Curse you Microsoft!

[Johnny19 344]

31 minutes ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

Totally different development team and type of software though. And I don't think anyone is expecting a completely bug-free experience, that's impossible.

I think you missed the point here. It's not about what team makes what, but about what was promised, is expected, and will be delivered. Yes, the shown stuff looks marvelous (so do marketing videos of stuff sold nowdays, but they don't look the same quality on my pc). But I digress. 

I read and see that lot of folks here already burried p3d and xplane, foreseeing addon companies go out off business. And so on. 

As someone above said, don't turn this into an ugly bashing when final version of FS sees the light of day.

[jpc55 185]

2 minutes ago, bonchie said:

Some of you seem really threatened for some reason.

Now that is really FUNNY!

[G-RFRY 1,712]

2 hours ago, Jim Young said:

No! No! No!  Work on it started over 5 years ago and over 200 people are working on it.  Soon, Microsoft will bring on some experts/non-experts in the community to be Alpha/Beta testers.  Microsoft did this with Windows and Office too.  There is no way there will be flaws requiring hot fixes with all that testing and expertise.... (tongue in cheek).

Yes and DTG started FSW some 4years ago !!!!!

[ChaoticBeauty 6,692]

1 minute ago, Johnny19 said:

I think you missed the point here. It's not about what team makes what, but about what was promised, is expected, and will be delivered. Yes, the shown stuff looks marvelous (so do marketing videos of stuff sold nowdays, but they don't look the same quality on my pc). But I digress. 

I'm not missing the point, the comment I quoted suggested that Microsoft are incapable of delivering software that works correctly, while focusing on a very specific release. The Microsoft Flight Simulator team are not promising a bug-free experience with the product (no such software exists anyway), and in fact they have made it clear what features will be included at launch, and what features will not. How about we wait until it's released before judging their work.

[RioPilot 99]

On 9/28/2018 at 5:05 PM, RioPilot said:

Yeah, I see no reason why we should stunt technological advancements, just because it would render certain 3rd party developers redundant. Should we be expected to stick with 2-dimensional cloud sprites into perpetuity, just because REX and HiFi or whoever would have to rework their entire product line? At the end of the day, either they can adapt to the new technology, or new 3rd party developers will rise to the occasion to take advantage of these new developments.

Imagine if a version of P3D made use of clouds like those seen in UNIGINE here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tui5-x2i2zw

Really though, I'm starting to think more and more that a complete rework of the ESP engine would be needed to make use of future developments.

It's quite unfortunate that we're nearing the 5th version of P3D, and many aspects of the simulator are virtually identical to FSX, a simulator which was released in 2006. In fact, there are many aspects that remain unchanged since Flight Simulator 2002, if not earlier. The flight dynamics engine, cheaply done oversized autogen, unrealistic flat airports, and of course, the woefully antiquated ATC system (though personally, I see this as something that could be largely left to the 3rd party developers at the moment). It's nearly 2 decades later, and some aspects are exactly the same.

What I'd like to see would be a simulator with a reworked flight dynamics engine, using volumetric clouds, and actual 3D satellite imagery used for most of the global landclass. There are challenges I'm sure when it comes to properly adapting satellite imagery to a simulator (seasonal variations, incorrect shadow lighting, artifacts like clouds overlaid on the terrain pictures, etc), but I think this would be the future going forward.

For instance, take a look at FSX using Google Earth imagery. A mixture of that kind of imagery, with properly done trees, volumetric clouds, waterclass, etc, would make for an especially realistic looking simulator. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6D3t4rqNRa8&t=234s

 

I felt like it was worth quoting this post I made over a year ago in the Prepar3D forum regarding my disillusionment with Lockheed Martin's snail paced development progress. I never could have imagined that 9 months later I would see a trailer for a flight simulator that would essentially embrace all of the things I listed in that particular post. When I first saw the trailer for Microsoft Flight Simulator, I was certainly shocked, but it was not because I thought what I was seeing was impossible. It was more of a shock like, "finally, we will now have a sim that takes advantage of technologies that have been available for nearly a decade, if not more." I never expected Microsoft to re-enter the Flight Simulator genre, but I'm certainly glad they did. A small team like Laminar Research will never be able to accomplish what Microsoft is trying to accomplish, and a defense contractor like Lockheed Martin is simply never going to be in the business of making a truly commercial flight sim.

