11 minutes ago, LHookins said:

 

I suspect P3D is still using the older technology.  Microsoft will be doing a lot of things differently in the new sim.  There's no reason for Microsoft to be limited to what P3D is doing currently.

Hook

As I understand LM does use the old tech, except for the trees (batch processing). No reason why MS should use the old tech ? I don't know the scope of what they want to do and the trailer made the marketing people is, for me, no indication at all except for the ususal suspects, I mean a few landmark sites. If I were pessimistic (I am not) , I'd add that they show no "normal" places  anywhere (where I live, where you live etc.).   

16 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

Repeating a point I've made before: My small home town is just 50 miles or so as the crow flies from Seattle and Redmond WA, one of the centers of the high-tech universe. But when I go to my home town on Google Earth Pro, it's just a flat ortho photo. No ability to tilt the view and see any 3D buildings at all, because the height data and facing images just don't exist in the Google database.

I live in a small, relatively new village in the West Midlands in the UK (a long way from any major city) and I've just checked in Google Earth and it appears in glorious 3D. I would have thought that somewhere in the US was much more likely to be there in 3D than somewhere in the UK.

1 hour ago, LHookins said:

Ouch!!  So much for navigating VFR using real world charts.  I have no problems doing that with stock FSX and P3D.

Hook

Actually I think it's easier to navigate VFR on X-plane. In the part you quoted me above I was talking about the autogen system (houses, trees, building, industrial buildings, commercial buildings, taller buildings etc), but there are other scenery layers on X-Plane scenery system, placing the other objects on the scenery (roads, churches, piers, eletric towers, beacons etc), and those are very accurate and based on the OSM data. The problem on X-plane is the way it places the autogen on places the OSM data for the city buildings and houses is really poor/non-existent.

Getting back on the topic, I would like to see the new MSFS moving away from those current techniques (at least partially, as sometimes they can provide good usable data). Would be nice to see how far the AI can process the satellite data and turn it into usable data for the scenery system. The more accurate the better. 

Edited July 3, 20196 yr by ca_metal

@ca_metal

Thanks.  When I'm navigating across country, often without the benefit of roads to follow, I have to use landmarks that are prominent and easy to see at a distance.  Towns are the most numerous but if I can't match what I see to the chart I can't navigate.  

For airliner flying, or those using GPS or radio navaids exclusively, towns are nothing more than decorations anyway and accuracy doesn't matter.  As long as they're attractive. 🙂 For me, they're how I find my way.  I have several thousand hours flying this way. 

The only things missing are individual buildings as landmarks on charts:  prison, school, racetrack, etc. and you can't see those at a distance anyway.  I'm hoping the new techniques used in MSFS will display those, and I'll be looking, but I won't miss them if they're not there.  They're mostly useful to mark your position as you pass over them.

Hook

On 7/2/2019 at 7:25 PM, Greazer said:

FS2020 will not look like that worldwide. Many locations will have boring stock textures. MS want to keep you in Dream Land and not think about that.

Of course that is obvious but the scenery looks much better than any other stock scenery, I mean it can't get any worst than X-Plane 11 (now don't get me wrong I love X-Plane but stock scenery isn't it's fortay)

From what I've seen the scenery looks very natural with detailed maps over landclass textures and use of high fidelity objects including speedtrees. That combined with enhanced water, 3D cloud and shadows effects and atmospherics then I'd say it's look a little less than boring.

2 hours ago, dtrjones said:

From what I've seen the scenery looks very natural with detailed maps over landclass textures and use of high fidelity objects including speedtrees. That combined with enhanced water, 3D cloud and shadows effects and atmospherics then I'd say it's look a little less than boring.

There's no actual proof the clouds are 3d. Everybody waiting on more info or video. Please don't post false information. As for XP, don't worry it will always have proper flight models, physics and realism. The graphics engine is getting upgraded. The Vulkan is landing.

On 7/2/2019 at 1:25 PM, Greazer said:

FS2020 will not look like that worldwide. Many locations will have boring stock textures. MS want to keep you in Dream Land and not think about that.

Yeah, it's gonna really suck to only have 200+ areas like that to fly in (and that's assuming Bing's public database is the limit). 

Seriously though, do you think we don't realize that not every area on earth has 3D image scanning? Of course there will still be land class areas and they show several of those in the trailer. They look very good. 

