The Tide of Progress is Unstoppable

[flycln 435]

15 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

Well I dont have any blurry scenery.  I guess I must be lucky with my computer spec. 👍

Of course you have blurry scenery. The photo scenery simply isn't high quality everywhere. And from really high up everything is rather blurry.

This is by design. Not dependent on your specs. 9900K and 2080Ti here btw.

I assume that's part of why they overload so many places with trees. It makes the terrible textures less obvious.

Edited September 24, 2020 by flycln

[eslader 1,783]

17 hours ago, tpete61 said:

It's absolutely is a standard answer here and on other forums!

We're not saying we expect to load MSFS up with all the 3rd party stuff we bought for P3d/FSX. We're saying it's not reasonable to compare a platform that's been developed for 14 years and is only marginally acceptable today because of 3rd party addons to a platform that's been out for less than 2 months. You don't buy a new car and then complain that it's slower than your old car, which you swapped a 500hp engine into. Of course it's slower than the old car, because you significantly changed the old car from it's default state. Same here. Do a clean install of FSX. Install no add-ons. See if you're still saying it's so much better than MSFS.

I expect Asobo to fix the issues with the features they advertised in pre-release marketing. If they don't, I will be happy to join you in roasting them on a daily basis, but I'm also not a petulant kid who wants everything now-now-now and throws a fit when I don't get it. I'm willing to give them time to fix the problems, and thus far they've indicated that they're willing to do so.

 

[ShawnG 1,823]

Some of the arguments are from petulant children who throw their toys in frustration.  Some are from fans of other sims who are perfectly well aware that the OP thread title is 100 percent true, and are having trouble accepting it.  cognitive dissonance at its finest.  That isn't to say that the new sim doesn't have a load of problems they can point to, it does.  Nor does that say that the older sims will "die" in any kind of final sense.  But the writing is on the wall, and they know it.  Leave them this transitional period to attempt to deny reality if they wish.  I might even do the odd flight in p3d as well, once I feel like doing all the maintenance it requires of me.

The forced narrative by some seems to be that msfs right now is just pretty, that for real flying you need sim (x or y)  However that point is a bit overboard.  There are deficient points in msfs, but they aren't as bad as some here would make it out to be, even right now, in its current state.  The argument also ignores the fact that the alternative sims are full of unresolved debilitating problems as well.  pick your poison.

[Ricardo41 5,949]

3 minutes ago, ShawnG said:

The forced narrative by some seems to be that msfs right now is just pretty, that for real flying you need sim (x or y)  However that point is a bit overboard.  

No. it's simply wrong. I consider statements like "this sim is broken" "can only be used to enjoy pretty scenery" pure trolling, often from folks who couldn't distinguish a cockpit from an armpit. 

[tpete61 227]

1 hour ago, eslader said:

We're not saying we expect to load MSFS up with all the 3rd party stuff we bought for P3d/FSX. We're saying it's not reasonable to compare a platform that's been developed for 14 years and is only marginally acceptable today because of 3rd party addons to a platform that's been out for less than 2 months. You don't buy a new car and then complain that it's slower than your old car, which you swapped a 500hp engine into. Of course it's slower than the old car, because you significantly changed the old car from it's default state. Same here. Do a clean install of FSX. Install no add-ons. See if you're still saying it's so much better than MSFS.

I expect Asobo to fix the issues with the features they advertised in pre-release marketing. If they don't, I will be happy to join you in roasting them on a daily basis, but I'm also not a petulant kid who wants everything now-now-now and throws a fit when I don't get it. I'm willing to give them time to fix the problems, and thus far they've indicated that they're willing to do so.

 

14 Years ago when released these other sims where probably/possibly cutting edge for available hardware. As hardware improved so did these other simulators. It is kind of a lame excuse.

I'm not throwing any fits just being a realist here with all of the extreme views I've read.

[Keto Ketchup 240]

I continue to be blown away by photogrammetry, especially when it's of a smaller town without a ton of skyscrapers (crowded skyscrapers don't translate to photogrammetry as well IMO). I imagine a day when ALL scenery is photogrammetry, with improvements like bridges being rendered as bridges rather than walls, temporal removal of dynamic objects like cars, etc.

