Looks Great but....

[F737MAX 5,699]

17 minutes ago, Pluto7777 said:

Looks indeed fantastic, any advice from the experts here ?  should we stop to invest more money in P3D addons from now on ? Or not ?

I'm no expert.

Buy whatever you want or don't buy anything.
Your budget permitting, it is entirely your decision.
 

[Paul Golding 92]

25 minutes ago, Pluto7777 said:

Looks indeed fantastic, any advice from the experts here ?  should we stop to invest more money in P3D addons from now on ? Or not ?

Nobody invests (yeah, I wish people would stop using that word 🙂 )in P3D. 

We choose to spend money on add-ons that increase our enjoyment of it.  If you see something you'd like to use in P3D, go ahead and buy it because you'll get maybe a year or more of enjoyment from the purchase.

With things like the NGUx being released and the AS CRJ and A330 close to release, who on earth would choose not to buy and enjoy now as opposed to instead hoping that one day they'll get to buy (or upgrade) to a newer version in a new sim?

[RALF9636 1,981]

40 minutes ago, B777ER said:

I would be very surprised if MS is able to replicate both fsuipc and LINDA and all the functionality they provide, especially LINDA which I use with my VRi Insight MCP2. 

If I am not mistaken both FSUIPC and LINDA are developed by one or two persons each, who do that in their spare time.

I highly appreciate their work and I can't imagine using P3D without their products.

 

But I am confident that the 100+ software engineers who are currently working fulltime on MSFS do have the skills to implement all that into the new sim easily.

MS / Asobo surely know about all the utility addons that are widely in use by most simmers to compensate for the deficiencies of P3D. I am confident that all those utility addons will be obsolete with regard to MSFS.

 

Edited November 18, 2019 by RALF9636

[B777ER 2,489]

17 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

If I am not mistaken both FSUIPC and LINDA are developed by one or two persons each, who do that in their spare time.

I highly appreciate their work and I can't imagine using P3D without their products.

 

But I am confident that the 100+ software engineers who are currently working fulltime on MSFS do have the skills to implement all that into the new sim easily.

MS / Asobo surely know about all the utility addons that are widely in use by most simmers to compensate for the deficiencies of P3D. I am confident that all those utility addons will be obsolete with regard to MSFS.

 

Hope you're right. 

[MattNischan 3,809]

19 hours ago, tarere said:

Second and most importantly, an ATC engine will inevitably deliver very poor ATC experience, whatever the level of wasted ressources you throw at it. That is because ATC, with the very exception of CPDLC, is a human thing and can't be reproduced in AI at this stage of technlogy.

This is just not true at all. If anything, programming an ATC at this stage of technology is exceedingly possible, especially with a team of Asobo's size. There's nothing even particularly complex about it. All ATC is is a queue of airplanes in physical space, with directional vectors. It's the kind of task that is exceptionally well suited to a computer, especially in the case where the other airplanes are also AI. It gets a little harder with multiple humans, but not impossible.

Even voice recognition, once no better than a cheesy trick, is now hugely robust. I can take open source speech libraries and get real time speech recognition with an error rate on par with a human. And if you take the power of the cloud into account, you get even more options.

Really, the hardest part to an ATC implementation is not at all algorithmic. It's in the data. You have to build all the nav points and procedures into some kind of DB and that has to be the same DB that is used in the sim itself, to keep the ATC synchronized and remove the issue of 3rd party ATC being out of sync with the navdata (obviously things like Navigraph can be the bridge there, but it needs to be standardized).

Going back to the topic, FSUIPC itself is not the way forward. The way forward is to have an API in the SDK that allows a SDK consumer to register controls and their associated control type with the simulator; the same can be said of data outputs, where an API should exist to register pipes or sinks that other SDK consumers can read. That would not be an enormous effort at all, in my estimation. Unity and Unreal both have the ability to register named controls of varying types. The more difficult part of that is how to integrate it into the UI successfully.

By the way the developers have mentioned hardware control integration on a few off-hand comments, my guess is that the SDK will eventually have this capability. It's hard to tell what the SDK will support on launch day, though. I have a feeling that will be an evolving piece right up to and following initial launch.

