October 24th 2019 - Development/Insider Update

[SierraHotel 974]

12 hours ago, KillerKlient said:

Ye I know, but my point is not a single light on the sky scrapers is turned on.  In reality there would be a decent amount of them on in big cities (would expect half of them at least).  Doesn't matter how well it is shown, but they need to be on!

And that girl & guy, coming out of the office block! I mean who wears brown shoes with a black suit!!! Jeeeeeeeeesssss! Yes I am joking, for goodness sake! This is a PRE ALPHA build.

[Grindathotte 46]

Does this mean we will get flight cancellations?

[Spit40 197]

Its beyond comprehension how all this can be computed real time. There are some super talented people at Asobo - lots of them too. When this is released it will capture the world’s attention and there will be ‘The making of...’ documentaries about the incredible effects. 

[Grindathotte 46]

I wonder how much of the processing is done in the cloud and how much still has to be performed locally?

[b737800 470]

It's starting to get so real that I dare not refuse to leave my seat if I'm on a United flight.

[pmb 5,137]

7 hours ago, dmiannay said:

Michael - I worked in the Aeronautics Sector of LM for 36 years (retired 2016) with the last 15 or so in leadership and was never aware of any animus between LM and MS.  We used many MS tools and high-end IT expertise across many programs with never a hint of relational or commercial problems.  I'm honestly curious... please enlighten me.  If you'd prefer, just message me so we don't take this thread down a rabbit trail.

But this is exactly what I wanted to express, but maybe didn't get right as I am not a native English speaker: LM and MS are interconnected by a whole lot of projects and programs in very different areas which would be a good base for making them partners in the simulation field, as long as both benefit. At least that's what I understand.

3 hours ago, Lorby_SI said:

Why would Microsoft support the development of a competing platform? Don't you think that MS would prefer to make their own entry in the more serious training market?

In my experience there are no friends in business. "Business is War".

No objections against that last sentence, however I see (at least) two reaons for MS to be interested in Prepar3d:

- While non of us knows the contracts, I take it for sure LM has to pay license fees to MS for using the original ESP IP. This is easy earned money as MS doesn't have to do anything, just count the money.

- MS could license the new (Azure/Photogrametry) technology to LM, which would again be easy earned money and bring them more return out of their investment into R/D. Moreover, MS could give them access to the servers, that means paid acceess of course, and payment for commercial contractors would be certainly on another level than for hobbyists. 

So, in the end, this could be of advantage for both sides. But of course this is all speculation, and if you don't like the idea just don't buy it.

Kind regards, Michael

(As a sidenote: I understand this question is rather off-topic here, thus no more replies from my side on it.)

[Lorby_SI 2,036]

 

20 minutes ago, pmb said:

- While non of us knows the contracts, I take it for sure LM has to pay license fees to MS for using the original ESP IP. This is easy earned money as MS doesn't have to do anything, just count the money.

- MS could license the new (Azure/Photogrametry) technology to LM, which would again be easy earned money and bring them more return out of their investment into R/D. Moreover, MS could give them access to the servers, that means paid acceess of course, and payment for commercial contractors would be certainly on another level than for hobbyists. 

1. That is how all software works, especially for Microsoft. And so? (I would think that it was a one-time, lump-sum purchase. But as you say, we don't know)

2. Again - why do that? "Easy money" - they would empower a competitor too, and give up a market segment that is prepared (pun) to pay a lot more per solution than a gamer will. Where exactly is the advantage for MS?

And from a customers perspective - what is the point? Both platforms would look identical, so why bother buying one over the other? They will both be just as compatible or incompatible to the old world. Maybe even worse for P3D, where all the advances that were made in the last 10 years would probably have to be dropped to go back to basic ESP compatibilty before incorporating "the new". P3D and MSFS may have the same (grand) father, but they have very different mothers. They are about as similar as two children of that ancestry would be. 

