@Ray Proudfoot Perhaps that would be better directed at FSL. They weren't forced in to suspending the Concorde project, they are the ones who made that decision, not MS; I do wonder if FSL were just looking for an excuse to halt work.

I do understand your frustration, one of the deciding factors in my move to P3Dv4 was because PMDG explicitly said their J41 would be ported to it soon (after several false starts I might add) and now despite some promising screenshots it's on the back burner again because they're prioritising projects like GFO that I don't care about. But I haven't directed my ire at this situation in Lockheed Martin's direction.

Edited June 25, 20196 yr by ckyliu

7 minutes ago, eslader said:

Optimism is no more legitimate than pessimism at this point. There isn't enough information. If you think someone is foolish to be pessimistic about what this will end up being like, then in fairness you have to acknowledge that it is just as "foolish" to be optimistic. We don't know enough to come down on either side of the fence with any sort of credibility. It's all just personal opinions - you have no more grounds to tell someone to stop being pessimistic than they do to tell you to cut the optimism.

 

But the information they gave us is promising. Assuring the community that they are focusing on the SIMULATOR part of Flight Simulator, doubling down on third party involvement, confirming that the game is designed for the PC, assuring that they haven't forgotten about 3rd party hardware. These are all reasons to be positive. Coupled with MS' renewed focus on gaming and how this game will be their moment to show off the powers of Azure and it's not foolish to be a little positive about this.

I'm not saying it's any less legitimate to be skeptical either, but forming an opinion on pure conjecture about the SDK, add-ons which we have no idea about, or about how FSX messed up that one time 13 years ago seems like reaching to me. That's not to say that there aren't reasons to be cautious, but I feel like the concerns are focused on the wrong issues at this point.

2 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Probably the primary reason I’m not happy about this new sim is because Its announcement has caused FSL to pause development of a 64-bit Concorde. Without it they would have continued work for P3D v4/5.

So yes, given I will probably have wait for a few years for a 64-bit Concorde I am pretty piddled off with this sim. Worst possible news for some of us.

You should be mad at FSL, not MS

5 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Yes you do, because a programmer would NOT attempt to compare Forza racing game with a Flight Simulator.  Two very different designs.

Cheers, Rob.

What would a programmer say? I'm unsure what you mean by 'different design'.

I would say that comparing Forza to MSFS2020 is way more in line than comparing MSFS2020 to FSX. Forza and FS may have different designs and simulate different things but that doesn't mean the game engines have to be drastically different. Frostbite and Unity are examples of this.

Granted, Forza have developed an in-house game engine but it's not a jump to believe MSFS may incorporate parts of Forza's engine considering they're owned by the same game studio.

Edited June 25, 20196 yr by A330-300

5 minutes ago, ckyliu said:

@Ray Proudfoot Perhaps that would be better directed at FSL. They weren't forced in to suspending the Concorde project, they are the ones who made that decision, not MS; I do wonder if FSL were just looking for an excuse to halt work

Pointless. Talking to them is like talking to a brick wall. They say they only want to make one 64-bit Concorde so are waiting to see if FS2020 takes off. God knows how long that will take them.

6 minutes ago, irrics said:

You should be mad at FSL, not MS

Mad at both.

2 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Pointless. Talking to them is like talking to a brick wall. They say they only want to make one 64-bit Concorde so are waiting to see if FS2020 takes off. God knows how long that will take them.

Yet those are the people you think are going to deliver the phenomenal simulation of the Concorde you’re going to wait forever for?

It honestly sounds like time should be spent trying to get a different developer to do a Concorde project.

Edited June 25, 20196 yr by irrics

That's unlike FSL, usually they're gagging to cash in on a full repurchase for a port with polish to a similar platform 🤣 (not the only ones mind)

Edited June 25, 20196 yr by ckyliu

Lol

1 hour ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

That’s false, once MS indicated their will be an SDK (because initially there was no mention of one at all), I’ve consistently remained “cautiously optimistic”.

 

OFC the new code will be faster as rendering will be done on the graphics card and not CPU. The old FSX engine is extremly CPU heavy something modern games dont do for ages anymore. There are some games that are CPU heave like Planet Coaster or Cities Skylines but thats cos of heavy calcluations for thousands of thousand peeps.But there is no game that uses CPU for rendering. My 1080TI would laugh at the level of detail presented in the example Toronto approach and would happily reder it with 120+ FPS but the game doenst even ask my GPU for help.

So yeah I am very confident that

1. MSFS2020 will much much faster with better graphics on same hardware

2. New graphic card generations will continue to help in the future to max it out even further as I dont see the same wall coming like the CPU evolution had

 

My only concern is that addon creators will use the new power to include even more useless things into their products to push the performance to FSX levels again. Like PMDG does with their sound engine(?) and fuel calc (?) which is done in an extra process outside of the sim. Who needs that? 

1 minute ago, irrics said:

Yet those are the people you think are going to deliver the phenomenal simulation of the Concorde you’re going to wait forever for?

It honestly sounds like time should be spent trying to get a different developer to do a Concorde project.

There is an XP version in early access. Needs a lot more work. I’m not interested in XP. Andrew Wilson at FSL knows Concorde better than anyone else. When / if it does arrive it will be as good as the existing 32-bit version.

1 minute ago, DaWu said:

My only concern is that addon creators will use the new power to include even more useless things into their products to push the performance to FSX levels again. Like PMDG does with their sound engine(?) and fuel calc (?) which is done in an extra process outside of the sim. Who needs that? 

Agreed.

My solution is going to be “don’t buy those products”

3 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

There is an XP version in early access. Needs a lot more work. I’m not interested in XP. Andrew Wilson at FSL knows Concorde better than anyone else. When / if it does arrive it will be as good as the existing 32-bit version.

I guess what I’m getting at…

You said you have no interest in this Sim unless it has the Concorde. It is probably multiple years away from getting that if ever, from this moment in time.

Why not be positive about the rest of the Sim or simply not frequent here?

I’m not telling you not to post here…

You can post anywhere you want obviously…

But I don’t understand why even hang out in here and just post negative and skeptical things if ALL you want - the Concorde - isn’t coming even remotely soon. 

Edited June 25, 20196 yr by irrics

6 minutes ago, irrics said:

Agreed.

My solution is going to be “don’t buy those products”

What I'm hoping for is the new flightsim to bring in a whole new generation of simmers. Teenagers and 20 year olds hopefully hop in and breathe new life into the hobby. The hobby has stagnated significantly since the FS9/FSX days. Bringing in a new, young millennial/genZ audience should push developers out of their comfort zones and maybe attract new developers too.

I always found flight sim almost nepotistic in a way, with a specific set of developers ruling the masses. If MSFS truly disrupts the model and makes flight simming mainstream then we may see the beginning of the end of the 'monopolies' that exist in the hobby, which IMO would be the best thing to happen for flight simulation in the long run.

 

Edited June 25, 20196 yr by A330-300

All developers have to remain cautious about new product development, since until we have access to whatever SDK is finally delivered into our hands, we have no idea whatever if any of our current mesh products, gauge and systems code, animation scripts, and graphic assets will even be usable in the future FS2020 (or whatever it winds up being called)!