May 14th, 2020 - Development Update

[ryanbatc 12,819]

2 hours ago, KenG said:

Depends on what you play. Last brand new big game I downloaded was 50GB. So this is more than double.

I've got Call of Duty on my machine and installed size with patches is 179GB.  Textures....  it is what it is.

[KenG 492]

So at the minimum 5mbs bandwidth it will take someone 2 days of continuous downloading without the typical interruptions you get.  This single game will most likely bust some people's fair use agreements with ISPs. Even at 20mps you are most likely still taking the better half of a day to download.

Not all of us are fortunate enough to have Fiber to the house.

I can't even imagine how long it is going to take for the average user to download purchasing on launch day.

So yes a flash drive would be an acceptable method of delivery considering how inexpensive a flash drive is. I would pay extra for the convenience. 

[2reds2whites 827]

On 5/15/2020 at 4:11 AM, JSilva said:

Hate to be that one guy, but doesn't Madeira seem a little off. While I praise Asobo for depicting Madeira better than FSX and appear closer to how it is in real life, the runway appearance doesn't seem accurate to me. The start of both runways are supposed to be light gray in color rather than be the same as the entire runway. In addition, the runway number should be where the threshold markings are. In this case, there should be three lines to the left and right of the runway numbers each.

Also, doesn't the runway look too undulated. I hope these are only overdone just to prove some guy wrong about sloped runways, but in real life while Madeira does have sloped runways, I'm pretty sure it's not undulated to that extreme. From the perspective of the second Madeira screenshot, the runway platform is supposed to be completely flat (0.0%) from 191ft, then after the platform the runway slopes downward 0.8-1.0% (still somewhat flat most of the way but is sloped) to 146ft according to LPMA charts from November 2018. I looked at the 4/23 screenshot (the one from simtom112) of what I believe is Madeira, and the runway sloping (at least for runway 5) appears normal to me (save probably the trees).

And finally the trees. I'm pretty sure they're either bushes or small trees on the right of the runway (from the perspective of the first Madeira screenshot). Just, the height of the tree (on the right) should never reach the runway height. I think the inclined plane on the left is fine though. Just pointing out what I believe are discrepancies from what I remember and from a few images of the airport. As someone from Madeira, I really want Asobo to get Madeira right.

The runway undulation isn't extreme at all. That's what sloping runways look like from the cockpit. You're end on and the undulations are very obvious.

As for the runway colour/markings/the occasional bush, feel free to correct these things when the sim is released! Large elements of the design of these airports is entirely procedural. They absolutely cannot adjust these small parameters for each airport and still bring us a sim within the next 5 years. It's just not how the process works. The aim of the sim should be to give a reasonable representation (which it absolutely is) which can be improved upon using the tools of the sim (which it looks like you absolutely can).

[Anthracite 131]

43 minutes ago, KenG said:

So at the minimum 5mbs bandwidth it will take someone 2 days of continuous downloading without the typical interruptions you get.  This single game will most likely bust some people's fair use agreements with ISPs. Even at 20mps you are most likely still taking the better half of a day to download.

Not all of us are fortunate enough to have Fiber to the house.

I can't even imagine how long it is going to take for the average user to download purchasing on launch day.

So yes a flash drive would be an acceptable method of delivery considering how inexpensive a flash drive is. I would pay extra for the convenience. 

In the U.K. at least, average download speed is 54Mbps (according to ofcom) That’s roughly 7MB/s.  If the size is as described on the previous pages that means the average U.K. user would take a little over 4 and a half hours. Given that they often allow you to download games before they release, so that it’s installed or ready to install on launch day I imagine the average person is in a good place. At least in the U.K.. 

I’m in the U.K. and my download right now is about 380Mbps, which is around 48MBps, so for me, it will be about 40 minutes. 
 

where I used to live - one of the areas with the worst average download speed of 20 or so Mb/s, that’s about 2.5MB/s. That’s roughly 13 hours. So leaving it on overnight, or whatever.

Really it’s a non issue for the average internet user. The problems will arise for people not measuring up to the average   or who have data caps. I’m sure they can work something out in this day and age though, I think a lot of people here are living in the sticks or under a rock lol.

[JSilva 42]

4 hours ago, 2reds2whites said:

The runway undulation isn't extreme at all. That's what sloping runways look like from the cockpit. You're end on and the undulations are very obvious.

As for the runway colour/markings/the occasional bush, feel free to correct these things when the sim is released! Large elements of the design of these airports is entirely procedural. They absolutely cannot adjust these small parameters for each airport and still bring us a sim within the next 5 years. It's just not how the process works. The aim of the sim should be to give a reasonable representation (which it absolutely is) which can be improved upon using the tools of the sim (which it looks like you absolutely can).