It was always aggravating seeing the rest of the game industry advance forward, while flight simulators stagnated. When a game like Red Dead Redemption 2 has volumetric clouds, and ends up looking more realistic than any flight simulator, it's moments like that which really highlighted how antiquated most flight simulators looked. I'm happy to see Microsoft finally put to rest all the naysayers who believed it wasn't "possible" to improve flight simulators much beyond what we were seeing. "Flight simulators have to model an entire world," many would emphasis, as if that mattered. There are programs like Space Engine which literally model an entire universe with millions of procedurally generated galaxies, billions of stars, planets, moons, asteroids, etc, etc, and it ends up looking just great itself.

Maybe some people have unreasonably high expectations of what the new Flight Simulator will accomplish, but I personally don't think so. I think even if the new sim does not meet the most wildest of expectations, it will still end up making X-Plane and P3D look like the antiquated curiosities they are. No longer will X-Plane, for instance, be able to emphasis their superiority with blade elementary theory, when it is quite evident that the new flight simulator will model actual wind perturbations over terrain and aerodynamic effects on hundreds of different aircraft surfaces. It does indeed seem a lot of people seem unusually threatened by what Microsoft is setting out to accomplish, and it does not really make sense why. I suspect it's because of all the hundreds and thousands of dollars people invested into their sims up to this point. I'm one of those, but I will be the first to dump P3D and all the hundreds of dollar add-ons I got for it once this new flight sim comes out. I only wish Microsoft announced the sim a year earlier, before I resigned myself to life-long fate with P3D and their incremental changes. I probably wouldn't have purchased many of the ORBX scenery add-ons and 3rd party aircraft, but I digress.

The new Microsoft Flight Simulator certainly won't be perfect, nor do I think most people expect it will be. Evidently we won't get seasonal variations or ATC out of the box, but X-Plane lacks the former and apparently has a poor implementation of the latter. P3D may have both, but I would happily take a true-to-life representation of the world with no seasonal variations, over a drab representation with four. And to be quite honest, it's not like P3D's implementation of ATC is much to write home about either. It's basically identical to the ATC system implemented with Flight Simulator 2002. It seems to me Microsoft is adopting an attitude of not adding features if they can't implement them adequately. I rather admire that, and I could just as well do without ATC in the initial release of the new sim. I say this as someone who's an actual air traffic controller, so I certainly understand the importance of ATC. However, they will be adding SIDS and STARS, and there won't really be anything stopping anyone from going to Flight Aware, taking note of real world routes, and flying those routes in the sim exactly as you would in the real world. I never used VATSIM, nor do I ever plan to, but I imagine that may continue on as well.

On a final note, one thing I find amusing is how many people dismissively refer to what Microsoft Flight Simulator is offering as "eye candy." I feel like that diminishes a lot of what is being accomplished here. A true-to-life representation of the world is not eye candy, it's a fundamentally critical component of flight. Not just because seeing VFR landmarks is essential for the purposes of pilotage/dead-reckoning, but because seeing the world as it is from a whole new perspective is simply one of the most visceral and appealing aspects of flying. I didn't get my private pilot license just because I'm fascinated by the technical aspects of aircraft. I got it because seeing the world from even 2,000 feet up is such a unique experience. That it something that has not been properly conveyed in any previous flight simulator, as far as I can tell, and I eagerly look forward to flying over my old homes and the places I've visited in reality.

With all that said, I certainly admire Laminar's passion, and I'm thankful to Lockheed for breathing at least some new life into the old FSX sim engine, but I think it'll finally be time to put all that behind.

 

 

 

Edited October 13, 2019 by RioPilot

[sightseer 895]

very well said, RioPilot.

just because I and others may be excited about a new sim and its possible offerings doesnt mean that we're stupid enough to think its the Holy Grail or whatever.

sheesh...show a little emotion around here and you get attacked.  caught red handed showing feelings.

 

@Coneman Im having the same problem with XPlane.  its appearing a bit flat lately and I cant wait to try the new sim.

