evidence to the contrary.

That is absolutely not the case. There are multiple games that, while somewhat restricted in the console, do have a thriving third-party ecosystem in the PC. Even games like Fallout now also support modding on Xbox/PS4!

Moreover, we are not talking about Doom or Call of Duty here...

Do you think that Microsoft is not aware of the demise of Flight and Flight Sim World and what caused it? Are they really that blind not to understand that the *only* reason an outdated sim like P3D thrives is due to 3rd. party support?

Yes, I am convinced that MSFS will support 3rd. party content *on the PC*. They have created the consumer flight-simulation market in the first place...

Edited June 11, 2019 by GCBraun

[ZKOKQ 984]

FWIW, on the news here just a few mins ago, it flashed up very quickly MSFS at the E3 show.

It announced that Xbox cloud goes online in October.

[Wobbie 938]

I'm actually not too convinced of anything so far, and any comparison with P3D is onerous, as P3D is really not supposed to be for the casual simmer anyway.

As we know, we hoped onto a commercial/not for entertainment platform, & justified it that we were learning. So, actually, MS, I'm sure, is not really concerned with what LM does, as MS gets licence fees from them. 

Also, as we know, Microsoft's board is responsible to their shareholders, so, if any gaming product tanks, it's bye bye, as we saw with Flight.

What would be interesting to know, is who the developers are, behind this new sim.

And we know it will be using a new sim engine, so we'll see what happens.. Probably no backward compatibility with older software.

[Wobbie 938]

Just a thought...

You never know, This, from Xbox E3 press conference:

Microsoft will indeed follow through on its plan to open its xCloud game streaming service to the public later this year. According to Mark Skwarski, a senior product marketing manager at Xbox, xCloud is currently in the hands of Microsoft employees around the world.

 

So, the new sim could be a cloud based subscription game! 

[OzWhitey 3,353]

2 hours ago, GCBraun said:

That is absolutely not the case. There are multiple games that, while somewhat restricted in the console, do have a thriving third-party ecosystem in the PC. Even games like Fallout now also support modding on Xbox/PS4!

Moreover, we are not talking about Doom or Call of Duty here...

Do you think that Microsoft is not aware of the demise of Flight and Flight Sim World and what caused it? Are they really that blind not to understand that the *only* reason an outdated sim like P3D thrives is due to 3rd. party support?

Yes, I am convinced that MSFS will support 3rd. party content *on the PC*. They have created the consumer flight-simulation market in the first place...

Freeware mods for PC games are very common.

Where the FSX/P3D ecosystem is unusual is the very large number of payware producers, who are not authorized or supported by the game/sim manufacturer (Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Laminar).

Skyrim is a good example of a A-list PC title with a massive amount of freeware mods available. Bethesda allows this as they know that the modding community greatly increases the longevity and success of the game.

Paid mods - the equivalent of FSX payware - are a but more complex. 

Bethesda and Valve tried to monetize the freeware mod community back in 2015, which was a disaster due to negative consumer feedback.

More recently, they've now gone with the "Creation Club", which is a bit different in concept. Modders can pitch an idea, and if Bethesda agree they'll work together to make a payware product. 

If you apply this example to MSFS, one would expect:

• Modders would be encouraged to produce freeware planes, airports etc.
• PMDG could go to MS and say "We want to make a high-fidelity, payware 737 Max", MS would agree and would then be responsible for quality control and distribution.

What you would not see under this model is a payware industry that is in no way answerable to Microsoft.

For MSFS, the options available to Microsoft are:

1. Keep the system closed, like many console games - no mods. Unlikely as a choice, we'll only see this if they have been paying no attention at all to recent history.
2. Go with a freeware/curated payware model, as per Bethesda/Valve.
3. Accept that the flight simulator ecosystem is unique, and continue to allow unrestricted, unauthorized payware development.

I - like most of you, and PMDG/Aerosoft/Orbx etc - will be hoping for the third option!

Edited June 11, 2019 by OzWhitey

[hesynergy 67]

On 6/9/2019 at 5:12 PM, SP2472 said:

I thought MS was permanently withdrawing from the flight simulation market when they sold the rights to Lockheed. Whats going on???

