WebAssembly

[mSparks 2,086]

21 minutes ago, tweekz said:

You are a smart guy. Just totally biased unfortunately. 😞

Not particularly biased.

I throw criticism and praise where I think it is due. xplane has had plenty of criticism from me, I even have a fair few XPD's that made it into release notes over the last few years. You dont get nice things by whitewashing problems.

one of my very first posts on the org was a preamble to XP11.50, end of 2016 iirc. might have been 2017.

XP11.50 is everything I have been waiting for since then.

19 minutes ago, domkle said:

But, for many reasons, I don't buy at all that designing entirely new high fidelity addons will not be possible

If they force webassembly on the consumer build of msfs2020, high quality addons of the type you are thinking of will be restricted to the commercial use version ala ESP.

The Microsoft guy during the dev interview made it clear from day one that they do not want to have an expensive 3rd party addon market for consumer msfs2020, aka they want all that cash for themselves.

Edited April 5, 2020 by mSparks

[Milviz 919]

Yup.  See above.

[n4gix 4,947]

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

And if p3d v5 is based on msfs2020....

It is not and never will be. I know that for a positively sure and certain fact!

[CaptMatto 238]

I've been popping in and out following this thread and watching some people get hot under the collar.

Have I missed any other information regarding web assembly other than what was posted on the March 12th Update?

Quote

The SDK is now being used by over 50 companies and hundreds of programmers and artists. We have spent time listening, discussing and learning from our 3rd party developers, and we are working closely with them to keep improving the tools. The new aircraft editor is close to being finished with several improvements to the workflow. We also made lots of progress on WebAssembly support, which is the technology that will allow the porting of native code to our platform. We are excited to share what we developed with our partners within the next few weeks.

Several 3^rd parties have started to share the roadmaps with us and we happy to report that dozens of planes and airports are in development and we are hopeful that quite a few of them will be ready by the time our new simulator is released.

I've been pretty much following all public posts from MS/ASOBO and I have taken away that they want to work with developers to make a platform they can use. I took from the post above that Web Assembly is a way that 'old' fsx code can be run in the simulator? I believe as they mentioned they are also developing tools, e.g. aircraft editior and scenery (I'm pretty sure we say that in one video)

One problem with getting information such as their statement is that it allows people to post 11 pages worth of discussion over a single paragraph (unless there is more info out there) and naturally a massive game of chinese whispers ensues.

If we stand back and look at the press releases to date Asobo are developing a sim that is not only a major step change in the graphic department but also in the fidelity of the underlying sim. They have talked about ground friction, wind affected by moutains, better and more realistic aerodynamics and more.

I would be very surprised if this same team decided that they couldn't be arsed to build or allow a way for higher fidelity aircraft to be built.

Will developers have to develop new code, probably. From a user (parting from hard earned cash) standpoint would I want old FSX code running on the sim, probably not. I want the new shiny stuff.

I'm certainly interested in what Web Assembly support gives us! Doing a bit of reading around the subject as a web developer anyway.

Quote

How WebAssembly works

WebAssembly, developed by the W3C, is in the words of its creators a “compilation target.” Developers don’t write WebAssembly directly; they write in the language of their choice, which is then compiled into WebAssembly bytecode. The bytecode is then run on the client—typically in a web browser—where it’s translated into native machine code and executed at high speed.

WebAssembly code is meant to be faster to load, parse, and execute than JavaScript. When WebAssembly is used by a web browser, there is still the overhead of downloading the WASM module and setting it up, but all other things being equal WebAssembly runs faster. WebAssembly also provides a sandboxed execution model, based on the same security models that exist for JavaScript now.

Right now, running WebAssembly in web browsers is the most common use case, but WebAssembly is intended to be more than a web-based solution. Eventually, as the WebAssembly spec shapes up and more features land in it, it may become useful in mobile apps, desktop apps, servers, and other execution environments. (https://www.infoworld.com/article/3291780/what-is-webassembly-the-next-generation-web-platform-explained.html)

My worry is that there are quite a few people within the forum that are just wanting for FS to fail as did the last abortive iteration.

