34 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

This is a good point.  It's not enough for XPlane to have a few places that match the graphics of MSFS.  The whole world in XPlane has to have graphics that match MSFS, along with correct geographic markings and locations.  This can only be done by streaming this data to the XPlane client. And the only other company in the world that can do this is Google.  Short of a partnership with Google, XPlane cannot deliver what MSFS delivers.

  

27 minutes ago, marsman2020 said:

This is just false.  

There are many hosting providers and CDNs that can stream data over the internet.

There are global DEMs and ortho data available from many sources, and building data comes from OpenStreetMaps.

There is no requirement that Google be involved for X-Plane to deliver a better visual experience.  

 

I think he meant the licensing issues, there is NAIP and local state GIS data, but thats about it. But as far as it costing millions of dollars to stream this data...
Would never happen. For Xplane, maybe 5000 simultaneous capacity at absolute max, if even that.

Edited November 27, 20205 yr by SceneryFX

51 minutes ago, RobJC said:

Yes, and the problem is the architecture. They cannot just model the entire planet to the degree MS has done without revamping everything needed to stream that data in. It would be a HUGE undertaking. And if it was just for a few regions I am not interested. The ability to fly anywhere in the world at high res realistic quality IS the killer feature. And then it would be missing photogrammetry. 

Game over. 

They completely gutted the graphics engine and changed it to vulkan, there is already reference code they can use for streaming graphics into vulkan (or any engine) from the Internet, it's some work but nothing compared to what they already finished. They already did the hard part to be honest. There is some tweaking, but the photogrammetry, well that is going to have to be manually created using AI or licensed from someone like Google, there is a third method which I'll leave nameless for now 🙂

This is nothing new trying to stream graphics or objects from the Internet into a game, every FPS game has to synchronize objects between multiple players, MMO;s, etc... Flight Sim games are just a single player system, it's so much simpler it's not even funny.

The bigger issue is getting all the streaming compression and caching coded in, but it's still a heck of a lot easier than gutting a graphics engine, those programmers that did the graphics engine can do the Internet part in their sleep.

Edited November 27, 20205 yr by SceneryFX

3 hours ago, OSM said:

I don`t see FS2020 becoming any better. With each update it gradually becomes worse and users becoming concerned about this a lot. Now you can`t see the bright future for FS2020.

On the contrary, in my experience -- and I don't think I am alone -- it has improved with every update. The recent USA update is spectacular!

12 minutes ago, marsman2020 said:

Beautiful scenery ...

How about Realistic scenery with the Realistic weather for IMC, night flight training or flight area familiarization, etc. Does this important for Helicopters and GA pilots training?

1 hour ago, marsman2020 said:

This is just false.  

There are many hosting providers and CDNs that can stream data over the internet.

There are global DEMs and ortho data available from many sources, and building data comes from OpenStreetMaps.

There is no requirement that Google be involved for X-Plane to deliver a better visual experience.  

And who will supply that data for the entire world?  That data that covers the entire world, Microsoft and Google has that data.  XPlane needs permission for that data.  It's not free.  The best they could do is try to convince Google to give it to them for free.

And even if Google gives it to them for free, what about the servers to stream it?  That costs money too.  Google isn't giving XPlane free servers and the bandwith to go with it to stream that data.

And don't get "better visual experience" mixed up with "accurate visual experience."  Like I said, XPlane can improve it's graphics engine, but without the satellite data & photogrammetry data (plus, you have to massage that satellite data into 3D objects, which is what Blackshark AI does - this would cost Austin more money), it can't provide a world wide visual experience that is comparable to MSFS.

Edited November 27, 20205 yr by abrams_tank

51 minutes ago, OSM said:

Austin hates orthoimages in the sim, so most likely Lockheed Martin will have partnership with Google.

Yup, that makes sense for LM.  Alternatively, LM could pay Microsoft to license MSFS for commercial use. It would be a repeat of what they did with FSX. But hey, if you can't beat em, then join em.

33 minutes ago, cobalt said:

On the contrary, in my experience -- and I don't think I am alone -- it has improved with every update. The recent USA update is spectacular!