For the runway appearance, you do have a point. I can always edit these properties if I wanted to. Then again, I honestly don't believe it's impossible for Asobo to make these changes. One of the changes in the change log mentions runway surface types, so I have no doubt if they wanted to, they can. Plus, they confirmed about 80 airports in the simulator are going to be detailed, and while LPMA hasn't been confirmed to be a detailed airport, I think the chances of it being on the list is high considering LPMA isn't exactly an obscure airport. It's known for being a tricky airport to land on (in fact, it appeared on a few top 10 airports that are dangerous to land on). That, and the infamous runway platform that has been around since 2000. I understand where you're coming from with the aim for the sim being a reasonable representation. As said a few times, they did a good job with LPMA since they got the surrounding terrain right, and the runway structure being there (even for default, this is already a major positive). Compare that with FSX default, and you'll see what I mean. In fact, even if LPMA isn't going to be a "detailed" airport, I'll still take the MSFS version over FSX (and even XPlane 11) any day.

However with the undulated runways, I completely disagree. I can't comment with the other airports, but I can talk about it with Madeira. Thing is I can even see a little bit of undulations on the runway platform on the second screenshot. I am certain this should be flat, because I find it hard to believe a man-made structure such as this was designed to undulate. The other airports you can perhaps argue, but not Madeira because half the runway is built on a platform, not on land. Even ignoring the runway structure and talking about the other parts of the runway, this still doesn't undulate that much in real life. I've flown to Madeira and out multiple times, and I can attest that I never saw undulation to the same degree as the screenshots from the cabin. I even looked at cockpit videos, and still couldn't see any undulation. The only time I saw it is slightly before the runway platform starts. I would argue the April 24 screenshots are more accurate with runway undulations in Madeira than the screenshots we're seeing in this update.

This may be a useless detail, but during the late 90s when building the runway platform, the runway was redone (originally, runway 5/23 was 6/24), so there was a bit of land work going on. I saw a video showing Madeira airport pre-extension and I still couldn't see any undulation no matter how hard I try, even in the 70s. If the runway wasn't undulated back then, I doubt the runway would become undulated after the extension 20 years ago. There aren't many videos or screenshots of Madeira Airport before the extension, so I couldn't find one with a cabin or cockpit.

Edited May 16, 2020 by JSilva
Grammar

[Scottoest 1,561]

13 hours ago, KenG said:

That will most likely keep me from participating even if invited. I really hope they find a way to deliver it, because 116 GB download is unsustainable. 

Unfortunately unlikely Ken.  100GB+ is a very common install size for a lot of games these days. even on console.  When you're talking about something as big in raw terms as MSFS, that number is only likely to get bigger.

[Scottoest 1,561]

8 hours ago, KenG said:

So at the minimum 5mbs bandwidth it will take someone 2 days of continuous downloading without the typical interruptions you get.  This single game will most likely bust some people's fair use agreements with ISPs. Even at 20mps you are most likely still taking the better half of a day to download.

Not all of us are fortunate enough to have Fiber to the house.

I can't even imagine how long it is going to take for the average user to download purchasing on launch day.

So yes a flash drive would be an acceptable method of delivery considering how inexpensive a flash drive is. I would pay extra for the convenience. 

You don't need a fiber connection, lol.  I've got basic cable internet, and I get 150Mbps.

Yes, large 100GB+ games take a few hours to download, but as it's a one-time or occasional thing, it's not really a big deal.  And most consoles or PC launchers automatically will update in the background anyway.

You're unlikely to have a 5Mbps internet connection unless you're in a remote or under-serviced area these days.

[anden145 2,285]

Don't 'feed' him, guys... he wants this to be a problem for him. You won't change his mind, no matter how many logical and rational arguments, you throw his way...

Let's just leave him at that belief.

[2reds2whites 827]

Would love some more videos, the screenshots are great but videos would be lovely.

Edited May 17, 2020 by 2reds2whites

[Deleted 250]

14 hours ago, JSilva said:

 

LPMA is not the only airport in MSFS. Yes, opinions are good, but your detailing about your airport is totally over the top.

[Carts85 1,203]

37 minutes ago, Deleted said:

LPMA is not the only airport in MSFS. Yes, opinions are good, but your detailing about your airport is totally over the top.

That was my initial thoughts Deleted but JSilva is just expressing his passion for his local airport to be right which we all kind of want right?..and if you read his responses he’s explained it very well that he worded it perhaps a bit strongly. 

[LHookins 3,102]

8 hours ago, anden145 said:

he wants this to be a problem for him.

Thank you for your sensitivity. /s

For some people, the bandwidth requirements will kill any chance of being able to use MSFS.  Data caps are a real thing as well.

Hook

[anden145 2,285]

12 minutes ago, LHookins said:

Thank you for your sensitivity. /s

For some people, the bandwidth requirements will kill any chance of being able to use MSFS.  Data caps are a real thing as well.

Hook

You're more than welcome.

[Tuskin38 6,459]

The official system requirements listed hard drive space requirements. This isn’t new information that it was going to be over 100GB.

Edited May 17, 2020 by Tuskin38

[LHookins 3,102]

7 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

The official system requirements listed hard drive space requirements. This isn’t new information.

The 116 gig download is new information.  And it is something people can use to calculate their Internet requirements.