Back to Xp11 :-)

[jcomm 5,929]

41 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

It's way too early to do any flight model comparisons, because we don't know the full potential of the new MSFS yet. The default planes don't "fly the numbers" for the real thing and the systems are very basic, so Asobo didn't make a huge effort there. We'll have to wait for 3rd party devs to release better models before comparing to XP.

The internal MSFS flight model may need extending too. I was shocked to see that the default biplane apparently uses only a single wing in the internal flight model. Maybe it's still possible to replicate real world performance with a lookup table based on that modeling, but it's counter-intuitive when you're used to the way X-Plane does things. I can't imagine that working for helicopters, but maybe the whole thing is based on allowing 3rd party modules to plug into the base flight model.

Anyway, I'm not making any judgments on flight model vs. XP until 3rd party aircraft start arriving in MSFS.

@Paraffin,  I agree, we have to give ASOBO some time - it has JUST been released...

Remember when XP11 was released, FSX was released, XP10..XP9... name the sim... were released ?

There's potential, that I do not doubt.

 

Edited August 24, 2020 by jcomm

[mSparks 2,086]

give a man a fish

give them the tools to fish...

aka

msfs 

v

xp11

still think anyone waiting for underpaid overworked 3rd party devs to do what "unlimited budget" Asobo/Microsoft failed to deliver should just keep holding their breath (or maybe just start)

 

[Paraffin 2,197]

One other thing, it looks like the turboprop modeling in the new MSFS is just a copy paste of what was in FSX, so there is no realistic PT-6 like we have in X-Plane. Some RW pilots complaining about it here:

 

I don't know how easy this is to fix. It was never fixed for FSX. Was it ever addressed in P3D? 

 

 

[jcomm 5,929]

Well, actually I think they fine tuned at least a few parameters, namely the relation between FF and RPM, and unfortunately it is not yet that realistic in X-Plane either. For a free-running turbine like the Pt-6 there shouldn't be Fuel Flow variations with Prop RPM adjustments at constant throttle / condition settings, which is not the case in XP11.50 as I tested just yesterday, and kind of puzzles me because Austin himself should know this just too well from his own experience ...

Edited August 24, 2020 by jcomm

[Paraffin 2,197]

Yeah, I should have been more careful about the use of the word "realistic" for the XP turboprop. 🙂 

Still, it's better than what's in the current MSFS release. And unlike X-Plane, there isn't a driving force like Austin behind a desire for better turboprop modeling, even if his current modeling isn't perfect. All of this was mentioned to Asobo during the Alpha testing, and they did nothing. Maybe the 3rd party devs will fix it with individual models, but that's not how it should be done.

I worry about this copy paste approach with MSFS helicopters too. It really needs a ground-up rewrite and not what was in FSX.

[Murmur 3,941]

Even if MFS had the exact same flight model of FSX, it would have made almost zero difference in terms of sales.

Despite all the historical complaints, it was good enough for 99.9% of users (including the "serious simmers", who buy a "study level" aircraft without realizing that it's incapable of modeling VMCA. Any reference to a certain FSX Boeing add-on is casual).

3rd parties successfully produced FSX addons with much better flight models compared to default, despite the native limitations.

Things like helicopters, VTOLs, fancy flying machines, are overall a relatively small niche (albeit it's there).

What I'm trying to say, is that XP should also compete on things like visuals, weather, performance. The good thing is that apparently LR is focusing exactly on those things for the near future.

[mjrhealth 820]

4 hours ago, Paraffin said:

there isn't a driving force like Austin behind a desire for better turboprop modeling,

He got a turbporop plane so he could improve it, what do you mean there is no driving force, even did aircon load and such doubt youll see tat in MSFS

[Murmur 3,941]

He was referring to MFS.

Edited August 24, 2020 by Murmur

[Alec 370]

I experienced great joy when I read Austin's comments on a secret project that has been developing for some time now. I really hope it is really what we were asking for, even before this MFS crazy train began.

However, I can't help but be a little worried with certain things I heard in Austin's interview for a Sim Podcast, maybe a month ago, where he gave me a completely different picture than what I would expect for XP12.

- The Focus would be Flight Training, also Flight Testing Real Airplanes. If this is the Focus, do we need to antecipate P3D all over again? $300+ Dollar Licence and ton of EULA restrictions. Or will he choose to make two versions available?

- He also said somewhere that MMO style Multiplayer was the next huge thing. While I love what I see right now in MFS Skies, with lots of real users, I don't think X-Plane should focus right now in this, when there's so much missing that is much more important IMO

- Subscription for XP12, I believe he said would be a great idea.

I hope this is not the path taken, as competition is always welcome

[mtaxp 666]

43 minutes ago, Alec said:

I experienced great joy when I read Austin's comments on a secret project that has been developing for some time now. I really hope it is really what we were asking for, even before this MFS crazy train began.

