1 hour ago, carbonbasedlifeform said:

So how far do you take this? X-plane has about 2 types of trees. Is that enough for you if you’re into GA?

This is not really an issue for MS/Asobo. I don’t expect them to create region-specific objects for the entire globe.

Its also not about satellite imagery.

 

I really dont know.  Im dont do alot of GA/VFR and if I do, the specific type of tree wouldnt concern me.  It was more of a sarcastic comment towards how picky some simmers get.   

They did say they want to match the world in relative accuracy , as in correct roof type and color. Not sure if that would be house specific or region specific.  Perhaps this is something that freeware and 3PDs would get meticulous with in getting down to the nitty gritty detail. Something heli flyers and low and slow would be interested in. 

 

4 hours ago, domkle said:

I am sorry but I don't see your point. There was an obvious disinformation (being polite) that I wanted to correct. The price of an Orbx fat region with aiports  is not exorbitant at all and their OLC product which covers a continent (without airports) is also quite cheap. That's it. Discussing the future of the scenery market  cannot start from a baseline of disinformation.

 

I think whether something is priced “exorbitantly” or not is a personal opinion, it can’t really be called disinformation. 
 

Orbx sets their prices according to market tolerance. If anything, their prices are a good example of what happens in near-monopoly markets. 

21 minutes ago, Superdelphinus said:

I think whether something is priced “exorbitantly” or not is a personal opinion, it can’t really be called disinformation. 
 

Orbx sets their prices according to market tolerance. If anything, their prices are a good example of what happens in near-monopoly markets. 

I don't agree on both points.

To say that  a price is exorbitant may be a personal opinion but making an argument out of it without explaining why when they actually are not, is disinformation. Again, I use this word for the sake of politeness. We have seen on this forum since the E3 announcement some developer hating which is repulsive (THAT is an opinion 😏). 

You can say many things about Orbx, some negative (and I do from time to time)  but not that they  their prices reflect their de facto quasi-monopoly. They are relatively low, they often do sales, the  transition from FSX and then to different versions of P3D is free, and they give away hundred of freeware airports some of them of payware quality with the regions or Global. Out of their good heart ? No, of course, Venema has a stragegy focusing on  large catalogue and on volume sold.  The exact inverse of PMDG.

Edited October 11, 20196 yr by domkle

4 hours ago, france89 said:

I think people are putting too much faith in Azure capabilities.

Yes, it can see where there are trees and where there aren't, same for buildings or the color of their roofs but that's it. Remember that not every country, let alone cities, are covered in photogrammetry or with the bird eye view. I seriously doubt you'll be able to have the exact trees or buildings. They will be generic trees and buildings, so there will always be a difference between something more generic and something hand placed.

The question of the price of said addons or if it's worth it in the end, well, that really is up to the users to decide.

The Azure A.I. is precisely working on areas you don't have good data and photogrammetry. Where good data or photogrammetry is there, they don't have to scan the imagery to extract the buildings info. And watch the presentation again, Lionel said it will scan and place every building/trees/object he finds on the imagery. Unless, of course, the imagery is so bad that it can't "see" anything, in that case it will fill-in the gap with something procedural (some texture + buildings/trees/objects that will fit with the surroundings). 

We don't have to believe him, just see the screenshots and videos, most of those places don't have data or photogrammetry and they look really accurate.

On ‎10‎/‎11‎/‎2019 at 6:25 AM, france89 said:

You are assuming there will be different kind of building models for different continents. They haven't said that, have they?

They have said it will have a lot of different architectural models in one of the videos or interviews.

Edited October 14, 20196 yr by n4gix
REMOVED EXCESSIVE QUOTE!!! Please stop quoting the entire post you are replying to!

3 hours ago, pmb said:

Will it have something like the legacy Scenery Management Menu and scenery.cfg?

Personally, I don't think so. Since the scenery engine is completely new, there is no indication that I can see that it works anything like we used to know. And why would it, there are so many engines and algorithms out there that generate and show artifical worlds, and they all work differently. It is not like the "layered scenery" with its thousands of files is the only solution to do this. 

Best regards

2 hours ago, ca_metal said:

They have said it will have a lot of different architectural models in one of the videos or interviews.

Do you remember which one? Either way i missed that.

Of course IF things are like that the outcome is completely different!

23 minutes ago, france89 said:

You are assuming there will be different kind of building models for different continents. They haven't said that, have they?

When I was talking about the old way of thinking in another thread, this is an example of it. 

MSFS are not using regional building databases, at least not like FSX did. The AI is reading orthos and then an algorithm is producing buildings that match with the underlying image, including shape, facade type, and roof type. The rest of the detail (lights, cars outside, windows, etc.) will be procedural. 

This technology isn't totally new. We've seen a very rough, very primitive version of it used in X-Plane with World2XP and Ortho4XP overlays. 

Edited October 11, 20196 yr by bonchie

I hate to say it, but there is a real chance that OrbX et al are going to experience the same thing I did.  I used to make freeware sceneries that were hugely popular because they added buildings to the otherwise flat  FS world. Then FS2002 came along with autogen and what I was doing was rendered irrelevant.

9 hours ago, france89 said:

I think people are putting too much faith in Azure capabilities.

