4 hours ago, Milviz said:

Actually, I think you will find that it is a show stopper... it's single threaded... so that means if ALL of the threads are processing the world... and ONE thread is processing the plane.. it's gonna be a pretty simple plane.  No fun stuff like ADV or the OTHER one that starts with an A and ends with a M... and has the word SIM in it... That won't work either.  And those are some of the best GA ever. 

If all you'reinto is Care (last part of Tornado) then... sure.  That works.  But I have my doubts that you will be happy with aircraft that all fly the same, sound the same, work the same etc... with the only differences being that they don't look the same. 

I don't see webassembly being single threaded as a showstopper.  In one of the interviews the devs said that the plane with the flight dynamics, and the cockpit electronics and computers, and the weather systems, all together were only using 5% of a single core.  (This was last year)  So once again, if they can do it then why not others.  And if needed, they could put it on its own thread without the weather system.

And I don't understand how that means all planes would be the same.

Lastly, I thought that threads were added last year.  https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2018/10/wasm-threads

8 hours ago, n4gix said:

Matthew, all of the lovely "glass avionics" in MSFS is scripted in XML with a bit of Lua used for functions XML doesn't support, or doesn't support well.

Thank you Bill, to bring your stone without the bickering which has come as a parasitic noise over this otherwise interesting discussion. A clear explanation if any.

6 hours ago, Milviz said:

I have my doubts that you will be happy with aircraft that all fly the same, sound the same, work the same etc... with the only differences being that they don't look the same. 

I'd be concerned in a big way.  But, again, this is your call.  I think you'll be bored in no time.

Pretty heavy stuff you say in your last  posts, that seems in contradiction with the Asobo/MS posture to develop a sim targeted to hardcore simmers. No real complexity feasible in Fs20 aircraft, do I understand it correctly ? 

Don’t make me wrong, I have not the technical knowledge nor the access to the alpha to assess what you say, in a way or another, and I take it in as I would of a more positive comment.  I appreciate the honesty. Time will tell. 

Just observing your bring here a capital info which shatters  a bit what we were not only assuming but what was said by Asobo so far. That would deserve a comment, direct or indirect, from Neumann or Wloch !

BTW, don’t be too cryptic for the common folk reading this forum half awake  at breakfast 😁 like  the OTHER one that starts with an A and ends with a M... and has the word SIM in it. You mean Accusim ? 

Edited April 4, 20206 yr by domkle

On 4/3/2020 at 1:46 PM, devgrp said:

I would take what Rob says with a grain of salt. Don't you know Rob is p3d evangelist. It's funny how some of these guys have all the answers and have never developed an addon and trying to tell established developers how to do their jobs 🙄. And as you say hide behind an nda. 

I'll be concerned if big addon devs complain after release. Till then, I am happily looking forward to MSFS getting released first. 😄

Edited April 4, 20206 yr by tweekz

 

3 hours ago, tweekz said:

I'll be concerned if big addon devs complain after release. Till then, I am happily looking forward to MSFS getting released first. 😄

What do you call a developer ? The only developers I know for sure in this thread are those who have put a FS product on the market : Oliver, Ed, Milviz, Bill, Steve. 

I read them carefully. Most of the posts were quite interesting if always convincing.

The thread came, in the last 10-odd posts to the real meat IMHO

I find hard to believe that high fidelity avionics will be impossible in FS20. It may require new skills, starting products entirely from scratch which might be costly for the developers but I doubt that MS would put on the market a product that would be a regression in terms of aircraft complexity  to what the FS family has been so far, as Milviz has alluded to in his last post. 

Developers may not be happy to have to invest anew instead of shoehorning their old products into the new sim. I understand that. But as an user, nay as a paying customer, I do not look forward to old aircraft tweaked  into the new sim anyway.   

 

 

 

Edited April 4, 20206 yr by domkle

2 hours ago, domkle said:

What do you call a developer ? The only developers I know for sure in this thread are those who have put a FS product on the market : Oliver, Ed, Milviz, Bill, Steve.

I wasn't refering to the devs here in the forum. It was more like the big guys like PMDG, FSLabs, Aerosoft (yeah, I know, publisher) ... you get it. If they can't manage to create quality content, then I'd be concerned.

 

2 hours ago, domkle said:

Developers may not be happy to have to invest anew instead of shoehorning their old products into the new sim. I understand that. But as an user, nay as a paying customer, I do not look forward to old aircraft tweaked  into the new sim anyway.

That's what I suspect as well. I cannot believe MS will limit devs to low quality addons. I too think that it will require them to build from scratch. Of course devs won't be happy. But honestly... I prefer to get native content anyway. 😉

18 hours ago, Lorby_SI said:

It was my impression that the glass cockpits and most gauges are HTML now?

I should have included a qualifier to my previous post, that my observations are based on what has been revealed so far. I have no way of knowing what -if any- difference "glass avionics" might be rendered in the jet aircraft under development.

Yes, HTML will likely be used, just as it has been used these last few years in FSX/P3D by a clever programmer who's posted his work at FSDeveloper.com...

