MSFS 2020 Addon quality

[mSparks 2,086]

35 minutes ago, tweekz said:

Do you actually have loss of cabin pressure in your home cockpit?

simulated pretty well, when the world inside VR completely fades to black. Had to manually add oxygen to the (free) EUFI because it was an old version that didn't have it.

positive/negative Gs work pretty well to, you do "feel it" when your vision turns red.

fairly good example of that here (just after timestamped 8.29):

Why? Are you starting to think MSFS2020 addons wont be able to compete anytime soon?

Edited January 29, 2020 by mSparks

[tweekz 2,165]

6 hours ago, mSparks said:

Why? Are you starting to think MSFS2020 addons wont be able to compete anytime soon?

I was just joking considering how over the top accurate it has to be. 😉 You don't have a actual pressurized tube at home?

Compete with what?

MSFS2020 has to fail on a lot of promises to not be regarded the #1 sim.

As for VR. Well, I guess there will be VR support. Personally I don't care as it's just too inconvenient for me. But I am happy for everyone who draws joy out of it.

Edited January 29, 2020 by tweekz

[tweekz 2,165]

43 minutes ago, mSparks said:

Well, at this point, while there are lots of potential answers to that question, I'd say they are really going to be competing with themselves/FSX. No sign of them even making a start on the (enormous) Mac/Linux/Mobile market.

I will only focus on this point, cause the rest is going too much into the classic "MSFS bad bad" direction and is probably not healthy for this thread..

It depends on what you call enormous. Yes, X-Plane has a large number of Mac Users. Linux is almost irrelevant. But by far the most are still using Windows.

35.2% Mac Users
1.14% Linux Users

http://dashboard.x-plane.com/#os-heading

[Doug47 574]

slightly less awful flight model than a sim made roughly 20 years ago. 

 

I didn't know I was in the comedy section. 

 

[virtuali 4,421]

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

 

Who are already used to and have installed

As that video description indicates, that's not realtime, and it's externally post-processed and color graded.

[mSparks 2,086]

4 hours ago, tweekz said:

But by far the most are still using Windows.

aiui their largest revenue comes from mobile sales, which they use to fund desktop development (and dont publish numbers for) 

4 hours ago, tweekz said:

MSFS bad bad

Assuming you meant MSFT.

Not at all. VSCode is absolutely phenomenal, VS studio is very good (just no real market for windows programs these days and far too much piracy), Excel and Word are still essentials (even though they are absolutely awful), at least for now.

Halo is among the best FPS series in the recent decade.

I do have very low expectations after waiting patiently for hololens for over 5 years now and at this point it seems even they have no real faith in ever delivering what they promised.

MSFS2020 with 3rd party mods, and VR would be phenomenal. It would make me buy an xbox, I would give it the time of day. doesnt even need a decent flight model.

locked down gamepass $10+ a month, no VR, graphical mods only or any combination of these and it will be as dead to me as my playstation plus subscription.

3 hours ago, virtuali said:

and it's externally post-processed and color graded.

No it wasn't. Reshade is a free open source in-sim mod that gives you color shading options while you fly. with a large number of presets depending on the "mood" you want the lighting.

Works with pretty much any windows game

https://reshade.me/

just not windows store/gamepass games, where mods are not allowed...

https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/xbox/forum/all/is-there-any-way-to-use-reshade-with-xbox-game/50a7336d-b7a7-4f81-b8ec-71f3c4a96439

Quote

• Xbox Ambassador

Reshade is unauthorized software, and as such might not work with games bought from the Microsoft store or from game pass for PC. All you can do is try it. You will know then if it works or not.

 

....

As stated in the first response, using this software would be going against the forums guidelines as well as the Xbox terms of use /Service Agreement

 

Edited January 29, 2020 by mSparks

[virtuali 4,421]

18 hours ago, mSparks said:

No it wasn't. Reshade is a free open source in-sim mod that gives you color shading options while you fly. with a large number of presets depending on the "mood" you want the lighting.

You seems to fail to understand what I wrote, which is a sentence made with two parts, the video is not realtime (1), and it's externally post-processed (2)

 

1) The video is NOT REALTIME. This is out of the question, and clearly confirmed by the video own description, which says:
 

Quote

Forgive me for the oddly synced audio in some portions, I used a very unorthodox method of obtaining this footage

....

