1 minute ago, tweekz said:

News may be coming, but considering how long everything takes with LR better don't expect XP12 in 2021.

The other point I stated was, that while it may be competitive from a technical point of view, the market share is a totally different story. The "wow-effect" is long gone by then. More fps won't change that. XP manages to attract a lot of P3D converts over the past years. But that's most probably over now. Along with that I also expect a less flourishing payware addon market.

Wow effect for new shiny things will never go away in tech, in 10 years msfs will look dated.

So your claims does not hold reality, no such thing as too late in this case.

1 minute ago, mtaxp said:

Wow effect for new shiny things will never go away in tech, in 10 years msfs will look dated.

Only if you bring something innovative to the table. Not if you catch up.

6 minutes ago, tweekz said:

As mentioned earlier - XPs clouds eat half of my frames in overcast conditions. 😄

And as i mentioned earlier yet you refuse to read, this is a great example why claiming but "msfs looks better" does not debunk my claim about xp perf >>> msfs perf.

Means, x-plane cloud rendering is legacy they need to update for voxel and they even might *gain* perf since better graphics tech heavily uses gpu rather than slow legacy.

Edited September 23, 20205 yr by mtaxp

10 minutes ago, tweekz said:

Only if you bring something innovative to the table. Not if you catch up.

Yep, next gen on Vulkan sounds great for this case, only time will tell us how x-plane 12 will look.

MSFS will also need to be more suitable of airliners, x-plane-p3d are by far more mature in that term. This will not happen overnight. My bet is x-plane 12 will be released before msfs matures.

I expect 2021 to be great for flight simulation in all platforms.

Edited September 23, 20205 yr by mtaxp

43 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

I compared a new x-plane 11.50 install, only Vulkan ready addons, in major cities (sfo, lax, and nyc), msx settings both in msfs and x-plane..please 🙂

and yeah msfs looks better

Max settings in XP is closer to Low settings in MSFS.  How do your numbers work with that comparison?

6 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

I had made this video during Tech Alpha in regards to LOD Radius issues in MSFS and short the radius is with missing building detail at a given distance:

MSFS still has a ways to go when it comes to LOD Radius.

Cheers, Rob.

 

That’s an NDA infracture 

Just now, VFXSimmer said:

Max settings in XP is closer to Low settings in MSFS.  How do your numbers work with that comparison?

Yes perhaps , BUT I tell the G1000 to fly to the first leg in an RNAV approach, it captures the waypoint and the glide slope! That's more important to me than Perty.

1 hour ago, mtaxp said:

Yep, next gen on Vulkan sounds great for this case, only time will tell us how x-plane 12 will look.

MSFS will also need to be more suitable of airliners, x-plane-p3d are by far more mature in that term. This will not happen overnight. My bet is x-plane 12 will be released before msfs matures.

XP12??? What are the new features??? and release date??? Not a year+ cycles of beta...a full release.

The mod on the XP forum claims that LR uses the mobile funds to support the desktop development...if this is true...then XP11 can't carry its own weight today.

XP12 would have to offer something groundbreaking to warrant new sales...but wait...MSFS just did that...and continues to grow...

Also, the community that made XP11 better (building airports etc.) has been replicated in MSFS. Look at all the MSFS freeware etc that has been put out there in a little over a month. Where will that development be in a year???

And the 3PD jumping on board. Will they continue to develop for sims with a small user base or strictly focus on MSFS...new tech...and new users???

XP12...I don't think it will happen...or generate many new users....all roads seem to point to MSFS.

5 hours ago, VFXSimmer said:

Max settings in XP is closer to Low settings in MSFS.  How do your numbers work with that comparison?

When it comes to LOD for example, it's actually the other way around in Xplane too. Look at the mentioned p3d vs msfs lod here. Making perf better in msfs in latest patch included less LOD too.

Im getting really tired of repeating myself, refer to my comments about 2d clouds vs 3d clouds and why the first looks ugly and also performs worse on current hardware. If xplane shall to take msfs clouds it even might gain fps compared to it's current 2d engine.

 

Edited September 24, 20205 yr by mtaxp

11 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

QW 787 out of KSEA in P3D V5.0 HF1 seems very good visually to me?

Cheers, Rob.

 

So nice to see a 787 that actually works. Really regretting shelling out 120$ for the PDE. I’m so burned out by fs2020 

3 hours ago, FlyBaby said:

XP12??? What are the new features??? and release date??? Not a year+ cycles of beta...a full release.

From a marketing pov, wrong to reveal stuff while msfs first months hysteria. Microsoft's marketing machine will run them over.

I dont have LR internal timelines.

However they do claim to already have internal demos for new lightning and scenery. From what it sounds it looks like v12 will be what 11.50 was for perofrmance, but for graphics.

Edited September 24, 20205 yr by mtaxp

The thing that FS2020 does so well is show you places that exist, exactly was you expect them to be. Improving the graphics in XP or P3D isn't going to matter unless they show you what is real, and not a close approximation. 

1 hour ago, mtaxp said:

When it comes to LOD for example, it's actually the other way around in Xplane too. Look at the mentioned p3d vs msfs lod here. Making perf better in msfs in latest patch included less LOD too.

Im getting really tired of repeating myself, refer to my comments about 2d clouds vs 3d clouds and why the first looks ugly and also performs worse on current hardware. If xplane shall to take msfs clouds it even might gain fps compared to it's current 2d engine.