On 4/4/2020 at 9:31 AM, domkle said:

Pretty heavy stuff you say in your last  posts, that seems in contradiction with the Asobo/MS posture to develop a sim targeted to hardcore simmers. No real complexity feasible in Fs20 aircraft, do I understand it correctly ? 

The contradiction is really simple.

Asobo just want to build a great flight simulator.

Microsoft just wants to sell rent lots of xbox games to the minecraft generation at minimal development cost with maximum control over distribution. Even if that means limiting 3rd party devs to livery addons and some simple custom calculations Microsoft will win.

Edited April 5, 20206 yr by mSparks

On 4/4/2020 at 6:31 PM, domkle said:

Pretty heavy stuff you say in your last  posts, that seems in contradiction with the Asobo/MS posture to develop a sim targeted to hardcore simmers. No real complexity feasible in Fs20 aircraft, do I understand it correctly ?

Based on the posts of 3rd party devs seems like FS2020 currently can't support the types of "study level" add-ons we are used to in P3D.

If that's the case then FS2020 is little more than "eye-candy" and I certainly won't be wasting a cent on it.

I'm looking forward to P3D v5 now.

IMO Asobo have mislead the hardcore community, letting us think that FS2020 is a successor to P3D but it's clearly not. 

Shameful!  

I guess we should have expected this from Xbox developers.

 

39 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

Based on the posts of 3rd party devs seems like FS2020 currently can't support the types of "study level" add-ons we are used to in P3D.

If that's the case then FS2020 is little more than "eye-candy" and I certainly won't be wasting a cent on it.

I'm looking forward to P3D v5 now.

IMO Asobo have mislead the hardcore community, letting us think that FS2020 is a successor to P3D but it's clearly not. 

Shameful!  

I guess we should have expected this from Xbox developers.

 

😂😂 I'm going to go out on a limb speculate that MS/Asobo is using this WASM as some type of a sandbox to protect the integrity of the sim. Remember how some addons would misbehave and crash the entire sim? I think this is a way to prevent that in a way of not letting the devs port over bad code. They'd be able to port basic and not too complex stuff (to bring stuff over faster instead of writing from scratch), but complex avionics etc would have to be re-written. 

If this is the case then I was have to agree with them. I'm sure nobody wants to have an addon like GSX / coutl crashing the sim because of poorly written code.

23 hours ago, tweekz said:

That's what I suspect as well. I cannot believe MS will limit devs to low quality addons. I too think that it will require them to build from scratch. Of course devs won't be happy. But honestly... I prefer to get native content anyway

Yes thats what I think is happening. With all the work that Asobo is putting into the little things, why on earth would they not be able to do complex systems? I'm sure this is a way to keep these lazy devs from porting over bad code. If the want complex systems, they'll have to write new code based on the new sdk/apis

For all I’ve seen and all they’ve said so far, I really doubt we won’t see complex/study level aicrafts on this sim.

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).

6 hours ago, mSparks said:

Even if that means limiting 3rd party devs to livery addons and some simple custom calculations Microsoft will win.

I'll quote you on that. 😉 I am sure PMDG jumped ship at XP and P3D just to develope livery quality addons. That sounds legit.

9 minutes ago, tweekz said:

I'll quote you on that. 😉 I am sure PMDG jumped ship at XP and P3D just to develope livery quality addons. That sounds legit.

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

With no "acedemic" licence to boot.

Will you recognise that I spotted that wrench first?

Edited April 5, 20206 yr by mSparks

8 minutes ago, mSparks said:

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

With no "acedemic" licence to boot.

Will you recognise that I spotted that wrench first?

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

1 hour ago, MatthewS said:

Based on the posts of 3rd party devs seems like FS2020 currently can't support the types of "study level" add-ons we are used to in P3D.

If that's the case then FS2020 is little more than "eye-candy" and I certainly won't be wasting a cent on it.

I'm looking forward to P3D v5 now.

IMO Asobo have mislead the hardcore community, letting us think that FS2020 is a successor to P3D but it's clearly not. 

Shameful!  

I guess we should have expected this from Xbox developers.

 

I followed your interventions and appreciated the good questions you rose here as a non FS dev. , Matthew. But I do not draw the same conclusion than you from this thread (among other things). But at least you don't have any agenda.

The 3rd party dev have a vision dictated by their short term business interest. They are obviously upset that recycling the old products and know-how (including hacks) in the new sim, as they did from FSX to P3D, will be difficult if possible. There is nothing wrong in that. They also want to send messages by making a little drama. Nothing wrong again. C'est la vie.

But, for many reasons, I don't buy at all that designing entirely new high fidelity addons will not be possible. These are smart guys, They will find ways. And if they don't,  others will. Loved Bill's post about HTML in response to Oliver.  The whole history of flight simulation has been built like that. By smart programmers hacking they way (pun intended) into an unknown environment. 

You like big words Matthews 😉. Remember the sloped runways ? Stop the drama.  Don't be too hasty. And don't bring back the BS about the Xbox. You know better than that.   

 I do look forward to v5 too to compare. I am sure that the dev community is much more at ease to work in (what I supposed to be) the old framework  than in totally new programming environment.

 

 

 

Edited April 5, 20206 yr by domkle