Excellent Analysis of trailer by former ACES member

[Superdelphinus 718]

I’ve noticed you’ve said this quite a few times skywatcher - that people don’t understand. What do you do? Or at least what is the reason why you are the only person who is right on here, especially in comparison to a guy who literally worked on the previous version of this software, and continues to work in the profession on other games. 

[anden145 2,285]

17 minutes ago, Superdelphinus said:

I’ve noticed you’ve said this quite a few times skywatcher - that people don’t understand. What do you do? Or at least what is the reason why you are the only person who is right on here, especially in comparison to a guy who literally worked on the previous version of this software, and continues to work in the profession on other games. 

He has never said, that he's right and everyone's wrong!

Please don't read things into people's posts, that doesn't reflect what they're actually saying.

Also, please refrain from mixing your own personal assumptions and annoyances into his statement, and making it appear that he's expressing something, which isn't intended!

Thirdly - please only stick to facts.

And lastly - and perhaps more important - please refrain from getting personal!

On a personal note: Until I read some of these threads, I had no idea of how fragile the climate is and how many feelings people are mixing into their arguments - and at the same time, explode in anger and personal accusations, when a counter argument is being flung back at them - valid or not... What happened to the tone and decency among members? The hostility in here is incredible. If I hadn't seen so myself, I would simply not believe, that the forums would be so volatile. You really have to mind your wording in here...

(Now, I'm gonna run for cover now. As bad as the atmosphere is in here, pointing it out seem to have the effect of lighting a fuse...)

[Skywatcher 133]

22 minutes ago, Superdelphinus said:

I’ve noticed you’ve said this quite a few times skywatcher - that people don’t understand. What do you do? Or at least what is the reason why you are the only person who is right on here, especially in comparison to a guy who literally worked on the previous version of this software, and continues to work in the profession on other games. 

I've been working with all types of digital imagery and resolution since it's inception. My job also involved marketing all types of digital technology and imagery since it's inception. There are many issues and problems with what manufacturers need to create in order to sell a product. They must create inferior products in order to cater for public demands in resolution even at the cost of supplying inferior products. If they do not meet resolution demands that the public ask for, the product won't sell. We long ago came to the point where the benefit of increased resolution turned from being a good thing to working against us. Unfortunately, people don't understand this so manufacturers of TV's, phones, games all must supply products that will be inferior before they are even designed.

I've stated my view so far from the marketing aspect of why MSFS will not be what everyone expects it to be. I haven't even touched on the graphics. To have the words "satellite" and "4K" both represent MSFS, this instantly tells me things are going to be bad. At this point in time, it simply is not possible to have a fully realistic representation of the planet in a flight sim. As they do with TV's and phones and now games, they must come up with ways to make you think you are getting what you want by trying to hide all the pitfalls of the product they are presenting to you so you walk away happy.

This is the modern world.

[Superdelphinus 718]

5 minutes ago, Anders Bermann said:

He has never said, that he's right and everyone's wrong!

Please don't read things into people's posts, that doesn't reflect what they're actually saying.

Also, please refrain from mixing your own personal assumptions and annoyances into his statement, and making it appear that he's expressing something, which isn't intended!

Thirdly - please only stick to facts.

And lastly - and perhaps more important - please refrain from getting personal!

On a personal note: Until I read some of these threads, I had no idea of how fragile the climate is and how many feelings people are mixing into their arguments - and at the same time, explode in anger and personal accusations, when a counter argument is being flung back at them - valid or not... What happened to the tone and decency among members? The hostility in here is incredible. If I hadn't seen so myself, I would simply not believe, that the forums would be so volatile. You really have to mind your wording in here...

(Now, I'm gonna run for cover now. As bad as the atmosphere is in here, pointing it out seem to have the effect of lighting a fuse...)

I’m sure he can talk for himself, Anders. 

Personally, I have little emotional investment in terms of how this sim turns out one way or another, but it frustrates me when well considered views, backed up by skill and experience are dismissed after a “few minutes” because it doesn’t fit into a preconception or whatever and there is “no point” in watching any more. 

So I am simply asking what the credentials are so that I can decide how much I care about this opinion or not. It isn’t personal and I am not “fragile”. 

