8 minutes ago, dilore said:

 

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

They license ground/aerial/sat imageries from external providers, I think. And add value with Azure and the like.

 

Edited July 1, 20196 yr by domkle

2 hours 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/

 

they sold the FS ESP code to LM not stopped them developing MSFS , and we don't know were they get there data now.

7 minutes ago, rjfry said:

they sold the FS ESP code to LM not stopped them developing MSFS , and we don't know were they get there data now.

They didn't sell the ESP code, only a licence to use it to LM and Dovetail.

They don't have satellite  or aerial photographic reconnaissance aircraft (as far as I know) or cars with a funny camera on top. So that they buy licences to use imagery would be my best bet. The other solution is that they steal it from Google but  I doubt it.

Just to clarify. They licensed ESP to LM and FSX to Dovetail.

ESP is the commercial/corporate version of FSX, and FSX is the consumer/entertainment version. No significant difference between the code in the two versions, but two very significantly different licenses. 

2 hours ago, domkle said:

The other solution is that they steal it from Google but  I doubt it.

I think the google's photogrammetry wasn't collected in-house, they purchased it. Microsoft could go to the same source and buy it (depending on exclusity agreements that google may have).

But I'm not so sure about that info. Anyways, there are alternative sources for the data, I've found some other companies doing smaller projects around the world (nothing worldwide like google).

Edited July 1, 20196 yr by ca_metal

9 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

I think the google's photogrammetry wasn't collected in-house, they purchased it. Microsoft could go to the same source and buy it (depending on exclusity agreements that google may have).

They don’t have satellite for sure and their sat imagery is under non exclusive licence if I am not mistaken. I thought that the  cars were theirs but it makes more sense for them to subcontract the collect of ground imagery. That would explain the unequal quality. Same for aerial photography I suppose.

 

Edited July 1, 20196 yr by domkle

Satellite imagery alone won't do. Resolution is about 1 pixel for 2.5 meter. A car roughly represented by 2 pixels at best

It's the areal photography collected by aircraft that provide the much higher resolution from different altitudes. And that's where consistency in terms of colors, shades and time of day can be crucial in terms of immersion for a fast moving vehicle..

Watch this video from minute 29 (Satellite mission control)

<media> 

 

Edited July 1, 20196 yr by FS++

14 hours ago, Skywatcher said:

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 p

I think you seriously underestimate the effect a small number of vociferous users can have on the success of a software product! Just from a personal perspective, I think you're wrong about how hardcore the sim will be. You can easily make a sim/game appeal to less enthusiastic or committed users by just having all of the most realistic features off by default. To deliberately dumb it down doesn't make commercial sense as you want it to have the potential to grow as the users become more experienced with it. Some may just dabble and leave but others, like most of us here, will get hooked and want more.

Edited July 1, 20196 yr by vortex681

2 hours ago, FS++ said:

Satellite imagery alone won't do. Resolution is about 1 pixel for 2.5 meter. A car roughly represented by 2 pixels at best

 

As I remember (I hope not to make a fool of myself 😃) Spot res is 0.5 m and Eros almost the same. And I suspect that some sat do a better job 😈. But people speak of 'sat imagery" when there are three levels of collect, including  cars on the roads ! 

EDIT the 0.5 m res is the Pleiades sats.

Edited July 1, 20196 yr by domkle

We will have to just wait and see what happens. Could be here arguing all this forever. I see the other thread is now locked. I don't gamble but I do wish there was some betting on MSFS. I would be taking all the long odds. Time well tell how rich or poor I would've become. haha

well so now Ive watched the video and read more or less all the comments.