My personal opinion.

Wait and see.

 

[GlideBy 324]

Can we not let mSparks derail another thread with his FUD, wild conjecture, unsupported information, and most importantly, his tendency to bring up things unrelated to the topic.  

[n4gix 4,947]

15 minutes ago, Matt Barraud said:

I've been pretty much following all public posts from MS/ASOBO and I have taken away that they want to work with developers to make a platform they can use. I took from the post above that Web Assembly is a way that 'old' fsx code can be run in the simulator? I believe as they mentioned they are also developing tools, e.g. aircraft editior and scenery (I'm pretty sure we say that in one video)...

The problem Matt is that what Asobo/MS have written and stated is substantially different than what has been written and stated to the prospective developers.

Contrary to what you suspect, the vast majority of 3rd party developers want MSFS to succeed, as it's very announced development has nearly bankrupted many, as current sales are not meeting current expenses, much less ongoing expenses while waiting for MSFS to actually reach a release date.

In addition to the above, the current massive unemployment during this global pandemic has resulted in extreme FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) making a bad situation ever so much worse...

Edited April 5, 2020 by n4gix
Fix fumble-fingered typing errors!

[mSparks 2,086]

24 minutes ago, n4gix said:

It is not and never will be. I know that for a positively sure and certain fact!

Well someone is going to be handling the commercial simulation, if not Asobo nor LM, who? PMDG? - that would be a coup d'etat.

[CaptMatto 238]

2 minutes ago, n4gix said:

The problem Matt is that what Asobo/MS have written and stated is substantially different than what has been written and stated to the prospective developers.

Contrary to what you suspect, the vast majority of 3rd party developers want MSFS to succeed, as it's very existence has nearly bankrupted many as current sales are not meeting current expenses, much less ongoing expenses while waiting for FSMS to actually reach a release date.

In addition to the above, the current massive unemployment during this global pandemic has resulted in extreme FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) making a bad situation ever so much worse...

Ok, that, I can understand.

It would be interesting to know how far that divergence is.

I can share everyones feelings regarding FUD.

Best wishes
 

[MatthewS 761]

4 hours ago, devgrp said:

complex avionics etc would have to be re-written

Nice theory, but according to the 3rd party devs posting here, complex avionics are not possible currently with Asobo's WASM implementation.

 

4 hours ago, ca_metal said:

If 3rd parties of current simulators can’t/don’t want to do it, I’m sure others will fill-in the gaps (Asobo/MS may themselves release extra complex aircrafts as add-ons/DLCs).

Dream on... Yeah sure I'll just wait another 3 years for someone to release PMDG-like addons for FS2020.  

 

4 hours ago, domkle said:

They will find ways. And if they don't,  others will.

I'm only interested in PMDG add ons.  Without those FS2020 is not that interesting for me.

 

4 hours ago, domkle said:

You like big words Matthews 😉. Remember the sloped runways ?

I guess you don't understand the difference between "sloped" and "undulating". Still not seen any evidence of undulating runways in FS2020 for "generic" (non-iconic) airports.  Have you? If so, can you post me a link please.

 

3 hours ago, mSparks said:

The Microsoft guy during the dev interview made it clear from day one that they do not want to have an expensive 3rd party addon market for consumer msfs2020, aka they want all that cash for themselves.

Hmmm... Can you post a link to this interview?

 

2 hours ago, n4gix said:

The problem Matt is that what Asobo/MS have written and stated is substantially different than what has been written and stated to the prospective developers.

Exactly... What Asobo first promised is not what they have so far delivered (according to the 3rd party devs posting here).

Edited April 5, 2020 by MatthewS
added "for "generic" (non-iconic) airports"

[ca_metal 2,024]

51 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

Dream on... Yeah sure I'll just wait another 3 years for someone to release PMDG-like addons for FS2020.