 

You're still ignoring the obvious.  If you do the things right now that you need to do in order to make xplane look as good (addons to replace inaccurate and repetitious autogen, reflections, weather engines, scenery cast shadows that actually extend beyond the 100m bounding sphere), its performance is worse than MSFS.  You could even stipulate your voxel claim (which is not a given by the way, depends on your design - xenviro was seeing worse fps with their volumetric implementation) and it still wouldnt change that fact.  Vulcan helped some on my machine, but it wasnt enough to bring xplane's largely single-threaded implementation up to par when I compared the two.  I can only speak conclusively for myself, but I've read enough posts that come to the same conclusion to know I'm not alone.

Maybe the yet to be qualified XP12 will bring something to the table if and when and it happens - but if we're basing anything on optimistic future projections, you would have to allow the same for MSFS and this community - they wont be laurel-sitting either.

(.. sound of tennis ball being whacked back over the net...)

Am enjoying MSFS to much to start P3D up. All out the box 🙂

more shots from the flight here,

Live weather, real time, no long list of addons needed. All at 45+ FPS on a 6 year old PC.

I will keep P3D v5 for airliners as MSFS is not there yet, but frankly as you see above, I am enjoying this far more. Aircraft fidelity is one side of sim'ing but so is the world looking like the real world not land class etc. Sure the haters find faults here and there ( o look a giant leaf or a object at an airfield, perthitic, show the other 360 view ) but they don't show the other 90% that's breath-taking. Enjoy your sim. Let others enjoy there's and if you not so narrow minded you can enjoy as many as you like.

Edited September 24, 20205 yr by Nyxx

2 hours ago, RobJC said:

The thing that FS2020 does so well is show you places that exist, exactly was you expect them to be. Improving the graphics in XP or P3D isn't going to matter unless they show you what is real, and not a close approximation. 

It attempts to perfectly blend with orthos, but since orthos are not an exact top view angle, many wrong data and mistakes can happen and alignment gets screwed, so in other words, it's just as "guessing" as others, it can always get better.

The exception is photogrammetry, which for 99% of msfs does not exist. This is where you claim might be true. But then again photogrammetry has low res textures, no effects, no materials, no PBR, looks good from a very specific distance; too close all the low res is revealed, too far and LOD looks horrible.

As for orthos, they contain a visually 2d baked data, means, forests , buildings, roads and all of those. No need for orthos to get this data. Where ortho helps is covering lots of open lands, but even then you could use textures based on stuff like climate data. And for the last screw here, the ortho lightning and colors are static, so no seasons, no shaders, no nothing that resembles a 3d art assist in year 2020, and usually ~5 years old dated too.

I'll take auto-gen everyday, can be not less accurate driven good data, even MSFS mostly does that, but I loathe those low quality bing maps.

2 hours ago, VFXSimmer said:

You're still ignoring the obvious.  If you do the things right now that you need to do in order to make xplane look as good (addons to replace inaccurate and repetitious autogen, reflections, weather engines, scenery cast shadows that actually extend beyond the 100m bounding sphere), its performance is worse than MSFS.  You could even stipulate your voxel claim (which is not a given by the way, depends on your design - xenviro was seeing worse fps with their volumetric implementation) and it still wouldnt change that fact.  Vulcan helped some on my machine, but it wasnt enough to bring xplane's largely single-threaded implementation up to par when I compared the two.  I can only speak conclusively for myself, but I've read enough posts that come to the same conclusion to know I'm not alone.

Maybe the yet to be qualified XP12 will bring something to the table if and when and it happens - but if we're basing anything on optimistic future projections, you would have to allow the same for MSFS and this community - they wont be laurel-sitting either.

(.. sound of tennis ball being whacked back over the net...)

The tennis ball is ok, can't understand why people defend products like lifes depends on them, to me this a nice tech discussion about graphics and performance. Maybe people really like to justify what they invested in. If it hurts somebody he is more than welcome to shed a tear and move on.

Back to our talk, xenviro is not even supported in Vulkan....

Anyway, Industry standart* aims for not less performance in each version compared to the previous, just like xp11>xp10, p3d v5>p3d v4, gta v>gta vi, and every other game that becomes better in graphics and performance in each major release, this is just how this market works.

If x-plane 12 decides to break this (not gonna happen) for some reason and not follow industry standarts , better shut the valve early and not waste everybody's time.

And msfs is already behind industry standarts in some graphic features, it's trees tech is legacy, no particle effects, no seasons. Not that x-plane is better, but LR admits current graphics are legacy and are working on it, hence the Vulkan move so they'll be able to make next gen stuff with fast perf. Austin called xp11 stale looking, no reason for him to burn V11 if he didn't see that he already have much better stuff to come.

 

*Industry standarts also mean it's VERY likely features in xp12 like msfs for clouds and other stuff, since all this tech is already available in earnest in many different forms, this is why it'll be faster for LR to catch up. Just like all 3 sims and any game today have PBR.

LR are claiming to have next gen Industry standarts with it's next graphics update for V12. MSFS is already old when it comes to some of it's features; trees as an example

If you compare Industry standarts to MSFS

 

 

 

Edit: btw, if you watch the video, it's skyrim dx11, look at the fps drops when changing views. This is where Vulkan\dx12 should help and be MUCH better, keeping those FPS even in taxing moments like changing views fast. this is what we call stutters, MSFS is plauged with those in my system, not kidding using it compared to Vulkan smoothness hurts my eyes.

And no, setting weird stuff in other panels is not the solution.

Edited September 24, 20205 yr by mtaxp