Edited October 13, 2019 by sightseer

[Coneman 71]

For those worried about too much enthusiasm going on here (worship? really?), there's so much time for hand-wringing and fussing about if it will run or not. Just allow me my moment of wow. 😄

[carbonbasedlifeform 179]

1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

The company that is still stumbling to get Windows 10 to work correctly, is going to make the perfect sim with no bugs... LOL. That's hysterical. 

Stumbling? Windows 10 is great. Maybe it's your setup?

[shivers9 1,174]

43 minutes ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

I'm not missing the point, the comment I quoted suggested that Microsoft are incapable of delivering software that works correctly, while focusing on a very specific release. The Microsoft Flight Simulator team are not promising a bug-free experience with the product (no such software exists anyway), and in fact they have made it clear what features will be included at launch, and what features will not. How about we wait until it's released before judging their work.

That is the exact point! So far we know that MS has been working on a "scenery simulator". So why not wait until release before we declare that we will be able to see our cat in the back yard and MS is going to bring peace to the world! It may happen and we are all for it but it is just a little early to clean our hard drives and sit here for 3 or 4 years waiting it to happen.

[ChaoticBeauty 6,692]

18 minutes ago, shivers9 said:

That is the exact point! So far we know that MS has been working on a "scenery simulator". So why not wait until release before we declare that we will be able to see our cat in the back yard and MS is going to bring peace to the world! It may happen and we are all for it but it is just a little early to clean our hard drives and sit here for 3 or 4 years waiting it to happen.

According to all the content and interviews from the Global Preview event, this isn't looking like a "scenery simulator" at all. It has been stated several times that the flight dynamics will be updated and that the quality of the default aircraft will be much higher than previous versions of the simulator. They have been communicating the simulator's strengths and weaknesses well so far.

And nobody in this thread so far has suggested throwing out everything that has come before. Even the original poster has said that they're in it for the visuals alone, and will be keeping Prepar3D installed for any incompatible add-ons.

I'm not seeing any kind of worship for Microsoft Flight Simulator at all. Some users in other threads have said that they will stop using current simulators, but I can't blame them. Progress has stagnated extremely hard the last few years. If the visuals are what one is mostly after, it is easy to get bored with what we have now.

[Jim Young 2,356]

59 minutes ago, RioPilot said:

and a defense contractor like Lockheed Martin is simply never going to be in the business of making a truly commercial flight sim.

Prepar3D is based off of FSX ESP (Enterprise Simulation Platform).  This was being developed alongside the release of FSX and was being developed for the commercial side. Lockheed Martin is a Contractor for the Defense Department but they have non-Defense Department capabilities too.  FSX was released for the consumer side and licensed for home entertainment only.  We are fortunate Lockheed was able to purchase the Microsoft ESP licensing and continue development with what I understand are the original team developing Microsoft ESP and FSX.  Lockheed Martin is not developing anything.  It was already developed (FSX/Acceleration).  It is nice though they were able to move the application over from 32-bit to 64-bit making the sims stability 100% better than FSX/Acceleration.  They fixed a lot of bugs found in FSX.  I expect more updates of Prepar3D will continue as I doubt Microsoft is going to let Lockheed purchase the Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 licensing and they have contracts to fulfill.  I suspect you knew this as you indicated you were thankful Lockheed put some new life into the old FSX engine.  Me too!  

[Baber20 1,438]

2 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

The company that is still stumbling to get Windows 10 to work correctly, is going to make the perfect sim with no bugs... LOL. That's hysterical. 

Amazing logic.

[hychewright 46]

3 hours ago, RioPilot said:

I felt like it was worth quoting this post I made over a year ago in the Prepar3D forum regarding my disillusionment with Lockheed Martin's snail paced development progress.

Very well said RioPilot, could not have said it better! Well said indeed.

Edited October 13, 2019 by n4gix
Removed rediculously long quote!

[bonchie 2,305]

1 hour ago, shivers9 said:

That is the exact point! So far we know that MS has been working on a "scenery simulator". So why not wait until release before we declare that we will be able to see our cat in the back yard and MS is going to bring peace to the world! It may happen and we are all for it but it is just a little early to clean our hard drives and sit here for 3 or 4 years waiting it to happen.

We know far more about the new sim than just scenery. But ok.

[rjetster1 38]

Not to early for me... MSFS2020 and DCS... who could ask for anything more!