WebAssembly

[mSparks 2,086]

4 hours ago, tweekz said:

 

Why are you being so nitpicky with MSFS? After all, you are doing backflips if a sim provides stable >30fps with a city full of randomly placed and shaped cardboard autogen houses ...

actually 60fps.

So I can 

I'd do that flight in real life every day if I had ~€2000 a day to burn.

Since I don't I'll take the next best option.

I've got quite a lot of original flight sim material under my belt, a market of several hundred million users to sell it to, however much I dislike the windows platform, is fairly attractive.

Why does my devoting a little time to helping make sure MSFS2020 isn't another MS Flight trigger so many of you? Its almost like you take it personally.

Edited April 10, 2020 by mSparks

[MatthewS 761]

46 minutes ago, Noodle said:

This is what I meant by drama queens.

Like I said let's see if they actually deliver on what serious developers want. Frankly, I don't think they will (especially with the first SDK release), and I'd be very interested to hear what Milviz and WarpD say when they get the SDK.

[mSparks 2,086]

8 hours ago, Noodle said:

The comment directly addresses the drama queens in this thread who bleat on and on about "hollow promises" and the impossibility of creating high-quality addons.

Not really, firstly I've not seen any "drama queens", just a few people with development experience express displeasure at getting confirmation their wings will be clipped so Microsoft suits can ensure you can't install homebrew on the new XBOX/XBOX PC.

Secondly, this does nothing to address the impossibility of creating high quality addons, as was pointed out way back at the end of March/beginning of April

On 3/30/2020 at 10:18 AM, mSparks said:

This is going to stop at lua scripts, which can just about, maybe, be ported into WASM assuming it doesn't do any drawing, and losing about 95% of the performance of something like SASL.

On 4/1/2020 at 1:31 AM, mSparks said:

lua is the defacto standard systems language for every flight sim aircraft released in the last 5 years, so maybe it doesn't matter?

On 4/7/2020 at 5:49 PM, n4gix said:

JSON, XML, JavaSript and Lua simply are wholly inadequate for this kind of fidelity...

Edited April 10, 2020 by mSparks

[Amon1973 1,421]

9 hours ago, MatthewS said:

Like I said let's see if they actually deliver on what serious developers want. Frankly, I don't think they will (especially with the first SDK release), and I'd be very interested to hear what Milviz and WarpD say when they get the SDK.

A few developers have questioned Asobo's decision to use WebAssembly, more than 140 other developers have said nothing, at least publicly (and if they were all raising concerns, Asobo would surely change their plans regarding WA), surely if the use of WebAssembly was a serious and possible fatal mistake by Asobo, 3PD's would be leaving MSFS in their droves. Maybe other devs are more engaging with Asobo and can see how complex add ons are achievable within MSFS.

[MatthewS 761]

1 hour ago, eaim said:

more than 140 other developers have said nothing

Only Milviz and WarpD have broken the NDA (apparently).

 

1 hour ago, eaim said:

3PD's would be leaving MSFS in their droves

Sure, why would 3PDs announce that, more likely they are saying nothing and taking a "wait and see approach".

 

Do you actually trust Asobo's notion of "high-quality airplane add-ons" (mentioned in the April 9 update) means study level PMDG-like addons?  Like I said, words are cheap.

Asobo is releasing the SDK this week, let's see how much they've actually listened, hopefully Milviz and WarpD will comment. 

[Noodle 626]

You talk an awful lot for someone who thinks "talk is cheap".

[MatthewS 761]

6 minutes ago, Noodle said:

You talk an awful lot for someone who thinks "talk is cheap".

You "thrall me with your acumen".

[Amon1973 1,421]

20 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

Only Milviz and WarpD have broken the NDA (apparently).

 

Sure, why would 3PDs announce that, more likely they are saying nothing and taking a "wait and see approach".

 

Do you actually trust Asobo's notion of "high-quality airplane add-ons" (mentioned in the April 9 update) means study level PMDG-like addons?  Like I said, words are cheap.

Asobo is releasing the SDK this week, let's see how much they've actually listened, hopefully Milviz and WarpD will comment. 

Firstly if 3PD's couldn't develop complex add ons why bother with the sim, they may as well break their silence whilst possibly breaking any NDA, and for them to go back to their core sims, maybe they are very happy with how the new sim is progressing, and YES I do have confidence and trust Asobo's notion of high quality add ons just like it appears the like's of PMDG do.

[MatthewS 761]

2 minutes ago, eaim said:

Firstly if 3PD's couldn't develop complex add ons why bother with the sim, they may as well break their silence whilst possibly breaking any NDA

Did you consider there may be legal consequences for breaking the NDA?

 

3 minutes ago, eaim said:

it appears the like's of PMDG do

See above.

[mSparks 2,086]

18 minutes ago, eaim said:

why bother with the sim

I can think of 40 million reasons

paying/charging $130 for a very high quality interactive manual isn't really one of them. That market saturated some time ago.

Edited April 10, 2020 by mSparks

[jpc55 185]

13 hours ago, mSparks said:

Since I don't I'll take the next best option.

After watching that VR clip, (No offence intended) it looks like "word not allowed" to me!  JMPO

Edited April 10, 2020 by jpc55

[Amon1973 1,421]

22 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

Did you consider there may be legal consequences for breaking the NDA?

 

See above.

As you say apparently like Milviz and WarpD have, maybe they haven't, I don't know what agreements other Devs have with Asobo and neither do you.

If some devs believe that MSFS is just candy graphics and has a limited capability of running highly complex addons, and if talking about the possible limitations of the sim means that they say what they think and walk away from developing for it, I'm sure they would only criticise MSFS as long as doing so didn't attract some financial penalties going forward.

[MatthewS 761]

3 minutes ago, eaim said:

If some devs believe that MSFS is just candy graphics and has a limited capability of running highly complex addons, and if talking about the possible limitations of the sim means that they say what they think and walk away from developing for it, I'm sure they would only criticise MSFS as long as doing so didn't attract some financial penalties going forward.

Ok, so you just agreed with me, in your own convoluted way.

[mSparks 2,086]

19 minutes ago, jpc55 said:

After watching that VR clip, (No offence intended) it looks like "word not allowed" to me!  JMPO

if you want to jump over to that topic you should continue that conversation here

No 2d video will ever convey what you see with a headset on, it was just a performance test with basic scenery. so no offence taken.

Edited April 10, 2020 by mSparks

[zemez 184]

Thank god for the ignore -button.