Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Flyfaster_MTN002

Asobo is hiring for Flight Simulator 2020 dev and testing

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Janov said:

This coming from an avid X-Plane supporter (fanboi):

Most of the components of the X-Plane scenery and weather are actually a LOT older than that, and it shows!

So getting those to 2020 contemporary levels will be the next big step for X-Plane and something they are working on, appearantly. (But no, it will never have "real" scenery like in MSFS, Laminar Research does not have the data available for that.)

Just as improving on a lot of "serious sim" features will be the next big step for MSFS, and they are planning on working on that, too, appearantly.

Cheers, Jan

I would not necessarily write off any of the other sims just yet.

it is worth remembering when Microsoft's CFS 3 was launched with much Fanfare in 2002 it basically crashed and burned because Oleg Maddox's IL2/Forgotten Battles/Pacific Fighters/1946 franchise simply walked all over it.

It will be interesting to see if any of the usual suspects can cut a deal with someone like google maps and get a product to market in time to be competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

I would not necessarily write off any of the other sims just yet.

it is worth remembering when Microsoft's CFS 3 was launched with much Fanfare in 2002 it basically crashed and burned because Oleg Maddox's IL2/Forgotten Battles/Pacific Fighters/1946 franchise simply walked all over it.

It will be interesting to see if any of the usual suspects can cut a deal with someone like google maps and get a product to market in time to be competitive.

It's not just "cutting a deal" with Google Maps.  The scenery doesn't simply leap onto the page from the Google Map Servers.  The base scenery has to be populated with the initial DEM data first.  Then the photogrammetric mesh is applied as a separate mesh, and then the imagery is applied to the photogrammetric mesh.  It then has to be color corrected and adjusted for various LOD steps.

And then once it's created it has to be saved somewhere and available for streaming to the client..  Current scenery for MSFS is 2 Petabytes worth, These servers, serving this data need to be capable of handling 100's of thousands if not millions of simultaneous connections and then stream the proper data set to the individual client based on the aircraft position at the time.  This synchronization would be tough enough for something going 120KTS, but it also has to hold up for something going much faster.  The data has to be small enough chunks to be able to be reasonably streamed in real time, but large enough so that the aircraft doesn't reach the edge of one scenery load before the other can be streamed.

And all that doesn't even take into account the "autogen" technology which scans the base satellite data outside the photogrammetric areas and applies buildings and vegetation based on the analysis of that data.

This isn't "free" and Google would need to see some financial benefit by dedicating the cloud space necessary to maintain that large amount of data as well as the bandwidth necessary to stream it globally.

And I simply don't see how the hardcore niche market is deep enough for such an investment.  People might accuse MS for "dumbing down" it's product or simply dismiss it as a game, but at least they have the intelligence to know that without the "casual simmer" there is no way this thing breaks even.  So folks can whine all they want to about the lack of a "study level aircraft" in the out of the box product, but remember that it's the "gamer" who's buzzing the Space Needle in Seattle or flying down 5th Avenue in Manhattan at rooftop level in the TBM, that's paying the bills, not the guy flying a Cat 3 approach into JFK using Vatsim.  That's just simple numbers folks.  
 

Edited by wthomas33065
  • Like 15
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I read somewhere a little while ago that Asobo are starting working on a new game as well so it seems reasonable they will need more staff.

This looks highly promising and shows they are in it for the long haul. 

It will be interesting to see the pace of development over the coming months. We are used to small teams taking a relatively long time to improve the sim and it will be interesting to see what comes next and when when a larger team is involved.

Edited by sanh
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, AmeliaCat said:

I like french fries

Freedom fries.....


Just Flight Beta Tester
 
We are all connected..... To each other, biologically...... To the Earth, chemically...... To the rest of the Universe atomically.
 
Devons rig
Intel Core i7 8700K @ 5.0GHz / 32.0GB G.SKILL TridentZ Series Dual-Channel Ram / ZOTAC GAMING GeForce® RTX 2080 Ti Triple Fan / Sound Blaster Z / Oculus Rift VR Headset / Klipsch® Promedia 2.1 Computer Speakers / ASUS ROG SWIFT PG279Q ‑ 27" IPS LED Monitor ‑ QHD / 2x Samsung SSD 850 EVO 500GB / 1x Samsung SSD 860 EVO 1000GB / 5 other regular hd's with up to 10 terabyte capacity each / Windows 10 Pro 64-bit / Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Gaming 5 Motherboard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sanh said:

I think I read somewhere a little while ago that Asobo are starting working on a new game as well so it seems reasonable they will need more staff.

