On 11/5/2019 at 11:45 AM, Christopher Low said:

The excitement is over. All those guys who said that they would not touch a flight simulator until the new MFS has been released are now busy flying in P3D or XPlane, and don't have time to visit the forums anymore because they are thoroughly enjoying themselves with two dead simulators that are no longer of any use to anyone

Exactly! I never claimed I'd stop using P3D, but I'm currently doing a delivery of a brand new DA62 from Austria to Denver, most of which based on the series of these videos! So much fun!

 

Thanks for keeping things clean Bill! 😊

Uninstalled P3D, got tired of waiting for Alpha after they told us we have to wait another month, playing new Escape from Tarkov patch currently

For the people playing RDR2, don't forget to look up to the skies from time to time. It's highly likely that a similar technique is used in RDR2 to render the clouds as in the new flight simulator. It is called "Volumetric Ray Marching" and you can read all about it here:

https://www.slideshare.net/guerrillagames/the-realtime-volumetric-cloudscapes-of-horizon-zero-dawn?ref=https://www.guerrilla-games.com/read/the-real-time-volumetric-cloudscapes-of-horizon-zero-dawn

 

Since you mentioned RDR 2 on the PC, if you hop on over to the RDR 2 subreddit you'll see that even people with top of the line hardware are having trouble running the game at 4K. The recommendation is to fall back to 1080p. This doesn't bode well for running MSFS on existing hardware, despite what's been stated by the developers.

1 hour ago, jabloomf1230 said:

Since you mentioned RDR 2 on the PC, if you hop on over to the RDR 2 subreddit you'll see that even people with top of the line hardware are having trouble running the game at 4K. The recommendation is to fall back to 1080p. This doesn't bode well for running MSFS on existing hardware, despite what's been stated by the developers.

I'm running RDR2 quite well on 1440p with settings on a higher quality setting (some medium, most high, few ultra). I have a 6700K (overclocked to 4.4 Ghz) with a GTX 980ti (not overclocked) so nothing very special anymore. I expect to be able to run MSFS on 1080p and hopefully 1440p with medium to high settings, at least I hope to be able to do that. But MSFS is using a totally different engine, so things could be better or worse, we'll just have to wait and find out. 

13 minutes ago, Raymond.Groenendijk said:

But MSFS is using a totally different engine, so things could be better or worse, we'll just have to wait and find out. 

My money is on “better”. 

Let’s not forget that Asobo was at least in part chosen by MS here because of their phenomenal proprietary engine

On 11/5/2019 at 2:29 PM, fs4fun said:

Those of us "unchosen" don't have much to talk about. We've already provided MS with a 40-page wish list. The chosen ones are NDA'd so can't say anything.

Actually......no. I'm one of the so called "chosen ones"  No-one has access to the build yet. We have ALL been told that the Tech Alpha 1 will not be downloadable until about 21st November (all being well). I can't comment about others who are Tech Alpha 1 candidates, but I have not been sent an NDA, nor have I been asked to acknowledge one anywhere.

In the true tradition of  many AVSIM members' philosophy of offering pure unadulterated speculation - I would not be surprised if there wasn't one either. This is a Tech Alpha 1 - and the whole world already knows that MS are building this simulator, so unlike a traditional Beta tester scenario, there isn't going to be a huge bunch to tell people that they don't already know. Not only that, we're mostly a bunch of amateurs - not "semi-professional" who are "testing" stuff that the authors want to keep a big secret from the competition. 

My guess is (more overt speculation 😎) that a lot of the feedback will be about technical performance which will be done by electronic data uploads, and compared with the DxDiags. Of course there will be scope for comments but those will (probably) be question/answers rather than free format to eliminate being flooded by endless wish-lists.

The truth is the alpha testing selection was a massive anti-climax.  Everyone had a date in their diary and dreamt of what could be, the date came and many didn't get in and even the ones who did still had to wait weeks.  Not a critisim of MS, I am glad they have given us target dates and weekly updates.

But I guess people realise that they can step back and get on with their lives as it will be a lot longer before they get their hands on this new sim.

3 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

Since you mentioned RDR 2 on the PC, if you hop on over to the RDR 2 subreddit you'll see that even people with top of the line hardware are having trouble running the game at 4K. The recommendation is to fall back to 1080p. This doesn't bode well for running MSFS on existing hardware, despite what's been stated by the developers.

I wouldn't jump to that conclusion. I'm running RDR 2 with the specs listed below in my sig line. The obvious bottleneck is the GTX 970 with just 3.5 GB usable VRAM.

I'm still tinkering with the settings in RDR 2, but I'm getting a steady average 34 fps in the game at 1920x1200 native monitor resolution. That's enough to enjoy the game. I'm not one of those "gotta have 60 fps or die" types.

Coincidentally, that's also the average FPS I get in the XP11 flight sim with my preferred balance of eye candy settings.

I imagine the target for the new MSFS after final optimization will be somewhere around the same 30's to mid-30's frame rate with my computer specs, and better if  you have a more up-to-date GPU with more VRAM. You can't market a game or a sim successfully these days that can't at least hit 30 fps on a medium-spec gaming computer, with whatever passes for "medium-quality" graphics settings.

2 hours ago, Paraffin said:

if you hop on over to the RDR 2 subreddit you'll see that even people with top of the line hardware are having trouble running the game at 4K. The recommendation is to fall back to 1080p. This doesn't bode well for running MSFS on existing hardware, despite what's been stated by the developers.

How does one manage to draw the conclusion that a poor performance on a shoot'em up game written by  RockstarGames will translate into poor performance on a flight simulator using totally different software techniques, written by a Microsoft team?