This information seems premature at best. If Aerosoft was actually developing add-ons for MSFS, they would be under an NDA and probably couldn't say much if anything about their efforts.

6 hours ago, RALF9636 said:

And I assume it means that there will be a few airports in very high quality included whereas the rest of the world's airports will be quite basic, but probably still better than the default airports of P3D.

+1 That's how I understand the statement (native German speaker), although they could/should have phrased it less ambiguously.

Nobody expects MS to deliver 25000 (or so) detailed airports with manually placed and modeled buildings etc., so we will get just what FSX/P3D and X-Plane offer: A number of detailed and manually optimized major airports and a majority of basic airports which are built using more or less sophisticated automation based on published data and possibly aerial and satellite imagery.

Edited August 29, 20196 yr by Airboeing

1 hour ago, Airboeing said:

+1 That's how I understand the statement (native German speaker), although they could/should have phrased it less ambiguously.

Nobody expects MS to deliver 25000 (or so) detailed airports with manually placed and modeled buildings etc., so we will get just what FSX/P3D and X-Plane offer: A number of detailed and manually optimized major airports and a majority of basic airports which are built using more or less sophisticated automation based on published data and possibly aerial and satellite imagery.

If all the 24k airports have some buildings that would be a major improvement as a lot of them are just the basic grass strip.

5 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

This information seems premature at best. If Aerosoft was actually developing add-ons for MSFS, they would be under an NDA and probably couldn't say much if anything about their efforts.

If only that is true, it would mean that each developper which is not answering questions is involved in MSFS, am I right? So it would be easy to know who it is.

31 minutes ago, Noooch said:

If only that is true, it would mean that each developper which is not answering questions is involved in MSFS, am I right? So it would be easy to know who it is.

That's a bit of a leap. Don't twist his words to back your conclusion.

Just because a developer doesn't answer (can't or won't) about development, doesn't necessary mean, that they are actively developing or are in co-hooch with Microsoft. It could be a sign that they are developing something - but not a given fact. 

8 minutes ago, Anders Bermann said:

That's a bit of a leap. Don't twist his words to back your conclusion.

Just because a developer doesn't answer (can't or won't) about development, doesn't necessary mean, that they are actively developing or are in co-hooch with Microsoft. It could be a sign that they are developing something - but not a given fact. 

Yes I know, it was half of a joke 😉

Edited August 29, 20196 yr by Noooch

4 hours ago, Airboeing said:

Nobody expects MS to deliver 25000 (or so) detailed airports with manually placed and modeled buildings etc.,

I expect MS to deliver all airports detailed to a reasonable (better than FSX & MS Flight) level, but not done manually. They are bound to have algorithms/tools in place to automate the placement of objects.

It did amaze me that in FSX and MS Flight, it took a "mission" to get some of the dirt strips or smaller airports to have some life added to them. Missions are fine and dandy, but free flight dominates by a huge margin, and this is not likely to change ever. 

Will Microsoft host a bug fix forum for third party addons 😚

8 hours ago, Airboeing said:

Nobody expects MS to deliver 25000 (or so) detailed airports with manually placed and modeled buildings etc., so we will get just what FSX/P3D and X-Plane offer: A number of detailed and manually optimized major airports and a majority of basic airports which are built using more or less sophisticated automation based on published data and possibly aerial and satellite imagery.

Yes as I said they need to build the right tools and have a universal library of objects/textures/assets so that the community can build their own airports. This is why X-Plane has many thousands of decent 3d airports, developed by the community. The large asset library should be locally on the computer and synced with the cloud. When flying it only downloads airport configurations within say 100 miles. The sim world is always up to date. And you should be able to give airport ratings. If 3 people develop JFK airport you can choose which one you want in your sim, based on reviews, the developer, and which is newest.

23 minutes ago, Greazer said:

Yes as I said they need to build the right tools and have a universal library of objects/textures/assets so that the community can build their own airports. This is why X-Plane has many thousands of decent 3d airports, developed by the community. The large asset library should be locally on the computer and synced with the cloud. When flying it only downloads airport configurations within say 100 miles. The sim world is always up to date. And you should be able to give airport ratings. If 3 people develop JFK airport you can choose which one you want in your sim, based on reviews, the developer, and which is newest.

I think everyone is very curious to see if/how Microsoft is employing AI driven scenery creation that may eliminate the need for a crowd sourced scenery solution. Honestly, the scenery gateway is one of the best decisions made for X-Plane, though. ...Now whoever decided to include in the object library that ridiculous flashing "X-Plane" billboard that is popping up at more and more gateway airports should be fired 😉

The SDK needs to include 'photogrametry' tools (however you spell that).

 

theres a deep irony that aerial images have formed perfectly rendered 3D cities and we're worried about how to go about creating 3D models of airports.

28 minutes ago, sightseer said:

The SDK needs to include 'photogrametry' tools (however you spell that).

 

theres a deep irony that aerial images have formed perfectly rendered 3D cities and we're worried about how to go about creating 3D models of airports.

I think the problem here is that photogrammetry looks rubbish from up close. 

I wonder if they will ever finish the A330 before MSFS launches.

1 hour ago, rocketlaunch said:

I wonder if they will ever finish the A330 before MSFS launches.

The devs won't say it, but I think most of them are in a slow pace right now. The MSFS2020 can be the new go-to sim, or can fail, it's a wait and see game. That said, I think most of them will refrain do to big investments on any current platform. Just like FSLabs is doing.

4 hours ago, Shack95 said:

I think the problem here is that photogrammetry looks rubbish from up close. 

It would be better than nothing and it might be better (or be able to be better) than we 'know'.

maybe we have pilots on here who would love to attach a camera to their plane and do circuits and then run the footage through a converter tool to let it build as much as possible.  Then they use that as a foundation.  Fix the models as needed and add better imagery.  It might work.  just a suggestion.

But the 3D cities look pretty darn good to me.