[Superdelphinus 718]

1 minute ago, Skywatcher said:

I've been working with all types of digital imagery and resolution since it's inception. My job also involved marketing all types of digital technology and imagery since it's inception. There are many issues and problems with what manufacturers need to create in order to sell a product. They must create inferior products in order to cater for public demands in resolution even at the cost of supplying inferior products. If they do not meet resolution demands that the public ask for, the product won't sell. We long ago came to the point where the benefit of increased resolution turned from being a good thing to working against us. Unfortunately, people don't understand this so manufacturers of TV's, phones, games all must supply products that will be inferior before they are even designed.

I've stated my view so far from the marketing aspect of why MSFS will not be what everyone expects it to be. I haven't even touched on the graphics. To have the words "satellite" and "4K" both represent MSFS, this instantly tells me things are going to be bad. At this point in time, it simply is not possible to have a fully realistic representation of the planet in a flight sim. As they do with TV's and phones and now games, they must come up with ways to make you think you are getting what you want by trying to hide all the pitfalls of the product they are presenting to you so you walk away happy.

This is the modern world.

Thanks. I don’t think anyone would argue with that. I would suggest you watch the whole video though, there are a lot of interesting points in it. 

[Skywatcher 133]

1 minute ago, Superdelphinus said:

I’m sure he can talk for himself, Anders. 

Personally, I have little emotional investment in terms of how this sim turns out one way or another, but it frustrates me when well considered views, backed up by skill and experience are dismissed after a “few minutes” because it doesn’t fit into a preconception or whatever and there is “no point” in watching any more. 

So I am simply asking what the credentials are so that I can decide how much I care about this opinion or not. It isn’t personal and I am not “fragile”. 

I didn't watch on because the early part showed me he is guessing on things he does not understand. He may go into other things which he does understand but I don't. The problem is, I won't know if what he is telling me is right or wrong. Once I have established he isn't clearly stating things from knowledge, watching the rest is pointless because I simply won't know if he is making things up again or bringing up accurate info. Credibility is gone a few minutes in.

[Woozie 732]

Anders, i dont see Superdelphinus getting personal in his post, its a simple and valid question he asked. However, i noticed that you seem to read things into people's posts quite often. Same goes for telling others what they should do and what they shouldnt, yet you dont seem to live up to your own high standards. Remember when you critized members for speculating (in a speculation thread....) while doing exactly the same just a few posts earlier?

I rather have the impression that you do like to light those fuses.... 

Edited June 30, 2019 by Woozie

[Skywatcher 133]

31 minutes ago, Anders Bermann said:

He has never said, that he's right and everyone's wrong!

Please don't read things into people's posts, that doesn't reflect what they're actually saying.

Also, please refrain from mixing your own personal assumptions and annoyances into his statement, and making it appear that he's expressing something, which isn't intended!

Thirdly - please only stick to facts.

And lastly - and perhaps more important - please refrain from getting personal!

On a personal note: Until I read some of these threads, I had no idea of how fragile the climate is and how many feelings people are mixing into their arguments - and at the same time, explode in anger and personal accusations, when a counter argument is being flung back at them - valid or not... What happened to the tone and decency among members? The hostility in here is incredible. If I hadn't seen so myself, I would simply not believe, that the forums would be so volatile. You really have to mind your wording in here...

(Now, I'm gonna run for cover now. As bad as the atmosphere is in here, pointing it out seem to have the effect of lighting a fuse...)

Anders, I've explained my issues with marketing. I'll just explain a little regarding graphics. The problem with graphics is the data to represent a 4K flight sim well does not exist. There will be so many problems that can't be overcome without the appropriate data. That video will not be a representation of the entire MSFS world I can promise you that.

There has been too little released thus far to really give a big picture. My concern is what has been released points to many more negatives than positives. The route MS are taking, I really believe is the wrong way and they are falling to public demand in wanting to let people do things like fly over and see their own home. Technology on a home PC or console is simply not ready for this and if you give in to these demands, your product will overall be inferior to what it could and should be. To try and give us these types of features at this point in time, they come with huge consequences. 

Edited June 30, 2019 by Skywatcher

[cepact 517]

So what route do you think they should have taken ?

Focus on improving landclasses and autogens just like orbx does ?

there are still landclasses, probably better, if not then orbx will do that job :) The 3d photoreal cities are just a plus

And I am not convinced that the game will be streamed, because it's still based on landclasses except a few areas. So the size may be similar to a modded p3d, around 100 gb  maybe

[Skywatcher 133]

17 minutes ago, cepact said:

So what route do you think they should have taken ?