[ShawnG 1,823]

5 minutes ago, tpete61 said:

14 Years ago when released these other sims where probably/possibly cutting edge for available hardware. As hardware improved so did these other simulators. It is kind of a lame excuse.

I'm not throwing any fits just being a realist here with all of the extreme views I've read.

14 years ago when released, the older sim was not runnable on then current hardware, not without gimping settings and completely ignoring any urban areas.  Hardware eventually caught up with it, sort of.  it took about 4 years and extreme user tweaking (and one end user alone actually finishing/hacking the unfinished DX10 code that aces left behind) before FSX was actually even useable.  P3D over 5 paid versions have improved things a bit, and removed some limitations, but plenty remain.  Lipstick on a pig.

[StoneDoor 86]

19 minutes ago, tpete61 said:

I'm not throwing any fits just being a realist here with all of the extreme views I've read.

Have you actually used MSFS?

Yesterday you did not even know there had been two patches already.

[Marco Manieri 194]

9 minutes ago, Keto Ketchup said:

I continue to be blown away by photogrammetry, especially when it's of a smaller town without a ton of skyscrapers (crowded skyscrapers don't translate to photogrammetry as well IMO). I imagine a day when ALL scenery is photogrammetry, with improvements like bridges being rendered as bridges rather than walls, temporal removal of dynamic objects like cars, etc.

And maybe when that day will arrive we'll also have higher bandwidth and bigger fast storage so the 2 PB will be just downloaded from cloud to local as the 100 GB today... 😆

[eslader 1,783]

9 minutes ago, tpete61 said:

14 Years ago when released these other sims where probably/possibly cutting edge for available hardware. As hardware improved so did these other simulators. It is kind of a lame excuse.

I'm not throwing any fits just being a realist here with all of the extreme views I've read.

Were you running those sims 14 years ago? I was. I also ran all the earlier sims, including from the subLOGIC days. FSX was a marginal at best improvement over FS2004. Yeah, higher res textures. Great. Now it's bad graphics that are a sharper version of bad. They certainly weren't cutting edge. There were plenty of games out there with much better-looking visuals.

Probably the biggest improvement was the ability to fly great circle routes / near the poles, which many of us almost never did anyway because doing a long trip in a default airliner sucked. And for that, we lost the Concorde and other cool planes. 

And when FSX came out, there wasn't a computer that could run it, with no mods at all, smoothly with all the graphics turned up. That only came years later and required performance mods to pull it off, and by then it was stuttering anyway because we were all running 3rd party addons to make up for the significant deficiencies. And it got even worse if you flew anywhere near a city.

 

My current computer is pretty good, but it's not bleeding edge, and I've got most of the graphics sliders all the way to the right. That I can do that, straight out of the box, is an orders of magnitude improvement on every MS flight sim since FS4. And that one only ran smoothly because it was junk wireframe graphics that weren't exactly taxing.

 

[Christopher Low 5,353]

Ironically, those "junk wireframe graphics" still looked better than FS5.

[tpete61 227]

1 hour ago, StoneDoor said:

Have you actually used MSFS?

Yesterday you did not even know there had been two patches already.

You must be referring to someone else!

[StoneDoor 86]

2 minutes ago, tpete61 said:

You must be referring to someone else!

 

No, yesterday you wrote

Quote

Basically a month between updates/patches at present. Crazy long for this big development team everyone speaks of.

 

[tpete61 227]

14 minutes ago, StoneDoor said:

 

No, yesterday you wrote

 

I don't see anywhere I stated there have been no patches.

I'm fully aware of the two we have. Never did I previously state there weren't any.

It has been basically 1 month between the 1st & 2nd patch and we will find out today hopefully when another is coming. It will be more then two weeks for sure. Unacceptable for many people that can't even load the game.

Edited September 24, 2020 by tpete61

[StoneDoor 86]

5 minutes ago, tpete61 said:

It has been basically 1 month between the 1st & 2nd patch.

Less than two weeks.