42 minutes ago, flycln said:

the constant movement in the air feels more like random movement that’s faking something real. 

Nah... they are plausible, just exaggerated.

22 minutes ago, GCBraun said:

Newsflash: it is faking something real. That is what a simulator does. 

True, but it's faking the wrong thing, or doing it wrong if you prefer to look at it like that. Yes aeroplanes do move up and down and around in the air mass, but the entire aeroplane does that, because the entire aeroplane is in that air mass. The new MS sim is simulating this as your aeroplane goes along:

Edited August 22, 20205 yr by Chock

12 minutes ago, Chock said:

True, but it's faking the wrong thing, or doing it wrong if you prefer to look at it like that. Yes aeroplanes do move up and down and around in the air mass, but the entire aeroplane does that, because the entire aeroplane is in that air mass. The new MS sim is simulating this as your aeroplane goes along:

A much easier fix than fixing P3D or XP11. 

5 minutes ago, GCBraun said:

A much easier fix than fixing P3D or XP11. 

Almost certainly, but one that they need to do ASAP.

14 minutes ago, GCBraun said:

A much easier fix than fixing P3D or XP11. 

So, what are you going to do to fix it?

4 minutes ago, airlinejets said:

So, what are you going to do to fix it?

I know you didn't ask me, but I'll reply anyways. I personally don't think there's anything to fix, but if there was I would submit a ticket to Asobo.

1 hour ago, rooitou said:

I'm now finally dumping FS9, thinking of abandoning X-Plane 11 as well, it is simply a more cartoonish version of FS2020 now.

I will keep FSX and P3D v4 for nostalgic reasons and because I have a ton of add-ons which will be nice to revisit and compare with FS2020 out of interest. But as soon as that novelty wears off, I will probably dump them as well. So yeah, in my case, no more investment in FSX/P3D or X-Plane add-ons. Everything will now be focussed on FS2020

I just got back into flight simming again.  After buying MSFS 2020, and then finishing all 8 lessons, I had to buy FSX today because MSFS 2020 is missing a bunch of lessons that FSX had, including Private Pilot lessons, VOR, ILS, some Airliner lessons, etc (I have owned FSX before but I lost the discs and I have long thrown out my old computer that held it).

I think I am one of the few people that purchased MSFS 2020 and then went back to buy FSX, lol!  But the lessons in FSX are so good, I need that information to get more out of MSFS 2020.  I just wished MSFS 2020 had all the lessons from FSX (not sure why they couldn't have ported it over).  I'm sure in 2 to 3 years, there will be a lot of good 3rd party add on lessons for MSFS 2020 but I can't wait and I want to learn now.

1 hour ago, McPlane said:

X-Plane v11.50 runs extremely well. I will continue to use XP and it actually works better. I'm sure that it will be improved due to the competition.

Agree completely, the Vulkan stuff works very well, and there are some serious disadvantages to the MSFS environment compared to Xplane, and some areas in MSFS don't look so great due to the low res ortho (especially desert areas). Asobo did a great job on grass and trees and overlaying a detail texture over the low res ortho, but it's still relatively low res ortho. Sure the cities and buildings look a LOT better in MSFS, but I don't think any of the non-premium airports in MSFS are better than Xplane 11, probably worse (though varies depending on the airport).

Xplane 11 has a good rendering engine and can make things look as good as MSFS for the most part, there are a few things it won't do as good, but it's not the engine it's that Asobo has better graphics designers and spent more time on graphics.

If I were working for Laminar, what I'd tell them right now is there are 3 things we gotta do. They need to integrate Ortho4XP into the sim as a download-ahead technology (with eventual streaming), they need to improve clouds and trees, maybe make some minor upgrades to their airport lego system (improve default textures - just a little).

There will be an effect to Xplane in sales obviously, but it won't be nearly enough to kill it off. I believe P3D will be hurt much worse by MSFS than Xplane 11, because the Xplane 11 crowd is more individualistic and not all even use P3D. Many using P3D now are going to move to MSFS, but only some using XP11 will.

You can still get better graphics in MOST ways in Xplane 11 with custom ortho than is available in MSFS, don't forget that.

Edited August 22, 20205 yr by SceneryFX

1 hour ago, Dominique_K said:

I will speak of P3D only, never been interested in XP.

Yes, P3D faces a real challenge, short term and medium term. But we shouldn’t assume that they will stay on their two feet waiting for their demise 

Their consumer market is in danger of shrinking significantly now and there is not much that they can do within a year, except if they work for 5.1  on something groundbreaking, ATC, weather or a more convincing implementation of TrueSKY and WW. The MSF « imperfect » release gives them a little time but they’d better move their behind fast to anchor at least the simmers who have the desire to stay but are uncertain.

Their institutional market faces the same grave danger within two/three years when MSF will be stable enough for MS to enter into it, specially the civil institutional market. The military institutional market is unclear as we don’t know what MS is cooking in their hidden kitchen. MS is also a defense contractor. The LM horizon is v6. 

The good news is that LM has all the enormous technological resources to do at least as well as MS/Asobo. Does the corporate want to put money into it, is the question. I hope but I am doubtful.

Does anybody know the agreement terms when Lockheed purchased the FSX engine for P3D?  Does it state that Microsoft is not allowed to sell a flight simulator product to the commercial market?  I hope Microsoft doesn't have that in their agreement terms.  Because there was a thread in the P3D forum about 6 to 9 months ago about concern of 3rd party support going forward for P3D and somebody in the thread mentioned that companies had approached Microsoft for the commercial use of MSFS 2020.  