 

Hopefully ground transportation - trains, trucks, buses or ships - that can build on or even integrate into the world application they have created with FS20. I would love to have a train sim where I don't need to burn my eyes out for months on end in the editor programme to build a 60 mile route.

Edited by Elvensmith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wthomas33065 said:

It's not just "cutting a deal" with Google Maps.  The scenery doesn't simply leap onto the page from the Google Map Servers.  The base scenery has to be populated with the initial DEM data first.  Then the photogrammetric mesh is applied as a separate mesh, and then the imagery is applied to the photogrammetric mesh.  It then has to be color corrected and adjusted for various LOD steps.

And then once it's created it has to be saved somewhere and available for streaming to the client..  Current scenery for MSFS is 2 Petabytes worth, These servers, serving this data need to be capable of handling 100's of thousands if not millions of simultaneous connections and then stream the proper data set to the individual client based on the aircraft position at the time.  This synchronization would be tough enough for something going 120KTS, but it also has to hold up for something going much faster.  The data has to be small enough chunks to be able to be reasonably streamed in real time, but large enough so that the aircraft doesn't reach the edge of one scenery load before the other can be streamed.

And all that doesn't even take into account the "autogen" technology which scans the base satellite data outside the photogrammetric areas and applies buildings and vegetation based on the analysis of that data.

This isn't "free" and Google would need to see some financial benefit by dedicating the cloud space necessary to maintain that large amount of data as well as the bandwidth necessary to stream it globally.

And I simply don't see how the hardcore niche market is deep enough for such an investment.  People might accuse MS for "dumbing down" it's product or simply dismiss it as a game, but at least they have the intelligence to know that without the "casual simmer" there is no way this thing breaks even.  So folks can whine all they want to about the lack of a "study level aircraft" in the out of the box product, but remember that it's the "gamer" who's buzzing the Space Needle in Seattle or flying down 5th Avenue in Manhattan at rooftop level in the TBM, that's paying the bills, not the guy flying a Cat 3 approach into JFK using Vatsim.  That's just simple numbers folks.  
 

Pretty much this.  XPlane and P3D may never have global scenery that is streamable off a server because of what you stated. For the foreseeable future, XPlane and P3D may always use autogen, which is a huge setback for people that want to reproduce VFR flying in a flight simulator.  Even if XPlane and P3D reach the level of graphics of MSFS one day, it doesn't help if the landmarks are all auto generated - that breaks immersion and isn't very useful for pilots/simmers that want to practice flying with visual navigation aids that reflect what we see in real life.

  • Upvote 1

i5-9400, GTX 1660 Super, 24 GB RAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, espent said:

How can you spin this news as bad?

 

It's hella cute how many people have no clue about the gaming industry.

The last studio I worked for where we had to hire so quickly did not end well... if you think this is somehow a "good" thing I envy your ignorance.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

and isn't very useful for pilots/simmers that want to practice flying with visual navigation aids that reflect what we see in real life.

Well, if you need to "practice" recognizing your local Walmart or parents in law´s house from an airplane you have no business flying one in the first place 😉 - while I agree that it´s cool to see your car in your driveway or the bar you like to hang out...it is hardly a deal breaker for VFR navigation if buildings in a town are represented by "generic" buildings instead of ones with the right colour of roof.

For what its worth - I can navigate VFR in X-Plane 11 with a real world sectional chart just fine. Terrain features are exactly where they are on the map, and just because they don´t look "photoreal" does not mean you can´t recognize them. In fact "real" VFR pilots (except the kind that just does the same milkrun every 10th weekend of the year) need to be able to fly and navigate over unfamiliar terrain - and a VFR sectional gives no indication of the way those houses down there really look 😉

Yet if you "practice" a flight in an aircraft that has no resemblance in performance/system handling to your real aircraft, you are doing negative training.

Again, I think it´s awesome that the scenery in MSFS looks as well and realistic as it does - but it isn´t necessary to "train" for real flying.

Jan

Edited by Janov
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks to me like they have made a lot of money from the release of MS 2020 and are expanding their operations. 😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RXP said:

@airlinejets Un compatriote! Formidable!!

