Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Til19031986

A320neo depth in MSFS 2020

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Til19031986 said:

it would take them a lot longer than a year. An Airbus is just really complex to develop.

Effort (=complexity) and duration are not the same thing.

Let us assume that the effort to make a complex simulated Airbus is 50.000 hours.
Then

  • a single guy in a normal 9-5 job would need 30 years to do it
  • a team of 10 people would require three years 
  • and a team of 150 people could theoretically do it in three months (of course that doesn't work due to interdependent work items, so give them a year. And throw in direct access to Airbus specs, plus the DirectX and Windows development teams are just down the hall)

These addons only take so long to make because the companies creating them are small.

Best regards

Edited by Lorby_SI
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 11

Oliver Binder

LORBY-SI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

 Only a simmer like @FDEdev could  comment if not the alpha implementation at least what Asobo has made public,  but since he has been inducted in the alpha elite, he has made himself scarce (hint, hint😄).

The reason for my 'absence' is easy. There's a lot to test and discover in the new sim, so that there's very little time left for a second forum if you take alpha testing serious. 🙂

  • Like 6
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Noooch said:

Look at the world they created, Courchevel, Lukla etc...weather, GA aircrafts already in the sim, should I go on?

They are at least at the same level of the best 3rd parties on the market.

And I don't even mention the close partnership they got with manufacturers or their financial resources.

Ah. I misunderstood your remark about not believing them, I thought you meant you thought they wouldn't let 3rd party aircraft be included.


Prepar3D v5 | PMDG 737NGXu | FSLabs A320/A321 | www.united-virtual.com | ASUS Maximus XI Code Z390 | i9 9900K 5 GHz | Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32 GB DDR4 3600 MHz | GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 11 GB GDDR6 MSI Lightning Z | Windows 10 Pro 64 bit | Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB | Samsung 43'' 4K curved TV | HP Reverb 2 VR HMD | Agronn 737 Captain's Yoke | VKB Gladiator NXT Stick | FSC 737 Throttle Quadrant | Saitek Pro Flight Rudder Pedals

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Casualcas said:

I would hope that its NOT a "study level" aircraft. There are several simmers including myself that just dont care, dont have the time, the interest in learning complex systems to fly the bloody thing. Because I have no interest in becoming an Airbus pilot. If its half way between the stock fsx 737, and pmdg 737 I'll be extremely happy. I won't need anything more. Save that depth for people that want it and will pay for it. 

I completely agree. I am in the same boat, just do not have the time no desire to learn a hyper-realistic airplane. I am not looking to be type rated on the thing, just want a decent flying Airbus that has the "feel" correct. And by that I mean it should not feel like an F15 but should replicate the feel of an Airbus and its flight control laws to even the casual simmer.

By far the best example I can give of a middle ground is the excellent Zibo mod for Xplane11. This is a mod of the default B738 but you can fly it JUST like default (get in + go) or use realistic B738 procedures. The Zibo sits way way above other freeware B738s but below a PMDG in avionics depth (but its well on its way there). This is the kind of level that I feel the A320N that would be ideal in FS2020.

I did read that FS2020 will allow you to select the level and depth of realism so that will be nice.


i7 920 @ 3.00Ghz // GTX 1060 6GB // 12GB DDR3 // Win10 Pro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect it to be somewhat better than XP11 default planes while not being payware level. Perhaps the Aerosoft Airbus series comes to mind.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

i do expect it to be better than anything else that we have seen for a default airplane, specially on the graphics department. But it will not be a top in class study level aircraft. Big part of the success of any simulation platform is the ecosystem and they will not shoot on their foot. Also there are a number of people not interested in study level

There is no way they can develop the best weather, best aircraft best scenery of each region of the globe, etc for the license fee. They do need an ecosystem, developers providing best in class scenery, weather addons, aircraft, etc..

The base system must be better than what currently exists, BUT BETTER to make the business going, they do need payware ecoystem that will drive the platform forward and put the customers $$ onboard

Edited by mmerelles
  • Like 1

Manuel Merelles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Lorby_SI said:

These addons only take so long to make because the companies creating them are small.

Basically I agree, but there are items that need a little time to process.

I had that argument once with our beloved mSparks, where he stated that solving mathematical problems won't speed up by increased team size. I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. There are problems which just take time to solve and won't scale directly with team size, but the combined effort of experts certainly speeds things up. Team work nearly always pays off.

Another big advantage of MS is, that they have the ability to hire experts, if they would take too long to dig into complicated topics.

