Please don't jump to too many conclusions based off of 1 statement I make.  XP11 is nearing the end of its version run, and XP12 is coming soon.  It's obvious this will be in direct competition to MSFS, and any sane person would know that buildings and fire trucks are way down on the priorities list when it comes to the overall package.  I would actually be bitterly disappointed if they put priority on what you want over the lighting engine, overall scenery, weather and an improved flight model.

YOU might want better buildings for the scenery gateway.  And maybe they'll come.  Just be patient.

Edited December 22, 20205 yr by GoranM

15 minutes ago, flyingpauls said:

But when I started WED work I got a bit angry about missing stuff.

If things like that make you angry...it may be better to find a different hobby 😂.

Everyone has a favourite item or issue with X-Plane. Everyone thinks that THIS very issue needs to get fixed first and then X-Plane will be perfect. I am not different.

However it is important to understand the big picture. And that is what Laminar does and that is what Goran ment.

Go over here: https://feedback.x-plane.com/

and tell me where "firetrucks" are in that ranking. See? 😁

end of this video rings in my ears every time this conversation comes up.

 

1 hour ago, Janov said:

However it is important to understand the big picture. And that is what Laminar does and that is what Goran ment.

Fully agree on that. The simulation aspect comes very first, because it is a flight simulator.

Here a look from our neighbours:

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/591979-why-are-we-not-talking-about-this/

This is one of the results when unprofessional developers do things on their own. The FS developers said themselves, they wanted to tweak the simulation settings, so they feel right. In reality, a plane doesn`t loose 10 knots at clouds, it does not have any effect at. It was told by two professional GA pilots.

If Paul feels angry about missing terminal objects in X-Plane, than FS is the largest (hypothetical) garbage created on earth.
So, LR can adapt whatever people like, but the simulation aspect must be on top level, as it is right now.

Also, does X-Plane 12 really have to compete against FS? Real simulation fans would value better graphics a lot, but I don`t see any point it has to compete with FS. I am sure there is enough income for the developers from real simulation fans. No need XP has to adapt to more customers and create another GTA for airplanes. (Just remembering the funny old comments here, from the visionary FS users that XP cannot survive if they don`t adapt to a larger market).

31 minutes ago, BigDee said:

Also, does X-Plane 12 really have to compete against FS? Real simulation fans would value better graphics a lot, but I don`t see any point it has to compete with FS

A few months ago I would have disagreed with you here... but as time has gone by and the more I'm developing for both sims, I'm starting to appreciate more that each sim has rather a different approach towards its users and what they're ultimately aiming for.  X-Plane, whilst it can't compete in terms of visuals yet, is much more configurable, tweakable and open in terms of what can be done and developed with it, whilst MFS is quite a closed-box with a rather more closed/restricted SDK. MS is clearly pushing to get this sim on the xbox and usable with a game controller, however X-Plane is not going down this route (at least for now). I personally much prefer LR's approach as I'd never use a flight simulator on a games console and I like to tweak everything, but MS clearly has the bigger customer base. Everyday on sites such as FSElite we see airport after airport being released, from veteran XP/P3D developers and new developers alike and there isn't a day that goes by now where another developer isn't announcing porting their old products over to MFS or a new airport is released

1 hour ago, BigDee said:

Also, does X-Plane 12 really have to compete against FS?

It doesn't HAVE to, but we've all seen the comparisons between XP11 and MSFS on reddit, youtube, etc...  So the inevitable will, surely, happen.

X-Plane is easily ahead of MFS in terms of flight dynamics modelling, and available tools...

While I enjoy MFS for it's graphics quite a Lot, even downgraded as they are to be able to run on my old rig, truth is the available choices, even without going to external programming, are way more vast, and I would dare saying consistent in XP.

Someone mentioned that quirk with the "cloud effects on density / IAS ", and just a few days ago, thanks to Murmur, I was also able to verify how tricky is the approach ASOBO followed to circumvent their problems with ground physics when under x-winds. The effects of x-wind are worse in MFS than in XP, so they decided to add some magic and simply nill the radial component up to a given taxi speed... Well, together with other simplifications, my only hope, and belief, is that ASOBO with their much wider resources and the already proven dynamism, can continue to improve the flight and systems modelling...

Edited December 22, 20205 yr by jcomm

9 hours ago, mjrhealth said:

Did notice that AMD and Nvidia divers are releasing minor Vulkan updates with each new driver

Vulkan is an ever evolving API and new extensions are being rolled in pretty much every few weeks, so that's kind of expected.

