Excellent Analysis of trailer by former ACES member

[simmerhead 885]

From what I've seen so far the non sattelite areas look a lot better than current landclass based scenery, but a lot remains to be revealed.

My biggest concern is ASOBO and how things will be followed up after release. Will they be as dedicated as the development teams of LM, DCS, Aerofly and Laminar. Will Microsoft be back in it for the long haul with continued incremental development, or will the release be a final product with only some bug fixing in the year to come. 

[ark 1,288]

6 hours ago, Skywatcher said:

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 would like to understand this better.

Could you give an example of what aspect(s) of a phone or TV might be inferior because the manufacturer gave in to the public demand for increased resolution?

Likewise, if MS continues down the path you think they might be going wrt resolution, what aspect(s) of the flight sim do you see might be negatively impacted?

Thanks,

Al

Edited June 30, 2019 by ark

[ca_metal 2,015]

2 hours ago, simmerhead said:

From what I've seen so far the non sattelite areas look a lot better than current landclass based scenery, but a lot remains to be revealed.

My biggest concern is ASOBO and how things will be followed up after release. Will they be as dedicated as the development teams of LM, DCS, Aerofly and Laminar. Will Microsoft be back in it for the long haul with continued incremental development, or will the release be a final product with only some bug fixing in the year to come. 

Why being concerned for something that isn't even that clear until this point? As far as we know for now any MS Studio can be working on the project, or even a new Studio noone heard about until now. I really doubt Asobo alone is pushing the whole project by themselves.

The arguments on this thread that would concerns me more are the ones about imagery quality around the world and how well MS will deal if this (can I fly over the amazon forest without clouds and with a good looking scenery? Or over the congolese jungle? Or Barhein's desert?).

Edited June 30, 2019 by ca_metal

[Paraffin 2,197]

9 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

The arguments on this thread that would concerns me more are the ones about imagery quality around the world and how well MS will deal if this (can I fly over the amazon forest without clouds and with a good looking scenery? Or over the congolese jungle? Or Barhein's desert?).

And that's just half the problem. The other problem is what do you see when you take off or land there? A working runway? Airport buildings?

Even small GA airports have a shed and some gas tanks. I know there has been speculation here about the magic that Azure AI might be able to do with extracting 3D buildings from a flat satellite photo, but we'll need a demonstration of that before it's anything more than conjecture.

MS might be able to do something like the Gateway program in XP11 where users build and upload small airports where they're missing, and they're included in each major patch release during the product cycle. But a project like that takes a while. 

For example, let's take Papua New Guinea, a great place for bush flying. I just did a quick check in that area, and not surprisingly, many of the smallest air strips in the highlands like AYWD Wapenamanda are just a runway, taxiway and apron in the XP11 database. But as soon as I got over to AWGY Goroka there is a decent "lego brick" airport model with hangars, terminal, and static aircraft made with the free tools provided with the sim and uploaded to the Gateway database. It's pretty basic, and the textures are low-res if you get up close, but it's an airport! I'd like to see a few basic sheds and local houses in some of the more remote landing strips in this area, and that will happen eventually.

If MS has some magic way to extract that kind of airport detail all over the world, including remote areas like the PNG highlands, I'll be thrilled. But I'll have to see it to believe it.

[ca_metal 2,015]

6 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

And that's just half the problem. The other problem is what do you see when you take off or land there? A working runway? Airport buildings?

Even small GA airports have a shed and some gas tanks. I know there has been speculation here about the magic that Azure AI might be able to do with extracting 3D buildings from a flat satellite photo, but we'll need a demonstration of that before it's anything more than conjecture.

MS might be able to do something like the Gateway program in XP11 where users build and upload small airports where they're missing, and they're included in each major patch release during the product cycle. But a project like that takes a while. 

For example, let's take Papua New Guinea, a great place for bush flying. I just did a quick check in that area, and not surprisingly, many of the smallest air strips in the highlands like AYWD Wapenamanda are just a runway, taxiway and apron in the XP11 database. But as soon as I got over to AWGY Goroka there is a decent "lego brick" airport model with hangars, terminal, and static aircraft made with the free tools provided with the sim and uploaded to the Gateway database. It's pretty basic, and the textures are low-res if you get up close, but it's an airport! I'd like to see a few basic sheds and local houses in some of the more remote landing strips in this area, and that will happen eventually.

If MS has some magic way to extract that kind of airport detail all over the world, including remote areas like the PNG highlands, I'll be thrilled. But I'll have to see it to believe it.

Well, that was kinda showed on the teaser, we have seen both, a custom and a default airport, The Nassau Airport (default) and KLAX (Custom made). Just my assumption, of course. To me they look good enought.

MS has a large database from FSX, but if we are lucky enought, they will release it with updated data, like Dovetail did.

What concerns me more is the accuracy/the lookings of the ground scenery (imagery, textures, resolution, autogen, photogrammery, custom buildings/objects etc)(not the airports). I would really appreciate if this matter was one of the first features they talk about on august.

But again, just my personal assumptions based on what they said/showed.

[Skywatcher 133]

10 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

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.

Not negative, rational. They have confirmed nothing to suggest this will be a FSX replacement. Their wording and trailer appear to be very carefully structured advertising. They have had opportunity to make blatantly clear statements. They have sidestepped them all. If you factor in everything else we know like platforms, development times/cost/difficulty, market, they will need to perform miracles to create and then profit from a fully fledged flight sim.

I am only stating from the information released to this point. Hopefully their next public announcement will give some concrete info. If it does not, I think serious warning bells will need to start ringing.

[shivers9 1,174]

36 minutes ago, Skywatcher said:

Their wording and trailer appear to be very carefully structured advertising. They have had opportunity to make blatantly clear statements. They have sidestepped them all.