Edited by tweekz
  • Upvote 2

Want to improve control sensitivity in MSFS?
► Upvote official bug report: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/flight-control-sensitivity/184445

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MS and Asobo have previously stated that they want to make the best platform that they can. They’ve also stated that they want 3PDs to work with them and for the released sim. So it stands to reason to me that to best serve those two ends effectively requires at least one “test case” or “proof of principle” case to be developed in-house. Think of it as a pilot study (no pun intended). This would allow them to work out just how many features, systems, etc. are needed in a study level aircraft. It will help them develop the SDK to best cater for that level of development. Etc. In other words, it will help them provide the necessary software infrastructure for 3PDs to develop with and from, without them having to cludge together fixes to poor software as 3PDs have had to endure with past FS releases and their legacy weaknesses. Developing their own study level (or near study level) aircraft would be sensible software development practice if they want the best future proof platform. Of course it will have to be balanced with time and resources. But I think Asobo have a very serious vision for MSFS, attention to detail, technical ability and resources, commitment to seeing it done well. I have every confidence that they’ll produce something that is again, by definition, “industry leading”.

 

  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mmerelles said:

There is no way they can develop the best weather, best aircraft best scenery of each region of the globe, etc for the license fee. 

I'd agree with you if their plan was to make every aircraft ever made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it depends on what Airbus wants to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give a coder or 2 some quality time with just one engineer and a pilot and they can work wonders . People talk (and i include myself too ) without knowing who is working on this plane we at this stage simply don't know yet , In my opinion its a bit early to come to conclusions . 


Image removed as image is no longer available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, tweekz said:

Basically I agree, but there are items that need a little time to process.

I had that argument once with our beloved mSparks, where he stated that solving mathematical problems won't speed up by increased team size. I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. There are problems which just take time to solve and won't scale directly with team size, but the combined effort of experts certainly speeds things up. Team work nearly always pays off.

Another big advantage of MS is, that they have the ability to hire experts, if they would take too long to dig into complicated topics.

What kind of mathematical problems? They partnered with airbus, they have the parameters of the real aircraft, the devs (or coders if you prefer) just have to translate it to the language they are using on the sim. They dominate their engine and they can have access to what to need to make it work, why would they need to solve real-life mathematical problems?

Bugs can happen, sure, but it's not like they are trying to project or build the real aircraft.

As the others said, and I totally agree, it's not about if they can develop complex aircrafts on the level of a PMDG/FSLabs (they can, and they could do it really fast in my opinion), the real question here is if they have the intention to go that deep in the complexity. 

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be not as simple as injecting the parameters gotten from Airbus into a proprietary engine. The latter is new, designed for a wide variety of aircraft and a WIP. Just for the aerodynamics they have to place one thousand application points  and see the effects with a myriad of weather situations, jet engine regimes etc.  The complexity of the instrumentation also requires a huge amount of work.  They test their simulation engine while designing their aircraft.  This is kind of a two-way process. No black box where you enter the data and get the product at the other end.

As I said earlier I wonder what kind of partnership they have with Airbus which has presumably its own aircraft design simulator. Maybe more than buying a licence, more than getting parameters ?

This thread reflects what our community is, with its wide variety of expectations. Some will be happy with a toy, some  with a more convincing aircraft, some with the ultimate simulation. All together we make a large market .  It is good to voice these expectations for MS to hear but the dice are already cast.

I say MS and not Asobo.

 We always have to remember that Asobo is bound by a contract with Microsoft, they are a sub-contractor. They don’t do as they wish and even less as we wish. They have contractual obligations to release a well-defined product within a time frame. No, I do not have insider knowledge it is just  that business is like that.

The FS20 team (MS+Asobo) has indeed said that they wanted to focus on the platform and leave complex addons to 3PD . But where do they draw the border 😉 ? My only personal hope is that they give us something beefy to chew on. Define beefy.
 


 

 

  • Like 3

Dominique

Simming since 1981 - Prepar3D v3 on a 4770 @ 4.4 GHz and a 1080 @ 2560*1440 - Warthog HOTAS - MFG pedals -

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, ca_metal said:

What kind of mathematical problems? They partnered with airbus, they have the parameters of the real aircraft, the devs (or coders if you prefer) just have to translate it to the language they are using on the sim. They dominate their engine and they can have access to what to need to make it work, why would they need to solve real-life mathematical problems?

Things like general problems with aerodynamics simulation and incorporating the flight data into that sim for example. They are still working on the flight model. Implementing the fly by wire and autopilot logic could also be a hurdle to overcome.

Regarding the partnering. I don't know how far that goes. Sure they get a lot of info, but I doubt Airbus really hands them over their aerodynamics data.

Edited by tweekz
  • Like 1

Want to improve control sensitivity in MSFS?
► Upvote official bug report: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/flight-control-sensitivity/184445

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    28%
    $7,170.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...