Pretty soon Xplane 11.5 will be out on a new engine (Vulkan) and it'll allow for people to achieve the visuals you see in this video in real time!

The audio is not in sync, because he captured the audio in real-time ( of course ), and the video separately, at a different frame rate, to fake the 60 fps.

And, the author assumes that, maybe, with Vulkan, it might be possible to achieve in real-time what is being shown in this video. Clearly indicating what I've said, that is not real-time.

 

2) I said it's "externally post-processed", and the video description says:
 

Quote

But I also used an external application called "reshade" for the colors

So yes, it IS externally post-processed with Reshade ( we all know what Reshade is, thank you ), and IT'S NOT real-time, exactly as I've said. The two are separate and not mutually excluding.

[mSparks 2,086]

5 minutes ago, virtuali said:

The audio is not in sync, because he captured the audio in real-time ( of course ), and the video separately, at a different frame rate, to fake the 60 fps.

its a replay of the flight. you can tell its a replay because the instruments act funky.

flights "in sim" can absolutely be made to look exactly like that while you fly.

just there will be lots of times when its less than 20fps (every time you see the instruments jump in the replay) and trying to screen record such high settings makes it absolutely unflyable (and without using an external capture program doesnt capture audio)

Its also how you get different views without having to worry about them while you fly (desyncing the audio). 

So what do you mean by "not realtime"? if he had recorded a shot of his screen "realtime" with a 60fps 4k camcorder it would look identical, just with some screen glare and made switching views while flying the approach even harder.

18 minutes ago, virtuali said:

it IS externally post-processed with Reshade

"externally post processed", to me implies he took the video and used video editing software to do some kind of "jurassic park" effects to it. That is not what reshade does. 

22 minutes ago, virtuali said:

And, the author assumes that, maybe, with Vulkan, it might be possible to achieve in real-time

less than 20fps messes with time (simulated flight becomes "not realtime" - like max payne "bullet time") and can play havok with the flight model. 

Its not an assumption that vulkan allows much higher gfx settings without triggering time distortion, its in testing now and there have been hard numbers for months. 

 

[virtuali 4,421]

10 hours ago, mSparks said:

its a replay of the flight. you can tell its a replay because the instruments act funky.

Yes, it's a replay, nobody is questioning that, but the actual flight wasn't made a 60 fps.

 

Quote

So what do you mean by "not realtime"? if he had recorded a shot of his screen "realtime" with a 60fps 4k camcorder it would look identical, just with some screen glare and made switching views while flying the approach even harder.

Nope. The X-Plane video recorder can be set to 60 fps, but it does that by making the sim slowing time and, guess what, IT DOESN'T RECORD AUDIO, that's why he had to syncronize it separately, the audio from the "real" session, and the video from the replay.

 

Quote

Its not an assumption that vulkan allows much higher gfx settings without triggering time distortion, its in testing now and there have been hard numbers for months. 

We can give the benefit of the doubt, and hope Vulkan would allow 4K/fps with *that* airplane, *that* weather, and *that* scenery, on an old i7-7700 with 16 GB and a double GTX 1070. I kind of doubt it, but let's assume it's true.

However, fact is, that video is NOT realtime, as I've said.

Edited January 30, 2020 by virtuali

[vortex681 806]

10 hours ago, mSparks said:

"externally post processed", to me implies he took the video and used video editing software to do some kind of "jurassic park" effects to it. That is not what reshade does. 

But it is what happens to many YouTube videos. Post-processing in games happens after the image is generated but before it's sent to the monitor. That's what Reshade does - it's external to the game. Many modern games have optional post-processing routines built into in the game code.

Edited January 30, 2020 by vortex681

[mSparks 2,086]

5 hours ago, vortex681 said:

it's external to the game.

no more "external" than any other addon. It injects shaders, which changes how things are drawn in realtime in 3d. 

5 hours ago, virtuali said:

However, fact is, that video is NOT realtime, as I've said.

The video is realtime, its the flight it was recorded from that was not.

The video is 6 minutes 26 seconds long. "realtime" that is how long the landing would take.

Actually flying it in sim would have taken more like 9 or 10 minutes, because sub 20fps slows down time.

Vulkan will allow those graphics to be achieved in realtime - i.e. the flight run in a realtime of 6 minutes 26 seconds.

Nothing directly to do with the video or sim fps. Everything to do with at 10fps one simulated second takes two real seconds.