Look, for X-plane I made for myself 1,5 TB ZL17-18 orthoimages, each adjusted with Photoshop and 150 GB World2XP overlays based on the latest OSM data for the US South. I know what does it mean "spectacular". For the USA Bing images the worst source. Goggle images much better. 😀

Edited November 27, 20205 yr by OSM

8 minutes ago, OSM said:

Look, for X-plane I made for myself 1,5 TB ZL17-18 orthoimages, each adjusted with Photoshop and 150 GB World2XP overlays based on the latest OSM data for the US South. I know what does it mean "spectacular". For the USA Bing images the worst source. Goggle images much better. 😀

Google was better on average in much of the US, but Bing was better in some areas. The problem is we are not seeing Bing's best in FS 2020.

The Bing stuff I download in Ortho4XP is higher resolution than the Bing we get in MSFS 2020 because of mass mass "JPG-LIKE" image compression.

FS 2020 makes up for it at low altitudes because of the overlay texturing tricks (though this also has a disadvantage of losing detail or making things look a bit more computerized and digital), but I suppose it works overall. From higher altitudes though, it's no contest, the higher res ortho looks better no matter what is on top of the other stuff.

Edited November 27, 20205 yr by SceneryFX

3 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

First things first, I have said that I would be more than happy to switch to XPlane if XPlane offers the comparable quality to MSFS, and the same price at MSFS.  For me, aside from airliners, MSFS offers better quality and the price is lower than XPlane.  For the flight model, many real life GA pilots have pointed out the flight model is very good for the Cessna 152 and Cessna 172 in MSFS.

But if you are a hardcore fan of XPlane (and I hope you aren't), what I will say next will be harsh, but it's the truth.  3rd parties are ultimately businesses.  If the sales of 3rd party companies start dwindling on XPlane, and they make a loss on producing new products for XPlane, they will stop making products for XPlane, because continuing to do so will drive them to bankruptcy.

Aerosoft was candid enough to tell us the sales of their products.  If the sales of Aerosoft products was so great with P3D, you bet Aerosoft would still continue to make products for P3D.  But Aerosoft has seen the drop in spending on P3D products and as per their calculations, they may make a loss if they make new products for P3D.  While Aerosoft has said their sales for XPlane is okay so far, the implication is there is an approaching tide coming in at XPlane as well.  At the moment, XPlane is positioned better than P3D for 3rd party developers like Aerosoft, but the insinuation is that XPlane is the next hurdle that may be toppled.  So none of us can see the future, but if I were a betting person, I would not place my bets on the future of XPlane.  XPlane's two biggest problems is that its engine is 10 years old, and it can't stream the world to user's desktop.  Even if XPlane can fix the first problem about its engine, how is it going to fix the second problem?  To solve the second problem, I can only think of one other company in the world that can solve it for XPlane and that's Google.  But until I see an announcement that XPlane has officially partnered with Google, I doubt they will solve the problem of streaming the entire world like MSFS is capable of.

Yes, there will always be a user base of XPlane, just as there will always be a user base for P3D.  But the key point isn't the user base as Aerosoft has mentioned, it the number of users in that user base that will spend enough money to make new products profitable for 3rd party companies.  The number of users in P3D that are willing to buy new products has dwindled and Aerosoft thinks any new products they make for P3D will make them a loss.  It's entirely conceivable that the number of users in XPlane that are willing to buy new products will also dwindle one day and if that happens, the remaining 3rd party companies that make new products for XPlane will eventually cease as well.

Lastly, don't forget the XBox version is coming for MSFS.  The XBox version will inject another wave of new revenue for 3rd party developers of MSFS and grow the user base of MSFS further, further enticing more 3rd party developers to prioritize MSFS.

 

 

I am not worried if people stop making add-ons for one sim or the other. I just want MSFS to be the best and ASOBO to wake up!

41 minutes ago, cobalt said:

On the contrary, in my experience -- and I don't think I am alone -- it has improved with every update. The recent USA update is spectacular!

