14 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

What would be helpful to me is to see a large airliner fly at 250kts below 10,000ft down to a landing at 130kts. I want to see how well the scenery is updated. Three demos, one with an internet speed of 30Mbps+, a second at 10Mbps and a third at 2Mbps.

The Cessna-style demos are all lovely but how much does tooting along at 120kts really push the system?

The 748 update would definitely bring more airliner gifs to media updates in my opinion but I agree a full flight with varying internet speeds to see the scenery updating in action would be awesome. 

What I'm worried about is, what will happen when the Azure servers have to stream to ten thousands or maybe hundred thousands of users...

Will everything start to stutter or loose frames? It has never been tested before, only hundred users of so.  I know these servers and their connection to the web are incredible fast, but everything has it's limit. The bandwidth per user is not small like with a Google search server.

Edited May 14, 20206 yr by MaVe64

38 minutes ago, MaVe64 said:

What I'm worried about is, what will happen when the Azure servers have to stream to ten thousands or maybe hundred thousands of users...

Will everything start to stutter or loose frames? It has never been tested before, only hundred users of so.  I know these servers and their connection to the web are incredible fast, but everything has it's limit. The bandwidth per user is not small like with a Google search server.

I think nothing will happen 🙂 Ten or hundred thousand users isn't so big load for servers like Azure. VOD services (youtube, netflix etc.) or maps services (Bing, Google etc.) has a much more users in one time and much bigger data traffic. And you must remember, that only a photogrammetry areas will generate a big data stream, not other areas without photogrammetry.

Ray's right is seeing what higher airspeeds will do to the graphical representation. However, will the sim have any military fast jets in it? If so then drop below 500 feet, go supersonic (Tornado IDS and others), and then see how the graphics hold up 

6 hours ago, HighBypass said:

Ray's right is seeing what higher airspeeds will do to the graphical representation. However, will the sim have any military fast jets in it? If so then drop below 500 feet, go supersonic (Tornado IDS and others), and then see how the graphics hold up 

I think we all know what will happen, it cant handle it, all feel free to yell at me, but thats what i think will happen. And i dont think any computer on the market can handle it.

Edited May 14, 20206 yr by OHN767

15 minutes ago, OHN767 said:

I think we all know what will happen, it cant handle it, all feel free to yell at me, but thats what i think will happen. And i dont think any computer on the market can handle it.

If that’s the case then why is it not mentioned on the top alpha issues??... Alpha testers will be putting the A320 through its paces be sure of that, an no mention of it not being handled by their systems/broadband.

39 minutes ago, OHN767 said:

I think we all know what will happen, it cant handle it, all feel free to yell at me, but thats what i think will happen. And i dont think any computer on the market can handle it.

I'm not so sure if it will not cope with the graphics when flying  a supersonic aircraft or not, but modern programming techniques are now capable of amazing things, watch what the new Unreal Engine 5 can achieve, Asobo are using state of the art techniques, so even if MSFS cannot achieve graphical imagery like in the linked video, it probably will in the future.

 

2 minutes ago, eaim said:

I'm not so sure if it will not cope with the graphics when flying  a supersonic aircraft or not, but modern programming techniques are now capable of amazing things, watch what the new Unreal Engine 5 can achieve, Asobo are using state of the art techniques, so even if MSFS cannot achieve graphical imagery like in the linked video, it probably will in the future.

That dynamic lighting is a game changer....They are also using  some of the same techniques as they mention 3D scanning of assets which is what Asobo have done with the cockpits.  

9 minutes ago, Carts85 said:

They are also using  some of the same techniques as they mention 3D scanning of assets which is what Asobo have done with the cockpits.  

Several games have done that over the years it's not a new technique, but they usually need to heavily optimize the results, but unreal's new renderer I guess makes it so you can keep more of the detail.

Edited May 14, 20206 yr by Tuskin38

4 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

Several games have done that over the years it's not a new technique, but they usually need to heavily optimize the results, but unreal's new renderer I guess makes it so you can keep more of the detail.

I didn’t say it was a new technique 😉.... Just a technique in common with unreal. The point is this is leaps and bounds ahead of what we’ve seen for a flight sim so people should raise their expectations on what this should be capable of.

9 hours ago, MaVe64 said:

Will everything start to stutter or loose frames? It has never been tested before, only hundred users of so. 

As has been mentioned, similar things have been done many times. Netflix has over 180 million users streaming HD and 4K video 24/7, for example. The only issue would be Asobo/Microsoft not properly provisioning enough Azure servers and data centres.

8 hours ago, goates said:

As has been mentioned, similar things have been done many times. Netflix has over 180 million users streaming HD and 4K video 24/7, for example. The only issue would be Asobo/Microsoft not properly provisioning enough Azure servers and data centres.

True, but video streaming is different. Video uses buffering, so when there is a short drop in bandwidth you don't notice it. MSFS has to be real time, with low latency, especially when flying low over detailed landscape, Azure will have to deliver say 30 frames every second without any buffering. If it can't deliver a frame on time, you'll start seeing micro stutters. Buffering would fix this, but then the latency is too high and everything would lag behind.

At least that's how I see it.  

50 minutes ago, MaVe64 said:

True, but video streaming is different. Video uses buffering, so when there is a short drop in bandwidth you don't notice it. MSFS has to be real time, with low latency, especially when flying low over detailed landscape, Azure will have to deliver say 30 frames every second without any buffering. If it can't deliver a frame on time, you'll start seeing micro stutters. Buffering would fix this, but then the latency is too high and everything would lag behind.

At least that's how I see it.  

MSFS isn’t streaming frames though, just the scenery data. The sim is still being rendered on your PC, like P3D and X-Plane are now, and will cache data when it can, as well as likely trying to load data ahead of where the plane is flying. Low level, high speed flights might be an issue, but the user could pre-download these areas to save offline.

Thanks, makes sense.

5 hours ago, MaVe64 said:

True, but video streaming is different. Video uses buffering, so when there is a short drop in bandwidth you don't notice it. MSFS has to be real time, with low latency, especially when flying low over detailed landscape, Azure will have to deliver say 30 frames every second without any buffering. If it can't deliver a frame on time, you'll start seeing micro stutters. Buffering would fix this, but then the latency is too high and everything would lag behind. 

I think you are confusing here what will be project xCloud, which allows to play games that are in fact running on a remote server so, for example, playing MSFS on a smartphone/tablet, or a PC with very low specs, or an nVidia Shield, etc. That would have such kind of requirements of constant bandwidth and small buffering to prevent lagging behind.

That's not how MSFS will work normally. The scenery will still be rendered entirely locally, the Azure servers are just a repository of photoreal scenery, which will be of course fully buffered locally, not unlike Google Maps or Bing.