-Matt N

[tarere 45]

3 hours ago, MattNischan said:

There's nothing even particularly complex about it. All ATC is is a queue of airplanes in physical space, with directional vectors

That is a strong statment, you are not a rw pilot, are you ? You did not read my post at all. ATC is all but that. You forgot the real world ATC description I gave, not the theoretical one. Just refer to my whole post for that.

3 hours ago, MattNischan said:

Really, the hardest part to an ATC implementation is not at all algorithmic. It's in the data. You have to build all the nav points and procedures into some kind of DB and that has to be the same DB that is used in the sim itself, to keep the ATC synchronized and remove the issue of 3rd party ATC being out of sync with the navdata

Ok nor are you a software developer. Navdata is actually the easiest part. I mean the part you do not even think of. You do know a global navdata cycle is published every 28 days for IFR operations ? And that this data is all the same for every IFR planned flight ? From private to airlines ? From your Garmin GNS430 to a  Honeywell  FMS in a Boeing ? You do know that ? You do realize that navdata is materialized by the simplest CSV (plain text) file you can think of ? Name, GPS position, procedure, etc.

Talk about the Dunning-Kruger effect, this is absolutely insane. Flying over a cuckoo's nest here at Avsim forums.

[smoothchat 99]

6 hours ago, B777ER said:

But I am confident that the 100+ software engineers who are currently working fulltime on MSFS do have the skills to implement all that into the new sim easily.

IMHO, there will always be room for 3PD enhancements as we cannot reasonably expect the MSFS developers to include absolutely every feature of highly specialised utilities such as FSUIPC and LINDA.

The real effort we can realistically ask for, is that the devs expose as many inner workings of the sim as possible so that any shortcomings (and future great ideas) can be addressed by "plugins". 

X-Plane does this with datarefs that can be accessed by LUA scripts.

MSFS could probably use Simconnect and VBScript or similar.

Edited November 18, 2019 by smoothchat

[joseg175 33]

Only on AVSIM... a new flight simulator that pushes and destroys the previous boundaries in terms of rendering engine, weather, flight dynamics, partnerships with all the great aircraft manufacturers, scenery, mesh, water colors and oceans, and someone still decides to post a thread with the title of “Looks great but...”. Incredible. A person who has never flown the sim for a millisecond has the nerve to do that. It’s the sole reason why flight sim developers usually never project release dates and unlike other software rarely publish alphas and betas open to public. It’s the constant nagging and whining over the smallest details that never apply to the majority. Look at the PMDG forum.. you have so called die hards crying over the fact that they will never buy a PMDG product because PMDG will stop supporting a platform (P3D) that runs on an engine released in 2007! (FSX). Yea fine many of us spent hundreds of dollars of not thousands over the period on addons... that’s life in the 21st century. New iPhones every year we all buy them. Point is if you refuse to pay more and upgrade hardware for a new sim that looks 1,000 times better than anything currently out; don’t do it and keep your thoughts to yourself it’s 2019 how else are we gonna move the platform forward. What should MS wait another 10 years until the cheapos still using FSX decide to upgrade their PCs at the expense of everyone else?? No way.  All I know is I’m tired of billboard 2d clouds awful lighting bad frame rates terrible water colors cheap flight models on lookup tables bad ortho bad auto gen that never fits the scenery. I end my tirade thank you 

Edited November 18, 2019 by joseg175

[MattNischan 3,809]

5 minutes ago, tarere said:

Ok nor are you a software developer.

I am a professional software developer of 15 years, currently a lead architect of a large scale distributed system with 500k+ lines of code. And yourself, sir or madam?

Yes, the flat data is not hard to parse. That wasn't my point at all. The data needs to be synchronized with the available world data and merged together so that you aren't flying approaches into buildings that existed when the world data was made but no longer exist and thus the approach has been revised. You can't fly into airports that don't yet exist on the map, runways that have not yet been commissioned, etc. All of these things need to be taken into account when creating a simulation for the public.

14 minutes ago, tarere said:

you are not a rw pilot, are you ? You did not read my post at all.

I am not. I read your post fully.