I think you'd be shocked if you knew what Azure and AI engines are capable of these days in all seriousness, I certainly was.  I have been lucky enough to see some of the new Azure AI and Machine Learning systems developed by MS and I was.. frankly.. amazed.. If you think generally about 'AI' these days and do some reading around the topic it will shock and in all likelihood terrify you.  We've already gone from machines that are pre-programmed and can beat grand masters at chess and go most of the time.. to single AI engines that you just tell it the rules to a game (meaning it can play anything) and within hours it beats grand masters pretty much all the time i.e. at super human level... That in itself is a massive leap.  Some think we're probably 20 years away from AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) that's capable of reasoning and operating at 'human level'... we should all let that one sink in because it has quite profound implications.. because the next step is ASI...  or Artificial Super Intelligence (totally off topic but it gives context)... and that's where it gets... exciting and terrifying at the same time.. and that could be quick... anyway.. massively off topic!!

If you extrapolate that development pace.. to something like this.. I think you'll see an AI that only gets better.. and better.. and better.. at procedural generation of landscapes and regions.... I guess in a round about way.. I am saying be careful to underestimate the power of this technology..  I think this kind of thing is easily achievable personally based on what I've seen...

This was meant to prompt thought, not be a 'contradiction' post...

Thanks

Edited October 11, 20196 yr by craig_read

Concerning Renton KRNT...  it must not be part of the photogrametry Seattle area or surely it would have "more detail" which i myself, as a non pilot who has never been to the real KRNT, would not have noticed or known about.  An airport such as KRNT must be an example of 'just another airport' as done by Azure AI.

If the AI can and does read satellite photos and aerial images and produces 'generic' autogen from those then it would be illogical for it to stop at airport boundaries and leave out the many buildings at various airports.  I think that means that most airports will be looking pretty darn good by default for people who dont know what they look like in real life.

I wonder what airports inside photgramtery areas will look like.  there are many airports very near downtown city areas.  Will they be the 3cm coverage?

Artificial intelligence, machine learning ... all these things are strongly overrated.

It's just code, sequence of conditional statements, dictionnaries, image detection algorithms etc.. things that exist since the beginning of computers but now they replace everything with these "cool" terms like AI, machine learning, data science etc.. they sound cool but nothing revolutionary. There is no way a processor with transistors can come close to an human intelligence.

22 minutes ago, sightseer said:

If the AI can and does read satellite photos and aerial images and produces 'generic' autogen from those then it would be illogical for it to stop at airport boundaries and leave out the many buildings at various airports.  I think that means that most airports will be looking pretty darn good by default for people who dont know what they look like in real life.

 

That's the thing. In another post I mention it's pretty much impossible for me to touch any default airport (even the ones enhanced by Orbx regions), because of being spoiled so badly by what developers were able to achieve. It's not about the 100% accuracy..... it's more about the ground textures and general feel of the airport as well.... in default FSX/P3D pretty much every airport is the same, just differently organized. Even if you enhance it with good Afcads, it still gives you the same boring monotonous appearance. And that's something I am sure MSFS will do much better. It might not give you the exact up-to-date buildings and most of them will be automatically generated, but you will certainly notice the difference between the various airports, most probably at high definition. That alone is more than enough for me to be able to use default airports (which means I can finally fly anywhere and not limit myself to premium airports), while developers work on enhancing specific airports. Flights to places like Ethiopia, Namibia, Fiji, Peru, Oman, Myanmar, Thailand, India, Siberia, Uzbekistan, etc.... will finally be possible as airports will be, perhaps not very accurate, but surely at the same visual quality and level as the rest of the world and it's ground textures and general ground features taken from the satellite imagery will give every airport it's proper character reflecting the region you're in. Adding to that the "VFR" elements around the airport and yeah.... makes me very excited.

I'd still buy whatever FlyTampa, Flightbeam or others might do to raise the level even further.

Edited October 11, 20196 yr by OSJJ1985

3 hours ago, bonchie said:

When I was talking about the old way of thinking in another thread, this is an example of it. 

MSFS are not using regional building databases, at least not like FSX did. The AI is reading orthos and then an algorithm is producing buildings that match with the underlying image, including shape, facade type, and roof type. The rest of the detail (lights, cars outside, windows, etc.) will be procedural. 

This technology isn't totally new. We've seen a very rough, very primitive version of it used in X-Plane with World2XP and Ortho4XP overlays. 

I am well aware.
I am just a bit more careful until i see it shown outside of the big cities and specifically in places where houses look quite different. Especially on places i am more familiar with.

Until then, presentation stats and numbers (such as those shown in the Discovery Series, an introduction video for potential new customers) can be trusted up to a certain point. Then there is marketing and the ultimate goal to show your own product as being the most amazing as possible.

I am pretty excited about this all, but i think neither an overly negative nor an overly positive approach leads to anything good.
 

5 minutes ago, france89 said:

I am well aware.
I am just a bit more careful until i see it shown outside of the big cities and specifically in places where houses look quite different. Especially on places i am more familiar with.

Until then, presentation stats and numbers (such as those shown in the Discovery Series, an introduction video for potential new customers) can be trusted up to a certain point. Then there is marketing and the ultimate goal to show your own product as being the most amazing as possible.

I am pretty excited about this all, but i think neither an overly negative nor an overly positive approach leads to anything good.
 

Well they did show Paris as an example of this. Most of Paris isn't photogrammetry. So that's one of the larger cities relying on this Azure AI technique. Then another shot of PNG, which probably has even less definition than Paris and I though it handled it very well.... maybe not 100% accurate, but visually just as good and believable as the rest, not to mention still a huge leap from what we have with P3D/FSX. And that's what I compare this to. If you compare this with real life, naturally you will be disappointed with "Azure cities"

EDIT: Sorry I misread your "outside of big cities", which would exclude Paris. Anyway the example with PNG is one outside of big cities.

Edited October 11, 20196 yr by OSJJ1985