Landclass definitions is actually an excellent system that can produce really good results in many areas. The problem with FSX/P3D is not that it uses land class outside of hand annotated areas. It's that the land class uses low resolution textures, has oversized autogen, lacks variety in the autogen, has simplistic textures on the buildings, and the seems between landclass tiles aren't done well. 

Landclass done to 2020 standards with a next-gen presentation will still be great for areas without 3d scans and decent satellite imagery. I'd far prefer that compared to how XP11 does their "plausible world." There's a reason I only fly in Ortho regions in XP11. 

Edited July 11, 20196 yr by bonchie

13 hours ago, Greazer said:

There's no actual proof the clouds are 3d. Everybody waiting on more info or video. Please don't post false information. As for XP, don't worry it will always have proper flight models, physics and realism. The graphics engine is getting upgraded. The Vulkan is landing.

The actual proof is the shots in the trailer flying through clouds. They are clearly volumetric (the fog and haze are clearly as well) and are almost certainly a derivative of TruSky, which Dovetail had already started implementing. 

 

 

Edited July 11, 20196 yr by bonchie

56 minutes ago, bonchie said:

Lndclass definitions is actually an excellent system that can produce really good results in many areas. The problem with FSX/P3D is not that it uses land class outside of hand annotated areas. It's that the land class uses low resolution textures, has oversized autogen, lacks variety in the autogen, has simplistic textures on the buildings, and the seems between landclass tiles aren't done well. 

Landclass done to 2020 standards with a next-gen presentation will still be great for areas without 3d scans and decent satellite imagery. I'd far prefer that compared to how XP11 does their "plausible world." There's a reason I only fly in Ortho regions in XP11. 

I agree. LC is an excellent tech if done right. With a better blending algoritm, a much higher grid resolution, more zones, and last but not least, better landclass textures. Something also should be done to cities so we never have to see roads going through houses etc. 

4 hours ago, bonchie said:

The actual proof is the shots in the trailer flying through clouds. They are clearly volumetric (the fog and haze are clearly as well) and are almost certainly a derivative of TruSky, which Dovetail had already started implementing. 

The video is not conclusive proof of volumetric clouds.  Until we hear from MS and or getter better video nobody actually knows. In fact if I was betting on this I would say those are not volumetric clouds, and look closer to the 2d billboard ones we have in p3d and XP.

32 minutes ago, Greazer said:

The video is not conclusive proof of volumetric clouds.  Until we hear from MS and or getter better video nobody actually knows. In fact if I was betting on this I would say those are not volumetric clouds, and look closer to the 2d billboard ones we have in p3d and XP.

And I would bet they are volumetric... and don't look like anything we have on p3d or x-plane (even XEnviro looks worst than that). 😉

11 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

And I would bet they are volumetric... and don't look like anything we have on p3d or x-plane (even XEnviro looks worst than that). 😉

Microsoft want you to think they are volumetric. Just as they want you to think the whole earth has perfect Ortho and autogen. But the trailer has a bad edit with mountains with stock textures and Ortho. They are quite famous for hood winking flight simmers even back in the day with their classic DX10 preview which turned out to be only an artists impression.

2 hours ago, Greazer said:

Microsoft want you to think they are volumetric. Just as they want you to think the whole earth has perfect Ortho and autogen. But the trailer has a bad edit with mountains with stock textures and Ortho. They are quite famous for hood winking flight simmers even back in the day with their classic DX10 preview which turned out to be only an artists impression.

And Austin wants you to think X-Plane is way better than anything Microsoft is doing... It's just a matter of perspective... I've been flying less and less my X-plane, since the trailer came out. I have high hopes for that sim. As I understand why you aren't hyped for the new sim, you will have to accept there are some of us really looking forward fot it.

5 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

And Austin wants you to think X-Plane is way better than anything Microsoft is doing... It's just a matter of perspective... I've been flying less and less my X-plane, since the trailer came out. I have high hopes for that sim. As I understand why you aren't hyped for the new sim, you will have to accept there are some of us really looking forward fot it.

I will get it for a 2nd side sim, if they tick all the boxes in the other thread (key things MS has to do). But I half expect they will cut corners and not fully deliver i.e. with 2d clouds. I hope I am wrong and it gives XP a real run for the money.

2 minutes ago, Greazer said:

I will get it for a 2nd side sim, if they tick all the boxes in the other thread (key things MS has to do). But I half expect they will cut corners and not fully deliver i.e. with 2d clouds. I hope I am wrong and it gives XP a real run for the money.

We will see, they are starting to release the info and on august the insider program will be started. We will know more sooner than later.