Edited January 31, 2020 by mSparks

[virtuali 4,421]

8 hours ago, mSparks said:

no more "external" than any other addon. It injects shaders, which changes how things are drawn in realtime in 3d. 

That's external, by every possible definition.

 

Quote

The video is realtime, its the flight it was recorded from that was not.

The video is 6 minutes 26 seconds long. "realtime" that is how long the landing would take.

Actually flying it in sim would have taken more like 9 or 10 minutes, because sub 20fps slows down time.seconds.

Precisely my point.

The video is not a representation of an actual flight, as if XP could achieve constant 4K/60p on that hardware, which surely can't. That would mean a "video in realtime", which this is NOT.

When you configure the XP video recorder to any frame rate higher than what the simulator can really achieve in realtime, it will playback the instant replay at a slower speed, so all timings will be correct when played back at the final video frame rate. 

That's precisely why, when the XP video recorder works in this mode, it doesn't record audio ( so he had to re-sync it with the audio from the real session ), since it won't "slow down" audio, as it does with the simulation.

 

Quote

Vulkan will allow those graphics to be achieved in realtime - i.e. the flight run in a realtime of 6 minutes 26 seconds.

Precisely my point: assuming it WILL ( which is a big IF on THAT system ), it's clearly and finally proving ( as if the audio issue wasn't enough ), what I keep saying: THAT video is NOT REALTIME.

If the video was made in realtime, there author wouldn't have said "Pretty soon Xplane 11.5 will be out on a new engine (Vulkan) and it'll allow for people to achieve the visuals you see in this video in real time!"

Edited January 31, 2020 by virtuali

[mSparks 2,086]

 

39 minutes ago, virtuali said:

so times becomes "real" again, when playing back at a frame rate higher than it was.

absolutely no disagreement here, so not sure what you think I don't get.

39 minutes ago, virtuali said:

The video is NOT realtime

What time is it then? If it was sim time, it would ~10 minutes long, if not more.

You don't seem to get that being able to:

Quote

achieve the visuals you see in this video in real time!

has nothing to do with recording the video or its framerate.

and everything to do with

at 20fps and higher simtime equals realtime

at 19fps and lower simtime does not equal realtime

Edited January 31, 2020 by mSparks

[virtuali 4,421]

54 minutes ago, mSparks said:

 

absolutely no disagreement here, so not sure what you think I don't get.

You said the video was realtime, I said it's not. Since it clearly isn't, I'm glad you finally admitted it, now.

 

Quote

What time is it then? If it was sim time, it would ~10 minutes long, if not more.

You don't seem to get that being able to:

has nothing to do with recording the video or its framerate.

and everything to do with

at 20fps and higher simtime equals realtime

at 19fps and lower simtime does not equal realtime

Again, you are just making my point.

When you kept saying "the video is realtime", it sounds as if you tried to imply X-Plane, today, can be used at 4K/60fps, so it can be just recorded with a camcorder, which clearly is not the case.

THIS means "the video is NOT realtime", and I don't think anybody else could understand otherwise.

X-Plane on my 2080 Ti, with all sliders to the right, at KSEA default scenery with a default Cessna and no add-ons, runs at about 15 fps. By saving an instant replay, with the video recorder set to 60 fps, I CAN produce a video that, when played back at 60 fps, will result in realistic timing, because the instant reply was played back 4 times SLOWER when it was recording. With no audio, of course.

Can I call my video "realtime" then ?

Edited January 31, 2020 by virtuali

[mSparks 2,086]

29 minutes ago, virtuali said:

"the video is realtime"

The video is "realtime"

but it is not recorded in realtime.

Do you really not see the difference?

Furthermore, and the whole point of

Quote

achieve the visuals you see in this video in real time!

Has nothing at all to do with recording a video at 40fps, 60fps or even 120fps

Its that the sim running at less than 20fps does not run in realtime. 120kts while at 10fps is "realtime" 60kts.

29 minutes ago, virtuali said:

runs at about 15 fps

The video in my first post was recorded in realtime using simplescreenrecorder, in VR I generally hold 60fps no problem on a GTX1070 and a 2700k without shadows.

29 minutes ago, virtuali said:

2080 Ti

should have no problems getting those visuals at greater than 20fps in 11.50, given thats as good as it gets, and in 11.50 any

Quote

decent machine should be able to run full autogen + scenery shadows at 30 fps.

 

Edited January 31, 2020 by mSparks