Best regards

Edited October 25, 2019 by Lorby_SI

[Scottoest 1,561]

Hello - recent lurker, and first-time poster. 🙂

I am starting to wonder how many planes they plan for the final shipping release, because I can't help but notice that their gameplay videos consist of the same handful of planes every time.  I'm obviously sure they have more planned than what we've seen, but if this game is planned for 2020 release, you'd think they'd have more at a stage of completion where they were ready to show them off - especially when it's just for pre-recorded b-roll or whatever, where they have complete editorial control over what is seen.

I'm also interested to see how their terrain streaming and performance holds up when flying faster jets, versus the slower GA footage we've seen this far.

The sim looks incredible, and I keep waiting for some inevitable "catch" that hasn't come yet.

[Sartanius 399]

51 minutes ago, pmb said:

But this is exactly what I wanted to express, but maybe didn't get right as I am not a native English speaker: LM and MS are interconnected by a whole lot of projects and programs in very different areas which would be a good base for making them partners in the simulation field, as long as both benefit. At least that's what I understand.

Glad I misunderstood... and you do have some interesting points.  Appreciate your insight, my friend.

[Sartanius 399]

1 hour ago, Flamingpie said:

Not a word though about historic weather... hopefully we'll get that option because 9 out of 10 times I don't fly with the sim at the current time and it would be a bit odd or at least a pity to have real time winter night weather while I am flying at an historic summer's day. 😉 Of course I could use a weather preset all the time but then I'd miss out on the dynamic weather changes. So please MS, add historic weather!!! (And if not, I am sure the Active Sky guys will come up with something. 😉 )

This matters to me as well since my tube liner sim sessions are mostly within the last 24 hours.  Historical weather is just data, so even if the capability isn't there at release, I don't see this being a huge issue down the road.

Edited October 25, 2019 by dmiannay

[Sartanius 399]

4 hours ago, irrics said:

Graphical eye candy and the types of enhancements that MSFS is brining don't really appear to be of obvious benefit to LM's type of simulation usages anyhow.

For the most part, this is spot-on.  Totally different target population and training objective. 

However, I do see full Level-D flight sims incorporating visuals like we're seeing in MSFS, especially focused around mission rehearsal.

[F737MAX 5,534]

🙋‍♂️ hello

9 minutes ago, Scottoest said:

Hello - recent lurker, and first-time poster. 🙂

I am starting to wonder how many planes they plan for the final shipping release, because I can't help but notice that their gameplay videos consist of the same handful of planes every time.

Better to show the same models as they are probably the most developed and it allows them to keep more aircraft under wraps for a big reveal.

I'm ok with fewer default aeroplanes though. For me, a handful of more detailed ones is preferable to lots of mixed quality. P3D has far too many that I'm just not interested in, so I removed most of them.

 

1 hour ago, domkle said:

Activate closed captions 😉. He said that pouring real data in the sim engine gives you the same clouds that you see in a RW weather picture or so I understand.

CC isn't perfect with David's or Lionel's accents. He said "how we pour this in the menu of the game and how you can actually see the exact same clouds in-game."
(Can't believe I had to translate that for a french speaker 😉)

From that statement, I imagine that there will be a graphical representation of weather in a weather-specific menu, followed by it being recreated while flying.

[Superdelphinus 718]

Of all the add-on developers, HI Fi are amongst my very few favourites, so I hope they can survive and find a space to fill in the new sim. Who knows, maybe they have been one of the partnerships they’re going to announce at some point. 

[viz 139]

7 hours ago, Avidean said:

Is that a Cloud? I would have said that's Aurora?

It does look similar, though auroras are produced by a very different mechanism.

[Superdelphinus 718]

14 minutes ago, dmiannay said:

For the most part, this is spot-on.  Totally different target population and training objective. 

However, I do see full Level-D flight sims incorporating visuals like we're seeing in MSFS, especially focused around mission rehearsal.

I agree to an extent, but new generations into commercial training programmes are going to expect/ benefit from greater fidelity and immersion, I would argue. 
 

one thing I was wondering is that with photogrammetry could you remove individual buildings? Just thinking of the military applications in being able to do that.