7 minutes ago, tweekz said:

Procedural generation is kind of a more fancy name for autogen.

Sure they could base certain things on available date (and will), but if it was as accurate as MSFS it would probably need streaming as well. So you can bet it's also based on an algorithm guessing what makes sense for a certain area, according to the data it has.

So in the end, you might be better off with a scenery based on a 5 year old satellite image.

I disagree with bottom line statement.. 🙂

If it's accurate enough*, and brings consistent visual represnation unlike orthos.

For the artifacts ortho bring, i would really live with less accurate world in the other option (yet accurate enough). this is were scenery developers comes in, and MSFS just like others need them for many areas in the world.

*and as you can see, even with all the fancy AI stuff msfs ain't really accurate at many places, while in other it really shines.

Edited August 13, 20205 yr by mtaxp

I'll leave aside the hilarious and misinformed posts predicting XP demise.

(Hilarious: people have been saying the same thing for 20 years; misinformed: in the last 12 months, since MFS announcement, XP sales have actually increased more than in the 12 months before).

I'll suggest instead that since MFS makes only a minority part of the interview linked by the OP, maybe this should be moved to XP forum or hangar chat.

 

6 hours ago, Chock said:

What's more, if blade element theory was the perfect way to make a flight sim, every company making a flight sim would use that method;

Infact it's pretty much so: XP, Condor soaring, IL2, DCS PFM, War Thunder, Aerofly FS... All of them use some sort of predictive, BET-like flight model. Even MFS switched to such a flight model...

 

1 hour ago, LHookins said:

Everyone knows it can't be a real flight sim unless it runs on a smart phone.

Hook

Or an Xbox! 😄

9 minutes ago, tweekz said:

Procedural generation is kind of a more fancy name for autogen.

Sure they could base certain things on available date (and will), but if it was as accurate as MSFS it would probably need streaming as well. So you can bet it's also based on an algorithm guessing what makes sense for a certain area, according to the data it has.

So in the end, you might be better off with a scenery based on a 5 year old satellite image.

I disagree with bottom line statement.. 🙂

If it's accurate enough*, and brings consistent visual represnation unlike orthos.

*and as you can see, even with all the fancy AI stuff msfs ain't really accurate at many places, while in other it really shines. Procedural with real world data CAN be accurate enough for most of us.

7 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

I disagree with bottom line statement.. 🙂

If it's accurate enough*, and brings consistent visual represnation unlike orthos.

*and as you can see, even with all the fancy AI stuff msfs ain't really accurate at many places, while in other it really shines. Procedural with real world data CAN be accurate enough for most of us.

You don't have to disagree twice. 😛

But then we turn back to where we started - if there's only a small difference in quality - MSFS will have staisfied the market enough to not cause a mass-movement again. For that XP would have to introduce something comparably innovative. Most of the time it's not enough to be second on the party (whenever that might be).

Edited August 13, 20205 yr by tweekz

@mtaxp, on what are you basing your opinion of the scenery options? Hands on with MSFS, XP with ortho, videos, or talking points based on other’s opinions? I‘m not bashing XP. I really like it for a lot of reasons. I’m interested to see this new scenery tech Austin is touting. From experience, though, MSFS has changed the game with this scenery approach. I’m not even in an area that uses photogrammetry and it is jaw dropping to fly virtually in an area that I fly in real life. 

 

2 hours ago, LHookins said:

Everyone knows it can't be a real flight sim unless it runs on a smart phone.

... or an Xbox.

Edit: Murmur beat me to it 🤪

Edited August 13, 20205 yr by MadDog

32 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

@mtaxp, on what are you basing your opinion of the scenery options? Hands on with MSFS, XP with ortho, videos, or talking points based on other’s opinions? I‘m not bashing XP. I really like it for a lot of reasons. I’m interested to see this new scenery tech Austin is touting. From experience, though, MSFS has changed the game with this scenery approach. I’m not even in an area that uses photogrammetry and it is jaw dropping to fly virtually in an area that I fly in real life. 

MSFS changes the way stuff are delivered to customers (with out the streaming tech, they would have to ship you a truck full of ssd's xD). There is nothing new about the ortho+3d on top of it. For example i think orbx's true earth for x-plane is as accurate as msfs for a specific region. Of course it looks better when it renders in msfs which currently have better lightning (confirmed for x-plane after Vulkan, too)

I just think that orthos+3d is the old way to do it, based on what I and many others have seen from other open world engines (outtera as the best example) and some sceneries in current simulators actually!

We don't know what next gen scenery austin is talking about, but I really hope (and suspect, based on the way austin talk) that it's going to be the true next gen procedural way that modern world engines do.

Edited August 13, 20205 yr by mtaxp

10 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

MSFS changes the way stuff are delivered to customers (with out the streaming tech, they would have to ship you a truck full of ssd's xD). There is nothing new about the ortho+3d on top of it. For example i think orbx's true earth for x-plane is as accurate as msfs for a specific region. Of course it looks better when it renders in msfs which currently have better lightning (confirmed for x-plane after Vulkan, too)

I just think that orthos+3d is the old way to do it, based on what I and many others have seen from other open world engines (outtera as the best example) and some sceneries in current simulators actually!

We don't know what next gen scenery austin is talking about, but I really hope (and suspect, based on the way austin talk) that it's going to be the true next gen procedural way that modern world engines do.