That is rational and I am hopeful they can make a new Sim that is as slick as the trailer and that this stuff we have read is just marketing stuff being used as a place holder. But I have to say it is going to need a bit of magic if they pull it off. Lets just hope for now.

Edited July 1, 2019 by shivers9

[odourboy 1,289]

1 hour ago, Skywatcher said:

Not negative, rational. They have confirmed nothing to suggest this will be a FSX replacement. Their wording and trailer appear to be very carefully structured advertising. They have had opportunity to make blatantly clear statements. They have sidestepped them all. If you factor in everything else we know like platforms, development times/cost/difficulty, market, they will need to perform miracles to create and then profit from a fully fledged flight sim.

I am only stating from the information released to this point. Hopefully their next public announcement will give some concrete info. If it does not, I think serious warning bells will need to start ringing.

My question is: what could they possibly have to gain by being deceptive/misleading in their teaser? They know the community and know they'll be crucified if the bait us, then don't deliver.

Edited July 1, 2019 by odourboy

[Skywatcher 133]

17 minutes ago, odourboy said:

My question is: what could they possibly have to gain by being deceptive/misleading in their teaser? They know the community and know they'll be crucified if the bait us, then don't deliver.

They are not selling to just us, we are a small market. They are selling to the masses. All the promotional material released so far is what will sell to the masses. The masses will also be happy with a plane game they will consider to be close enough to a decent flight simulator.  We here know the difference between plane game and hardcore sim but even then, some here will still go and immediately buy it based on the promotional material like they did with say Flight. Sure, MS would know some will be upset but ultimately, more sales will be made with such promotion. There will always be casualties of the $$$ war. 

Imo, we will not see another FSX equivalent hardcore flight sim again. If MS think the same way, we are a totally expendable group and who cares if we get upset. They have no intention on ever selling another product to us again.

[Gibbage 199]

2 hours ago, shivers9 said:

That is rational and I am hopeful they can make a new Sim that is as slick as the trailer and that this stuff we have read is just marketing stuff being used as a place holder. But I have to say it is going to need a bit of magic if they pull it off. Lets just hope for now.

I was once in marketing.  It made me very cynical about everything.  Then I went into 3d Art.  Now movies dont look very impressive when I try to backwards engineer how the effects were made.  Then for the last 18 months I have been doing QA, so now I see nothing but flaws and its hard to see the overall value of a scene without trying to search for its flaws.  Occupational hazard.  

[rocketlaunch 614]

Great video, thanks for sharing.

Personally I am quite excited and optimistic about a new flight simulator from Microsoft. I get why everyone is dubious but let's face it if this new offering from Microsoft fails then what have we lost? I guess I will still be able to fire up P3D (which has been built on a Microsoft platform) and of course X-plane. Ever since I have been following flight sim I though most of us dreamed about Microsoft developing a new sim? We have just been nursing old Microsoft tech for the last 10 years plus. 

When FSW from dovetail was in development it attracted major criticism but if nothing else it generated competition and suddenly rain effects, PBR and other features appeared in P3D. Interest in development and investment can never be a bad thing, right? If the new sim from Microsoft fails in epic fashion I still think we will be better off! 

It is also interesting how little we value ourselves as a target market. I always here how lowly we are and how we must consider ourselves lucky that anyone gives us the time of day. Like me I am guessing that many of us in this hobby spend a small fortune on a annual basis!

I am looking forward to experiencing the latest technology and embracing the future. I think only Microsoft has the heritage, resources and technical know-how to pull this off. If they can not do it then I don't know who can.  

[dilore 126]

When we are talking scenery we should talk about Bing Maps and not MSFS, because the latter is totally dependent of the former.

I've seen elsewhere that there are 200+ photogrammetric cities in Bing Maps right now, the majority being in the US. Any upgrade of scenery (new photogrammetric cities in Europe for example) will solely depend on the development and budget of Bing Maps. It is my understanding that these cities cannot be done by satellite alone, one will need an airplane to fly around the city too. So this is not a cheap process. MSFS might have a strong incentive to have that accomplished, but does Bing Maps have the same incentive and budget for this?

My biggest concern is Bing Maps itself, it has in no way been as successful as Google Earth, and MS might close it down in the future, similar to Edge. It that case I'll assume MSFS will be toast, they will never switch to Google.

Edited July 1, 2019 by dilore

[Dominique_K 10,138]

11 minutes ago, dilore said:

When we are talking scenery we should talk about Bing Maps and not MSFS, because the latter is totally dependent of the former.

I've seen elsewhere that there are 200+ photogrammetric cities in Bing Maps right now, the majority being in the US. Any upgrade of scenery (new photogrammetric cities in Europe for example) will solely depend on the development and budget of Bing Maps. It is my understanding that these cities cannot be done by satellite alone, one will need an airplane to fly around the city too. So this is not a cheap process. MSFS might have a strong incentive to have that accomplished, but does Bing Maps have the same incentive and budget for this?

My biggest concern is Bing Maps itself, it has in no way been as successful as Google Earth, and MS might close it down in the future, similar to Edge. It that case I'll assume MSFS will be toast, they will never switch to Google.

Microsoft has disengaged itself from  imagery data collecting four years ago

https://www.zdnet.com/article/uber-buys-mapping-assets-from-microsoft-bing/

 

[dilore 126]

 

2 minutes ago, domkle said:

Microsoft has disengaged itself from  imagery data collecting four years ago

https://www.zdnet.com/article/uber-buys-mapping-assets-from-microsoft-bing/

 

In that case, will there be any development in the MSFS scenery at all?

[LHookins 3,103]

Anyone who owns such data already has incentive to expand it.

If we end up using MSFS for another 10 years you can bet the coverage will be expanded.

Hook