That might explain why Aerosoft has been so busy with special projects....btw, it looks like Orbx is there too! 

 

I believe they didn’t sell the entertainment rights...only an “educational” license...to LM.

howdy to all my avsim friends...from the X dark side ...

 

chas

[Wobbie 938]

I understand you point completely, & it's great to chat about all this, however, yip, always an however..

Maybe, just maybe, there are those of us that have no interest, nor regard the PMDG's/Aerosoft/Orbyx's as essential requirements of a new sim.

Your third point forgot to mention freeware, the actual backbone of our hobby.

Microsoft has just been valued at being worth over $1 trillion. & this new sim's value to them will be a mere minuscule drop in the pond for them, so it actually makes sense to target the XBox gamers to monetize the game, as we know that the simmers market is tiny compared to them.

As a marketing guy, (if you were), for a HUGE corporation, where would your target market be? IF you were re-releasing a game that tanked many years ago?  

Also, I wonder who the developers are of this new game? 

[GCBraun 2,390]

30 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

Freeware mods for PC games are very common.

Where the FSX/P3D ecosystem is unusual is the very large number of payware producers, who are not authorized or supported by the game/sim manufacturer (Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Laminar).

Skyrim is a good example of a A-list PC title with a massive amount of freeware mods available. Bethesda allows this as they know that the modding community greatly increases the longevity and success of the game.

Paid mods - the equivalent of FSX payware - are a but more complex. 

Bethesda and Valve tried to monetize the freeware mod community back in 2015, which was a disaster due to negative consumer feedback.

More recently, they've now gone with the "Creation Club", which is a bit different in concept. Modders can pitch an idea, and if Bethesda agree they'll work together to make a payware product. 

If you apply this example to MSFS, one would expect:

• Modders would be encouraged to produce freeware planes, airports etc.
• PMDG could go to MS and say "We want to make a high-fidelity, payware 737 Max", MS would agree and would then be responsible for quality control and distribution.

What you would not see under this model is a payware industry that is in no way answerable to Microsoft.

For MSFS, the options available to Microsoft are:

1. Keep the system closed, like many console games - no mods. Unlikely as a choice, we'll only see this if they have been paying no attention at all to recent history.
2. Go with a freeware/curated payware model, as per Bethesda/Valve.
3. Accept that the flight simulator ecosystem is unique, and continue to allow unrestricted, unauthorized payware development.

I - like most of you, and PMDG/Aerosoft/Orbx etc - will be hoping for the third option!

 

I would love to see a more streamlined approach of managing my add-ons.

For me, the ideal way would be to have official/approved DLCs distributed by Microsoft and installable via Steam/MS Stores while also being able to use external third-party software that is not directly validated by MS.

This would be similar approach to what is possible today with X-Plane 11. While I don't have XP11 on Steam, I did have XP10 and I would always prefer to buy add-ons directly there. It is so much easier!

The way we have today with P3D is just madness. We are dependant on multiple stores and add-on providers with different installation schemes, leading to a mere re-installation taking multiple hours.

Edited June 11, 2019 by GCBraun

[Wobbie 938]

They sold the rights of ESP, the pro/commercial version of FSX to Lockheed, & the gaming/entertainment version to DTG, so they basically got rid of their FSX engines.

Hence my understanding that the new sim will have a new sim engine, & in all probability, will not be backward compatible at all.

In my humble opinion, a good thing, where addons for the new sim will be based on a brand new engine, & not a vintage one. Remember, FSX has a lot of bits from FS2004, & that is 16 years old.

[Lorby_SI 2,036]

3 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

They sold the rights of ESP, the pro/commercial version of FSX to Lockheed, & the gaming/entertainment version to DTG, so they basically got rid of their FSX engines.

Selling a license does not mean that you are selling the ISP. The very definition of a software license is that the other partner gets to use it as the license dictates, but he doesn't own it. You don't own any piece of software on your computer, unless you wrote it yourself. The manufacturer always retains all ownership and usage rights. 

Best regards