In 2012 I already wrote that pr scenery + custom AG was the future. And backthen I was very interested in TileProxy ( downloading pr tiles from map servers ).

Bevause of the not so fast IN connections in 2012 one could only fly at 70-100 knots .

In P3D I only fly in Europe and have it covered by pr scenery + custom AG for at least 80%.
 

Imho nothing beats pr scenery + custom AG + POIs. However the pr ground is as good as the recording.,,,

1 hour ago, ca_metal said:

If charts+ is included with the new sim. I’m not so sure Navigraph’s costumers base would represent accurately people using MSFS.

P.S.: I know you don’t need to be a costumer to answer to their survey, but I’m not so sure how relevant Navigraph will still be for that platform. 

Navigraph actually just released some information on their plans for MSFS.  Beyond that, the reach of the survey is quite broad as it is done in partnership with many others flightsim developers, FS Elite etc.

4 minutes ago, GSalden said:

In 2012 I already wrote that pr scenery + custom AG was the future. And backthen I was very interested in TileProxy ( downloading pr tiles from map servers ).

Bevause of the not so fast IN connections in 2012 one could only fly at 70-100 knots .

In P3D I only fly in Europe and have it covered by pr scenery + custom AG for at least 80%.
 

Imho nothing beats pr scenery + custom AG + POIs. However the pr ground is as good as the recording.,,,

Of course mix it with real world data, for buildlings, climate etc.. and have a proper and varied art work library. This way you can get relatively accurate world wide scenery with out breaking immersion with many horrible artifacts IMO.

Data is not exclusive to bing, in fact msfs is drawn back since bing is microsoft and they have to use it, they can't mix other sources for some parts which are actually better repesented in other competitors.

 

 

1 hour ago, mtaxp said:

Not to me. Orthphotos while they might look good they also present weird artifacts, low quality imagery, ~5 years dated, stuck in certain lightning conditions/time/season and many other ugly and weird stuff baked on it=Kills how consistent stuff look=Kills the illusion, especially in VR.

Procedural is the way to go, IMO. It will be also much better in seasons represantions, for example.

I think, that you do not understand, how MSFS create the scenery. Ortho is only the bacground (and massively corrected), but over it is everything proceduraly generated. Especially buildings, trees etc. with many additional informations from other sources. If you want generate scenery by procedure, you need many informations from real Earth surface, otherwise you can generate nothing or only a randomize scenery, what don't correspond with nothing real, as fictious planets surface in Star Citizen for example, which are proceduraly generated and nice too, but don't reflect something real. Is impossible pick so much information from whole Earth surface, without satellite images, satellite radar or lidar pictures etc. Yes, Outerra looks very nice, but can we see some real cities procedurally generated by Outerra?

Edited August 13, 20205 yr by ludekbrno

He thinks 3rd party developers only exist by the grace of LR when it clearly is the other way around. 3rd party developers keep his platform alive. Same as any other sim.

Looks to me like LR got a nasty surprise when MS announced their August release date.

Nothing against X-Plane, but this arrogance is just not healthy.

1 hour ago, Murmur said:

In fact it's pretty much so: XP, Condor soaring, IL2, DCS PFM, War Thunder, Aerofly FS... All of them use some sort of predictive, BET-like flight model. Even MFS switched to such a flight model...

Good point.

2 hours ago, ca_metal said:

If charts+ is included with the new sim. I’m not so sure Navigraph’s costumers base would represent accurately people using MSFS.

 

P.S.: I know you don’t need to be a costumer to answer to their survey, but I’m not so sure how relevant Navigraph will still be for that platform. 

I get it that some folks who don’t use the Navigraph charts think they should not bother with filling out the survey. However, since 58% stated from the recent survey that they would consider moving to the new MSFS. that is a bench mark in which you want to know as far numbers from year to year. Also, out of those 58% they would most like fill out the survey understanding its importance. So as far is seeing the migration trends from each sim, it is very relevant.

As I said before in another thread, you don’t want sim developer doing an industry wide survey or anyone partnered with an sim developer who claims independence.

Edited August 13, 20205 yr by BobFS88

41 minutes ago, ludekbrno said:

I think, that you do not understand, how MSFS create the scenery. Ortho is only the bacground (and massively corrected), but over it is everything proceduraly generated. Especially buildings, trees etc. with many additional informations from other sources. If you want generate scenery by procedure, you need many informations from real Earth surface, otherwise you can generate nothing or only a randomize scenery, what don't correspond with nothing real, as fictious planets surface in Star Citizen for example, which are proceduraly generated and nice too, but don't reflect something real. Is impossible pick so much information from whole Earth surface, without satellite images, satellite radar or lidar pictures etc. Yes, Outerra looks very nice, but can we see some real cities procedurally generated by Outerra?

 

Yes, you can.

Roads and their subtypes are avilable as data, the same goes for buildings and footprints, industrial areas, agricultural fields etc.. go to OSM and you can see how the data is just their to place artwork on. X-plane already does that in a beautiful manner at many areas where data is avilable, however it lacks the proper art work library to give the proper "wow" effect which outterra does have.

Edit: besides, based on my work and every scenery package out there most of the hard drive/ssd space goes to those ortho backgrounds, hence why microsoft needs to stream it because those take A LOT of memory, for a really low visual quality.

Edited August 13, 20205 yr by mtaxp