If you go into the 3D google maps you also get those weird shapes on buildings and trees but it all changes as you move about.  Its a new type of modelling as far as I can tell (or know).  What may look odd from a distance will probably look better up close or you may not even notice because you are flying.  this will be in the photogrammetric  cities. never heard that word before. but anyway to continue with my pure speculation...

the rest of the world will have started with satellite or aerial imagery but tree models and building models will be put in actual locations as determined by Azure and 'detail textures' will be applied as Xplane already does.  That shot where the non flat runway is mentioned and a little before i think show that its definitely not landclass tiles as we have known and as Mr  Miller points out, there are trees placed where the imagery suggests a tree and their shadows are mismatched with the imagery.

To me, some of the generic scenery like the buildings near the pyramids look much like Flight did.  I think maybe it was too much ambient occlusion (imo).

I think it will be miles ahead of FSX and I hope people just buy into it because if MS themselves fail again we will probably never see another flight simulator.

It seems that some people have assumed that people like me have assumed it will be 3D perfection everywhere and thats not true at all.  I do think that it will be accurately placed generic autogen everywhere (except for the totally real 3D cities -- how much is one Orbx cityscape?)

I will need faster internet I bet.  currently dealing with 8Mbs at best.

Edited July 6, 20196 yr by sightseer

On 6/30/2019 at 11:51 AM, Woozie said:

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.... 

OK... *SIGH* ... I won't even respond to this, as I appear to be lighting fuses, simply by opening my mouth in here!!! *SIGH*

This place really has become a hostile environment... 

I just love the fact, that it's the same people, who are so advocating the stance, that there should be room for everybody.

"We're all equal - but some are more equal than others..." 

1 hour ago, sightseer said:

the rest of the world will have started with satellite or aerial imagery but tree models and building models will be put in actual locations as determined by Azure and 'detail textures' will be applied as Xplane already does.  That shot where the non flat runway is mentioned and a little before i think show that its definitely not landclass tiles as we have known and as Mr  Miller points out, there are trees placed where the imagery suggests a tree and their shadows are mismatched with the imagery.

It seems that some people have assumed that people like me have assumed it will be 3D perfection everywhere and thats not true at all.  I do think that it will be accurately placed generic autogen everywhere (except for the totally real 3D cities -- how much is one Orbx cityscape?)

That is what I am banking on too.  Azure will be intelligent enough to place objects accurately on satellite image data.  If you live in a house in a small city that doesnt have an aerial-captured 3D rendering like a larger city, Azure will still see the rooftop of your house on a satellite image and extend it upwards in a 3D model with a generic texture for the outside walls (and imagine Azure being smart enough to calculate building and terrain heights by the shadows they cast in aerial satellite images, wow!).  That alone is infinitely times better than lame generic houses and terrain.

Edited July 6, 20196 yr by Heli

On 6/30/2019 at 11:47 AM, Skywatcher said:

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.

I don't follow your comments. The video by Kevin Miller clearly outlines use of landclass/autogen. It's quite obvious that select areas will have the photogrammetry but to what extent we don't know. I think the detailed areas look amazing yet there is scope for 3PD to work on areas to improve, all in all providing the terms for the 3PD are fair, it's a win win. The technology in the trailer is absolutely stunning.

1 hour ago, dtrjones said:

I don't follow your comments. The video by Kevin Miller clearly outlines use of landclass/autogen. It's quite obvious that select areas will have the photogrammetry but to what extent we don't know. I think the detailed areas look amazing yet there is scope for 3PD to work on areas to improve, all in all providing the terms for the 3PD are fair, it's a win win. The technology in the trailer is absolutely stunning.

A "little" use of landclass and autogen. The final product will require a lot more across the entire planet.

I'm not sure how else I can explain my thoughts to people. The 1min 30 sec trailer tells you it's an immaculate, spacious, 4 bedroom, 2 bathroom home with extensive outdoor areas. You need to see the property in person. Every person here would buy the home from the description alone. Not only would they buy it but from the description are now expecting the bathroom will have a spa, his/her showers, the outdoor area will have a pool. It doesn't state that in the ad but they are now expecting it to happen.

That's how it's going with MSFS. lol