Well, the last we heard from PMDG was they were working to bring their NGX to MSFS2020, so there’s no reason to believe they won’t have it ready ASAP. They’ve already promised a discount for people that bought the P3D version of the plane.

If PMDG decides not to follow the development, you will still have P3D to stick to. I know I would still move to the new sim, I don’t really need PMDG. I would wait for new devs to the develop the planes I want, for the new platform.

[MatthewS 761]

41 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

Well, the last we heard from PMDG was they were working to bring their NGX to MSFS2020, so there’s no reason to believe they won’t have it ready ASAP. They’ve already promised a discount for people that bought the P3D version of the plane.

That was months ago I think... what are their plans now? 

 

I think this statement from n4gix sums up the "new reality" perfectly....

4 hours ago, n4gix said:

The problem Matt is that what Asobo/MS have written and stated is substantially different than what has been written and stated to the prospective developers.

 

[ca_metal 2,024]

14 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

That was months ago I think... what are their plans now? 

 

I think this statement from n4gix sums up the "new reality" perfectly....

 

Until they (PMDG) update their plans, I guess they are still working on that. So why bother now? If they cancel that project, then you would have a reason to forget MSFS2020 and stick to P3D.

I respect what N4gix thinks/concluded, but I'm not concerned that the sim will fail until I see it released for, let's say, 2 years and no good airplanes being released for it.

I will repeat with other words what I've said before, where some developers will find insurmountable obstacles, others will see opportunities.

P.S: The SDK is still in alpha release. Would be that hard to wait until we can make definitive conclusions?

Edited April 5, 2020 by ca_metal

[Dominique_K 10,149]

13 hours ago, n4gix said:

 

Contrary to what you suspect, the vast majority of 3rd party developers want MSFS to succeed,   

 No Bill, I do not suspect them to be suicidal 😉 ! And the 3PD of this thread are not a vast majority of this community anyway (without discarding the fact that some others share their concerns).

At that point, the thread that I naively and imprudently started 😋 calls for some basic questions.

Have Asobo and MS to adapt their toolset and architecture to accommodate the programming skills and pet peeves of the 3PD and their strong desire to release fast older products in their present difficult cash situation or do the 3PD which want to board the FS20 flag ship should acknowledge that it is a whole new environment and adapt ? 

Asobo is obviously at a crucial point in the development of the platform. Should they focus all their energy to stabilize it and respect their deadlines or focus on improving an embryonic SDK to cater to the wishes (even legitimate) of the 3PD community ?   

 Will using the public as a leverage on MS, by saying that study level addons are impossible in the FS20 environment, do anything to help ?

It is highly probable that we won't have any 3PD hifi aircraft at release. Like with any other version of the MS family of sims. I note however the conspicuous silence of PMDG, A2A and FSL  No news, good news ?  Regarding, A2A, I found mighty strange the Milviz allusion to Accusim. Not really appropriate.

 

13 hours ago, n4gix said:

It is not and never will be. I know that for a positively sure and certain fact!

I can't wait for 2021, the year the Three Sims War started. Better than Intel vs AMD. Time to hoard the popcorn.

 

 

 

Edited April 6, 2020 by domkle

[mSparks 2,086]

10 hours ago, MatthewS said:

Hmmm... Can you post a link to this interview?

guy far right is from microsoft, "we want to do everything else except airports" is an answer to another question.

Edited April 6, 2020 by mSparks

[MatthewS 761]

20 hours ago, mSparks said:

The Microsoft guy during the dev interview made it clear from day one that they do not want to have an expensive 3rd party addon market for consumer msfs2020, aka they want all that cash for themselves.

 

6 hours ago, mSparks said:

guy far right is from microsoft, "we want to do everything else except airports" is an answer to another question

 

Ok I watched the video link you posted.   I'm very sorry, but IMHO you're totally incoherent... Maybe English is not your first language?

Where exactly in the video did "The Microsoft guy during the dev interview made it clear from day one that they do not want to have an expensive 3rd party addon market for consumer msfs2020"?

Maybe you'd like to quote his exact words and also give the minute/second mark he says this?