But its just graphics. The AP was destroyed, the flight model not improved. This is my point! Its all about those Pixels and not about the Math lol

9 minutes ago, SceneryFX said:

Google was better on average in much of the US, but Bing was better in some areas. The problem is we are not seeing Bing's best in FS 2020.

The Bing stuff I download in Ortho4XP is higher resolution than the Bing we get in MSFS 2020 because of mass mass "JPG-LIKE" image compression.

Orthoimages in FS2020 make everything, including photogrammetry and vegetation. Actually, poor quality orthoimages unacceptable.

Edited November 27, 20205 yr by OSM

25 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

And who will supply that data for the entire world?  That data that covers the entire world, Microsoft and Google has that data.  XPlane needs permission for that data.  It's not free.  The best they could do is try to convince Google to give it to them for free.

And even if Google gives it to them for free, what about the servers to stream it?  That costs money too.  Google isn't giving XPlane free servers and the bandwith to go with it to stream that data.

And don't get "better visual experience" mixed up with "accurate visual experience."  Like I said, XPlane can improve it's graphics engine, but without the satellite data & photogrammetry data (plus, you have to massage that satellite data into 3D objects, which is what Blackshark AI does - this would cost Austin more money), it can't provide a world wide visual experience that is comparable to MSFS.

There is free data for most of the world, and it can be improved using the same type of tone mapping tricks that HDR optimizers use. It is lower quality, but not all of it, about 80% of it or so (maybe less I don't know exactly) is 1.2m, some is better. That said, it can be improved using state of the art processing tricks, but it's not simple. This would have to be combined with the same or similar tricks that Asobo also uses in their overlay texturing, so it has to be a multi-faceted approach.

The problem is finding the expertise from people that know how to do it, and not just do it, but do it right. There are only a handful of people that are really good at it, maybe 1000 people in the entire world that already have the experience, I'm sure there are thousands that could do it well if they tried, but it is pretty tricky. Most of the people that know how to do it work at TV manufacturers or for video processing companies (like Lumagen). They would need to hire a tone mapping expert to fix it, and that's just Step 1. So I doubt they ever will.

Edited November 27, 20205 yr by SceneryFX

2 hours ago, akita said:

x-plane has no problem with the current way they utilize real world terrain data. it's rather how they represent it in the simulator.

Compared to FSX, XP does have fascinating visual qualities,  paid add-ons come in some cases close to reality. Further, it doesn`t have exaggerated lighting and it is beautiful to watch. FS2020 is of course way better in graphics, but still the lighting tends to create a cartoonish look, not much, but a litte, this can be seen when compared with real world images.

From the pic you have showed, the one thing that is evident is that XP does also have very good auto-generated buildings, or even better, there is no building visible that is sitting on top of a photographed building, at least in the pic.

 

My main point is, whatever Microsoft does in FS2020, it has to be anounced in the loudest manner, yet they are not the only ones.

I really hope LM or LR can come up with an answer to MSFS, but I seriously doubt they are going to make such a huge investment. Meanwhile MSFS will be coming to xbox, meaning more resources to pour into better weather, better terrain, better everything. 

It would take a miracle for me to open my wallet to either P3D or XP at this point. They would have to make huge gains.  

1 hour ago, cobalt said:

On the contrary, in my experience -- and I don't think I am alone -- it has improved with every update. The recent USA update is spectacular!

Yes it's beautiful, and it also full of good idea.

But the execution is so lacking, you have :

 

- Really bad testing before release

- New features that are half baked, then no update on them

- Stuff presented on the discovery serie that are not present, or not working

- Tweaking instead of fixing

- Saying on Q&A you can't feel the force, when force feedback tech exist

- Also during the Q&A, telling us that they will take time to answer unanswered questions on the forum, in fact just 1-2% of them

- SDK is still lacking, but it does not really matter now since update might completely break your addons

- For the AP issue, we still don't know if they recognize the issue, if we will see a quickfix or if we will have to wait a month

- "You are disconnected from the internet, press OK to confirm"

 

So yeah, a lot of issue and we are not better in term of execution that we were 3 month ago