That's a good sign though if companies are approaching Microsoft to see if they can use MSFS 2020.  It means they think the simulator is realistic enough for commercial training, etc.

3 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Does anybody know the agreement terms when Lockheed purchased the FSX engine for P3D?  Does it state that Microsoft is not allowed to sell a flight simulator product to the commercial market?  I hope Microsoft doesn't have that in their agreement terms.  Because there was a thread in the P3D forum about 6 to 9 months ago about concern of 3rd party support going forward for P3D and somebody in the thread mentioned that companies had approached Microsoft for the commercial use of MSFS 2020.  

That's a good sign though if companies are approaching Microsoft to see if they can use MSFS 2020.  It means they think the simulator is realistic enough for commercial training, etc.

For what we know in their joint statement, it is a license to LM to use and transform the old ESP engine for their own use and that is it.  I doubt that there is any provision of splitting the simulation market between the two which would be IMO illegal. 

 MS will enter into the pro market if FS20 fulfills its promises in the consumer market. It is written in the stars. And sooner than everybody thinks. 

 

8 minutes ago, SceneryFX said:

You can still get better graphics in MOST ways in Xplane 11 with custom ortho than is available in MSFS, don't forget that.

So, I don't own XPlane and I don't really have a a beef between Xplane and MSFS 2020.  But here is a video of XPlane 11.5 with Vulkan and Orbx True Earth:

 

 

I run MSFS 2020 in high settings at 1080p so I'm not even at the best settings.  From my perspective and experience with MSFS 2020 at my settings, MSFS 2020 has better graphics than the Youtube video above.  Unless the video above is not showing the best XPlane has to offer (XPlane 11.5 with Vulkan), then the graphics in XPlane 11.5 + Vulkan + Orbx still seems like it is a generation behind MSFS 2020.

1 minute ago, Dominique_K said:

For what we know in their joint statement, it is a license to LM to use and transform the old ESP engine for their own use and that is it.  I doubt that there is any provision of splitting the simulation market between the two which would be IMO illegal. 

 MS will enter into the pro market if FS20 fulfills its promises in the consumer market. It is written in the stars. And sooner than everybody thinks. 

 

Cool, nice to know this.  I mean, if I were Lockheed, the most sensible business decision is to try to make a deal with Microsoft to license MSFS for the commercial market and give Microsoft a cut for every commercial version sold.  For Microsoft, it may be in their best interest to push Lockheed aside and enter the commercial market themselves with MSFS - that's a nice additional revenue stream for Microsoft.

Edited August 22, 20205 yr by abrams_tank

Yah, TE Washington isn't close to the best Xplane 11 can do, you can make it look much much better by using 30-60cm ortho.a

15 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

I run MSFS 2020 in high settings at 1080p so I'm not even at the best settings.  From my perspective and experience with MSFS 2020 at my settings, MSFS 2020 has better graphics than the Youtube video above.  Unless the video above is not showing the best XPlane has to offer (XPlane 11.5 with Vulkan), then the graphics in XPlane 11.5 + Vulkan + Orbx still seems like it is a generation behind MSFS 2020.

Well, I noted MSFS does have some graphical advantages (better detail texture, better buildings, better clouds, better trees), but this isn't insurmountable for XP 11 to improve upon.

The US area is at a disadvantage in XP 11 from Orbx because that Ortho came from 1.2m NAIP, and Microsoft is down-scaling higher res 30cm Bing ortho to about 80cm - 1.2m and then overlaying a detail texture. It's the trees and detail texture that is showing the most difference though, not the ortho itself. The Bing ortho isn't that great, but man do those MSFS trees hide it in many places.

Edit - I meant TE Great Britain in XP 11 looks higher res (sorry I made a typo in saying "if they ported it").

However, there are many states that have tons of free Ortho higher than 1.2m provided at the state level, and much of it with no licensing restrictions (though most of it is in the Eastern US). 

 XP11 has tons of untapped potential for the Ortho, because XP 11 is the only other sim with an Ortho image close to as advanced as MSFS. 

Laminar has been making mistakes in underestimating how much people care about graphics, because they are very much engineering nerds and so they think of graphics in terms of "close enough", but in the real world market, it doesn't work like that. Graphics are more important than most would think they should be, when it comes to overall sales, even for a simulator.

 

Edited August 22, 20205 yr by SceneryFX

I don’t think we need to feel bad, neither competing product is made for or particularly interested in the mass market.  My prediction is that Google or Apple will see advantages to doing the same thing with their mapping data, and will try to purchase/work with /throw money at Laminar on the sim end.  Austin is enough of a contrarian that he probably won’t agree, but who knows?  Microsoft might make a commercial version, or work with Lockheed, but I think they really aren’t much interested in that end.

1 minute ago, ShawnG said:

I don’t think we need to feel bad, neither competing product is made for or particularly interested in the mass market.  My prediction is that Google or Apple will see advantages to doing the same thing with their mapping data, and will try to purchase/work with /throw money at Laminar on the sim end.  Austin is enough of a contrarian that he probably won’t agree, but who knows?  Microsoft might make a commercial version, or work with Lockheed, but I think they really aren’t much interested in that end.

I tend to agree. Laminar would be wise to approach Google.