Focus on improving landclasses and autogens just like orbx does ?

there are still landclasses, probably better, if not then orbx will do that job 🙂 The 3d photoreal cities are just a plus

And I am not convinced that the game will be streamed, because it's still based on landclasses except a few areas. So the size may be similar to a modded p3d, around 100 gb  maybe

Like I said, not enough information released to really have any idea of what their plan is. Just like the video shows only a snippet of the Earth, it also only shows a snippet of their plan. Satellite I just hope is not the only option for the game. Landclass/autogen based graphics as in the other sims are fine. Satellite or photo should be an option as it is in the older sims. At this point, they have just tried to create a WOW show with their video but it really doesn't tell us what the game will be. You can't have satellite everywhere, it just won't work, the resolution is too low.

[Shack95 2,658]

That was a very interesting and informative video. Thanks!

Just had a look at Navy Pier in Chicago in Earth View 3D and the buildings were much more accurate there. What does that imply? Could they have used older data for the alpha version of MSFS? Or will 3D structures gradually come into shape as you get closer, same as in Earth View or Google Earth?

[NG_Aviator 39]

57 minutes ago, Skywatcher said:

Satellite I just hope is not the only option for the game. Landclass/autogen based graphics as in the other sims are fine.

Agreed, hopefully the default option is landclass with the option to add the satellite overlay if desired.

In the mountainous parts of the preview it looked like a low res satellite image with a noise texture on top.

[Mengy 814]

1 hour ago, Skywatcher said:

 You can't have satellite everywhere, it just won't work, the resolution is too low.

True for direct tiling, low res sat images wouldn't look the best plunked down on the mesh.  However, with some powerful AI routines it would be possible to create extremely realistic autogen using the low res satellite data as templates.  Buildings themselves might not be accurate looking but might be accurately placed.  Same with fields, rivers, forests, etc.

We don't know if MS is doing it this way or not, but it's certainly a possibility based on what they have told (and shown) us so far.  They might use the hi-res sat images with photogrammetry where possible and the low res images to propagate very accurate autogen.

[ryanbatc 12,857]

7 hours ago, Skywatcher said:

 

Everything about MSFS so far is bad news if you actually understand some of the tech stuff and markets and marketing.

Wow.  And I thought I was a negative person.  I've seen a lot of awesome new tech in the trailer, not previously available in MSFS titles.

[Paraffin 2,197]

2 hours ago, Mengy said:

True for direct tiling, low res sat images wouldn't look the best plunked down on the mesh.  However, with some powerful AI routines it would be possible to create extremely realistic autogen using the low res satellite data as templates.  Buildings themselves might not be accurate looking but might be accurately placed.  Same with fields, rivers, forests, etc.

We don't know if MS is doing it this way or not, but it's certainly a possibility based on what they have told (and shown) us so far.  They might use the hi-res sat images with photogrammetry where possible and the low res images to propagate very accurate autogen.

I'll believe that's a possibility when I see it demonstrated, and it isn't demonstrated (AFAIK) in that video.

"Very accurate autogen" created by advanced AI manipulation from low-res satellite imagery sounds fantastic as a concept. But we haven't seen it yet. And a lot of people here are making assumptions based on that idea.

I keep coming back to this idea of flying over your house. I live in a town just 50 miles as the crow flies from Seattle, a very high-tech part of the country. But when I look at my neighborhood in Google Earth Pro and use that "tilt to see 3D buildings feature," there are no 3D buildings. It's all just a flat 2D orthophoto because the height data and the facing data isn't there. Not for Google anyway, and I'm not going to assume MS has better data until I see it. 

The default XP11 landclass + autogen based on OSM data is better. There are plenty of 3D autogen buildings, but not enough and not in the right spots because the OSM data for my town isn't very extensive.

The Orbx TE Washington version of my town is even better, including three custom-made 3D landmark objects (that surprised me). But it still isn't perfect, because the autogen buildings are too generic, not accurately placed on the street grid, and the combination of blurred low-res ortho color with a texture overlay on the ground doesn't look realistic. 

So I think people are making way too many assumptions about what the entire world will look like in MSFS, based on a few hand-tailored areas with good photogrammetry information. If you live in a place like downtown Seattle or Tampa, it might look great. I'm not expecting it to be anything like that elsewhere. And that's fine. We've always settled for "good enough for the current tech" with flight sims. But let's not go overboard with expectations.