 

4 hours ago, GoranM said:

YOU might want better buildings for the scenery gateway.  And maybe they'll come.  Just be patient.

On the other hand, I love the thinking outside the box that's required to get a Gateway airport to look as much as possible to the real thing. It (re)trains imagination and creativity, something that got lost with the advent of photorealism and usually gets lost in most people with adolescence.

 

4 hours ago, Janov said:

Go over here: https://feedback.x-plane.com/

and tell me where "firetrucks" are in that ranking. See? 😁

And even if they're on that list, Laminar's comment would be nothing but the usual non-commital "We're looking at this for future implementation". 😉

18 minutes ago, Bjoern said:

And even if they're on that list, Laminar's comment would be nothing but the usual non-commital "We're looking at this for future implementation". 😉

True - they are holding their cards close to their chest.

I know that "more assets for airports" is on their list and they do deem those important. It is just when looking at the whole state of assets on the simulator (autogen, vegetation, terrain textures, etc.) they feel - and I agree - that the airports have gotten a lot of upgrading in the last years...while we are still looking at the same trees we had in XP8.

Cheers, Jan

 

30 minutes ago, Janov said:

they are holding their cards close to their chest.

Hehe. I forget where I saw it now, but I think Austins "leaks" in that video made Ben a bit bonkers...

3 hours ago, tonywob said:

X-Plane is not going down this route

afiak Xplane "as is" could, more or less, drag and drop straight onto the PS5, with PSVR support. (sony use lua for their scripting)

Really Really wish they would do that. Half expect they will.....

On 12/21/2020 at 8:49 AM, flyingpauls said:

Yep. True. LR has been asked very often to improve that. They do far too little steps when it comes to those details. I would guess it does not take a good developer more than a week to equip X-Plane with great terminal buildings and towers. X-Plane currently does not even have a fire truck.

LR developers need to improve their performance, on many levels.

5 hours ago, tonywob said:

A few months ago I would have disagreed with you here... but as time has gone by and the more I'm developing for both sims, I'm starting to appreciate more that each sim has rather a different approach towards its users and what they're ultimately aiming for.  X-Plane, whilst it can't compete in terms of visuals yet, is much more configurable, tweakable and open in terms of what can be done and developed with it, whilst MFS is quite a closed-box with a rather more closed/restricted SDK. MS is clearly pushing to get this sim on the xbox and usable with a game controller, however X-Plane is not going down this route (at least for now). I personally much prefer LR's approach as I'd never use a flight simulator on a games console and I like to tweak everything, but MS clearly has the bigger customer base. Everyday on sites such as FSElite we see airport after airport being released, from veteran XP/P3D developers and new developers alike and there isn't a day that goes by now where another developer isn't announcing porting their old products over to MFS or a new airport is released

Yes is amazing 5 developers doing same airport for MS, I dont own one in xplane. Cant see the point. Its quick money, dont blame them, we all need to get paid.

And 11.51R1 is out

Edited December 22, 20205 yr by mjrhealth

Some replies seem to misunderstand my point. Of course, X-Plane has more important stuff to do than fire trucks. Even I found enough problems in their flight model. Then, there is still the issue with their simulation of weather and wind, let alone the visual aspect of the clouds. And the ATC is nothing to write home about too.

The point is that they do not find the time at all to do the small things which could be done with almost no effort. You may call this effectiveness. I call it carelessness.

Edited December 25, 20205 yr by flyingpauls

2 hours ago, flyingpauls said:

The point is that they do not find the time at all to do the small things which could be done with almost no effort. You may call this effectiveness. I call it carelessness.

Well - I am eagerly awaiting your first flightsimulator, then - since you seem to know so much about how to implement all this. Or are you careless and don´t want to program it for us? 😂

Edited December 25, 20205 yr by Janov

4 hours ago, flyingpauls said:

Some replies seem to misunderstand my point. Of course, X-Plane has more important stuff to do than fire trucks. Even I found enough problems in their flight model. Then, there is still the issue with their simulation of weather and wind, let alone the visual aspect of the clouds. And the ATC is nothing to write home about too.

The point is that they do not find the time at all to do the small things which could be done with almost no effort. You may call this effectiveness. I call it carelessness.

to give some substance to the sarcasm of @Janov

for all the things they havent got to yet, its wide open to DIY, and has been for years

 

Edited December 25, 20205 yr by mSparks