Dude, si tu te met a travailler sur MSFS je pense que je vais faire un crise cardiaque 😄

 

(If RXP starts working for Asobo, i think im gonna have a heart attack 😄 )

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, langly said:

It's hella cute how many people have no clue about the gaming industry.

The last studio I worked for where we had to hire so quickly did not end well... if you think this is somehow a "good" thing I envy your ignorance.

Dude, by now everyone knows you never worked in the "industry" as you say...gotta find another narative 😄

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, langly said:

It's hella cute how many people have no clue about the gaming industry.

The last studio I worked for where we had to hire so quickly did not end well... if you think this is somehow a "good" thing....

Totally disagree. They are recruiting 4 or 5 positions. They have something like 100+ people involved in the product. Hardly "hiring quickly". 

Another viewpoint is that msfs has sold better than expected and MS want to push forward on some things that were put on hold until it was known if the title was going to be a profitable long term investment.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Janov said:

Well, if you need to "practice" recognizing your local Walmart or parents in law´s house from an airplane you have no business flying one in the first place 😉 - while I agree that it´s cool to see your car in your driveway or the bar you like to hang out...it is hardly a deal breaker for VFR navigation if buildings in a town are represented by "generic" buildings instead of ones with the right colour of roof.

For what its worth - I can navigate VFR in X-Plane 11 with a real world sectional chart just fine. Terrain features are exactly where they are on the map, and just because they don´t look "photoreal" does not mean you can´t recognize them. In fact "real" VFR pilots (except the kind that just does the same milkrun every 10th weekend of the year) need to be able to fly and navigate over unfamiliar terrain - and a VFR sectional gives no indication of the way those houses down there really look 😉

Yet if you "practice" a flight in an aircraft that has no resemblance in performance/system handling to your real aircraft, you are doing negative training.

Again, I think it´s awesome that the scenery in MSFS looks as well and realistic as it does - but it isn´t necessary to "train" for real flying.

Jan

Well, I practice strictly with the Cessna 152 and Cessna 172 in MSFS.  While I am not a real life pilot, from all the feedback and reviews I have read from real life Cessna 152 and Cessna 172 pilots, the Cessna 152 and Cessna 172 simulate the real life aircraft pretty well in MSFS.  And trust me, I have read countless reviews and asked for feedback on both these planes over the last 2 months on how they perform in MSFS versus the real life planes from real life pilots that fly these 2 planes.

I think your blanket statement that the "aircraft that has no resemblance in performance/system handling to your real aircraft" is not true for all aircraft in MSFS.  It's true of the default airliners, but it's not true of all the GA planes in MSFS.

So if you are practicing with the Cessna 152 and Cessna 172, not only do you get a plane in MSFS that simulates the real life 152 and 172 quite well, but you also get geographical terrain and landmarks that will also reflect what it looks like in real life.

And BTW, I have no beef against P3D or XPlane.  Because if P3D and XPlane can deliver what MSFS delivers, at the same price to the consumer, I will be more than glad to jump over to P3D and XPlane.  But the amount of money I have to fork out over on P3D and XPlane to get it up to speed is not worth it when MSFS does it at a much lower price (even if XPlane provided satellite generated terrain one day and not auto-generated terrain, will they charge for that?).

Edited by abrams_tank
  • Like 2

i5-9400, GTX 1660 Super, 24 GB RAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Janov said:

Again, I think it´s awesome that the scenery in MSFS looks as well and realistic as it does - but it isn´t necessary to "train" for real flying.

I agree but there is something about flying over what is really there in real life even if it is not for VFR flying. I was flying somewhere over northern Africa and there were these strange water inlets everywhere. It looked spectacular. Later I checked Google  maps and it was really there. If it had been generic textures I would have missed out on a lot in my simulated world travels. Namibia in Africa is just spectacular with the sand dunes. I only fly airliners but strangely instead of fast forwarding or walking away I actually enjoy checking out the world from 30000ft. 

Edited by sanh
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

I think your blanket statement that the "aircraft that has no resemblance in performance/system handling to your real aircraft" is not true

That was a perfect example of "selective" quoting.

I wrote: IF you fly an aircraft... 😉

So yeah, if the Cessnas handle realistically, the "negative training" part does not apply. I just read somewhere that they had some problems with mixture/high altitude performance, but I guess that was fixed or a misconception.

Cheers, Jan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    34%
    $8,560.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...