All the factors you described, mistakes, controllers with different pacing, other pilots with the same, all of that is simulatable. Whether or not a "worthwhile" or "valuable" ATC experience requires those things seems self evident. Clearly many folks, myself included, find an even more basic ATC experience than the one I described, with full voice control, valuable and entertaining, therefore it has value to them. To dismiss such value because it doesn't ring hardcore enough to you is an elitist take at best. Basic ATC adds a ton of fun, and a more advanced ATC with voice control and a more organic experience is well within reason to build. I'll tell you a secret, though: most of the sim community doesn't want to yell into a headset.

I have flown VATSIM on a number of occasions and found the phraseology that I learned using the basic FSX ATC to be directly translatable to VATSIM, so much so that I don't recall having a ton of trouble flying into a crowded KDEN on during primetime on a Saturday evening in the 737. And it was a really, really short final. And approach never handed me off to tower. We all managed just fine.

-Matt N

[Skywatcher 133]

3 minutes ago, joseg175 said:

Only on AVSIM... a new flight simulator that pushes and destroys the previous boundaries in terms of rendering engine, weather, flight dynamics,

How would you know any of this?

Let people speak freely. Not only speak if they are pushing your opinion.

Only at AVSIM.

[joseg175 33]

2 minutes ago, Max50 said:

How would you know any of this?

Let people speak freely. Not only speak if they are pushing your opinion.

Only at AVSIM.

I know this from what they’ve released and all the trusted flight sim reviewers that I’m sure you have used in the past to judge products that posted videos of their experience when they were flown to Renton. Also I’m not the one posting looks great but.. threads without ever flying the sim which results in another pointless thread being created 

[Skywatcher 133]

7 minutes ago, joseg175 said:

I know this from what they’ve released and all the trusted flight sim reviewers that I’m sure you have used in the past to judge products that posted videos of their experience when they were flown to Renton. Also I’m not the one posting looks great but.. threads without ever flying the sim which results in another pointless thread being created 

Until the product is finished you don't know what issues there will be with the rendering, with the presentation or if you'll get more than 5fps on an average system from the lovely terrain.

People are running their old sims using historic weather. MSFS will come out with what is essentially a fixed Jeppesen.

Flight dynamics, who exactly has flown all the planes to give this feedback?

What it all boils down too is we know nothing so comments for or against are valid.

Edited November 18, 2019 by Skywatcher

[joseg175 33]

Exactly my point running their OLD sims using “historic” “weather”(2D billboards) sounds good man I hope FSX can keep you through the next decade enjoy

[Skywatcher 133]

16 minutes ago, joseg175 said:

Exactly my point running their OLD sims using “historic” “weather”(2D billboards) sounds good man I hope FSX can keep you through the next decade enjoy

I use FS9

[B777ER 2,489]

1 hour ago, joseg175 said:

Only on AVSIM... a new flight simulator that pushes and destroys the previous boundaries in terms of rendering engine, weather, flight dynamics, partnerships with all the great aircraft manufacturers, scenery, mesh, water colors and oceans, and someone still decides to post a thread with the title of “Looks great but...”. Incredible. A person who has never flown the sim for a millisecond has the nerve to do that. It’s the sole reason why flight sim developers usually never project release dates and unlike other software rarely publish alphas and betas open to public. It’s the constant nagging and whining over the smallest details that never apply to the majority. Look at the PMDG forum.. you have so called die hards crying over the fact that they will never buy a PMDG product because PMDG will stop supporting a platform (P3D) that runs on an engine released in 2007! (FSX). Yea fine many of us spent hundreds of dollars of not thousands over the period on addons... that’s life in the 21st century. New iPhones every year we all buy them. Point is if you refuse to pay more and upgrade hardware for a new sim that looks 1,000 times better than anything currently out; don’t do it and keep your thoughts to yourself it’s 2019 how else are we gonna move the platform forward. What should MS wait another 10 years until the cheapos still using FSX decide to upgrade their PCs at the expense of everyone else?? No way.  All I know is I’m tired of billboard 2d clouds awful lighting bad frame rates terrible water colors cheap flight models on lookup tables bad ortho bad auto gen that never fits the scenery. I end my tirade thank you 

You are classic example of one of the person's seeing the visuals of MS2020 and forgetting everything else like I mentioned in my original post. Sad.  The numerous "smallest details" added up all together is what makes a great sim. If you can't see that, frankly I don't care.