However, I can't help but be a little worried with certain things I heard in Austin's interview for a Sim Podcast, maybe a month ago, where he gave me a completely different picture than what I would expect for XP12.

- The Focus would be Flight Training, also Flight Testing Real Airplanes. If this is the Focus, do we need to antecipate P3D all over again? $300+ Dollar Licence and ton of EULA restrictions. Or will he choose to make two versions available?

X-plane already has 2 versions for home and for flight training setups.

He was talking about the short term (11.50 Vulkan) to achieve a stutter-free experience which is obviously good for us home edition too. Due to multiple screens in pro edition, stutters tend to break the sync and visually "cut" the horizon which ain't acceptable for obvious reasons.

After 11.50 its all about "next generation scenery". 

Edited August 24, 2020 by mtaxp

[Paraffin 2,197]

39 minutes ago, Alec said:

- Subscription for XP12, I believe he said would be a great idea.

I'm going to assume Austin was just "spitballing'" as we say, just throwing it out there without being serious.

A subscription could work if XP offered everything as a total package, including all the airports and aircraft we could ever want. But it's not self-contained like that. Laminar has never had any direct relationship with 3rd party developers that could be folded into that kind of product. We will always be paying for additional 3rd party aircraft and scenery.

To offset that additional payware cost to consumers, a subscription would have to be ridiculously cheap, something like $5 USD a month to be attractive. It also wouldn't be sustainable to ask consumers to wait 4 years between major versions with a subscription model. You expect constant upgrades with a software subscription like Photoshop. It's just not a good fit for the pace of development at Laminar. 

[Greazer 1,320]

13 hours ago, mSparks said:

give a man a fish

give them the tools to fish...

aka

msfs 

v

xp11

still think anyone waiting for underpaid overworked 3rd party devs to do what "unlimited budget" Asobo/Microsoft failed to deliver should just keep holding their breath (or maybe just start)

 

Give them 17 beta's, 10 release candidates and it's still buggy as h3ll, with no new features and runs like a dog, bottle necked on one CPU thread [xp11]

[Greazer 1,320]

9 hours ago, Alec said:

I experienced great joy when I read Austin's comments on a secret project that has been developing for some time now. I really hope it is really what we were asking for, even before this MFS crazy train began.

He has a guy in Europe (somewhere) working on "ultimate" scenery for XP.  Complete and utter joke. He's too busy working on side projects and been out of the loop. He doesn't understand photo real scenery, photogrammetry, the tech, how advanced it is and how far (decades) that XP now finds itself.  Nobody is slower at getting around to improving things, or fixing bugs than these guys.

Edited August 25, 2020 by Greazer

[mtaxp 666]

@Greazer always with the same comment.

You always complain and whenever somebody offers to help you tend to fade away. So here we go, if you have any problems with 11.50, can you give more data about them? Can you send a picture in which x-plane is using one thread only while has low fps etc..?

Maybe we can help, maybe help to isolate and then you can send to laminar a comprehensive bug report if needed so they can fix it. 

BTW, cant really comprehend why in your last comment you had to underline a pure lie about what austin said, did he say he hired only *1* guy for scenery? If so, give a source, otherwise fake news, microsoft propoganda can go to msfs forum. (Even there more x-plane talking than msfs lol, people are desperate indeed)

 

Edited August 25, 2020 by mtaxp

[Janov 2,383]

I think it is important to realize for everyone that the scenery in XP12 will not be looking as good as MSFS´ scenery when you are doing VFR sightseeing. Just to curb some expectations here. It will look a lot better, but it won´t be photorealistic and a copy of the  real world, like MSFS in photogrammetry areas.

I believe it will have a much better lighting engine (look more realistic) and it will have an improved weather system (maybe even on par with MSFS).

I personally would have no problems with a subscription model - doesn´t matter to me if I pay 60$ once every 3 years or spread that out over monthly payments. It may not work out for Laminar, though - because they will loose money. A lot of people are curious - they spend 60$ to see X-Plane...but may then go back to MSFS. The money stays in LR´s bank. If they just get a subscription for a month and then cancel? I don´t think LR will ever go subscription.

MMO online flying is already part of the mobile version - as it is for MSFS - so I don´t see the harm in a sensible implementation. It may be "low hanging fruit" i.e. not need that much dev time to implement for desktop.

X-Plane will be the simulator for people that enjoy the realistic operation of aircraft.

MSFS will be the simulator for people that enjoy the graphical representation of flight.

I have no doubt that the majority of flightsim users fall into the second category. I am thankful to LR for NOT jumping on the bandwagon of least resistance and maximum income. Not everything in life is about making the most money, I think it is about doing something right.

Jan