2 hours ago, FlyBaby said:

In contrast, Asobo received feedback from both the community and Devs about the poor level of their garmin avionics...taking the feedback, Asobo collaborated with Working Title (producing freeware) to improve their Garmin systems.

I agree, they have received a lot of feedback from the community and 3rd party devs in general.

However as for taking feedback and collaborating:
GTN650/750 updates? - Page 4 - Microsoft Flight Simulator (2020) - The AVSIM Community

1 hour ago, Paraffin said:

LR does have additional income streams from the mobile version, the FAA-certified XP Pro version, and side contracts with aerospace companies. LR has some similarities with LM's P3D in not really needing to tap fees from 3rd party products to fund the sim development.

 

I stated that LR has additional revenue in my post (the same one you quoted) with regards to their mobile version. So you either have a problem with reading or a problem with selective quoting someone to fit your agenda.

Either way, you missed the mark. try reading it again below...

23 hours ago, FlyBaby said:

With respect to their mobile app…

To me, this is where XP shines, LR has a continuous revenue stream from the in-app purchases that can fund resources for further development. This is the market that LR can dominate and I believe that LR will (at some point) just mainly focus on this market from an investment / growth aspect.

 

Then you went to say....

1 hour ago, Paraffin said:

I have to speak up for LR's community engagement and update process. They have a far superior system of opt-in Beta branch for previewing and testing changes in the sim, compared to the new kid on the block.

I don't know if you've been over to the MSFS forum here lately, but that sim is suffering from "one step forward, two steps back" syndrome with new patches, along with a strange reluctance to hotfix anything seriously broken. There is no way to revert to a previous version. People have to wait two weeks or more for the next update, and live with whatever new artifacts and glitches were introduced. It's nowhere near as smooth as we're used to with XP, or any AAA game released through Steam where you can also opt-in to a beta branch. 

LR is doing this right, and we do get some info and feedback through the Dev blog site. 

 

...

 

 

 

5 minutes ago, RXP said:

I agree, they have received a lot of feedback from the community and 3rd party devs in general.

However as for taking feedback and collaborating:
GTN650/750 updates? - Page 4 - Microsoft Flight Simulator (2020) - The AVSIM Community

So are you saying that MSFS is not collaborating with Working Title???

I want to be sure now, because there was a big announcement in their live stream and a MSFS partnership series video (much like other partnership vids showcasing their collaboration efforts) introducing Working Title staff as well.

1 hour ago, Paraffin said:

I don't know if you've been over to the MSFS forum here lately, but that sim is suffering from "one step forward, two steps back"

Depends on what you prefer. Complaints about Vulkan Device Loss CTDs for months and months and months. Or complaints about a temporary FPS slowdown lasting at most two minutes which will no doubt be promptly fixed?

Edited March 17, 20215 yr by jarmstro

@FlyBaby This is not what I'm saying at all. This is maybe what you are inferring instead, and if this is the case, it would mean I've just wrongly expressed myself. The topic I'm linking to has more details about "taking feedback" and "collaboration".

Edited March 17, 20215 yr by RXP

20 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

I look forward to waving my phone in front of my face and prodding the little screen to try and set the ILS frequency on the Toliss 319.😂 Seriously?

Bravo, you did not understand a single thing I wrote.

4 minutes ago, RXP said:

@FlyBaby This is not what I'm saying at all. This is maybe what you are inferring instead, and if this is the case, it would mean I've just wrongly expressed myself. The topic I'm linking to has more details about "taking feedback" and "collaboration".

Got it, my original point was MSFS does look to collaborate with other devs (WT as an example). This is evident throughout the features in their sim.

However, I realize that there will be disagreements in the how / who. I, myself, prefer that MSFS went down another road with respect to improving their Garmins & 3rd party vendors. But to infer that they don't collaborate in general (or even try to), I think is a bit too much.

7 minutes ago, Bjoern said:

Bravo, you did not understand a single thing I wrote.

I think @jarmstro did...

You wrote a lot about Austin's far off outlook concerning software / hardware convergence...that is about 5 years away. Which is...at this point...all talk.

The idea that someone interested primarily in the PC flight sim could care about mobile initiatives is about as disconnected as Austin showcasing his vertical plane at a "flight sim" convention.

Your comments tend to represent a consumer base so ignored...that they embrace even the distractions that Austin waves in front of them because he really doesn't have much to say about future improvements to the PC app.

Austin "vision" about the "Dynamic Unpredictable World” was political drama at its best, and the hungry crowd cheered faithfully for their candidate...who offered no answers for the here and now.

5 hours ago, FlyBaby said:

How is that you "downplay" the efforts of DCS

If this was a DCS topic my only comment about their future would be they should put some effort into making it run on a device I own, rather than a device I gave up on completely 6 months ago.

5 hours ago, FlyBaby said:

So again @mSparks, these are Devs taking feedback, adjusting and improving...constantly.

Where is LR with engagement and improvement?

 

In their slack channel, a safe space for developers to use words developers use about: computers, bugs and people who make blanket complaints and statements with no way of validating them.

 improvement has been constant, think that earlier video shows it well. from 2017, with no VR, terribly broken flight model and fps often in the 20s for

to today, perfect VR with solid 60fps and basically perfect flight model

vs the real thing

What exactly do you think needs to be improved next? - what are you waiting for?

Edited March 17, 20215 yr by mSparks

3 hours ago, mSparks said:

What exactly do you think needs to be improved next? - what are you waiting for?

At this point I have mainly 5 wishes:

Transsonic & supersonic flight accuracy: X-Plane seems to use Prandtl-Glauert rule for compressible flow effects, but its accuracy quickly deteriorates at the transsonic region, especially above Mach 0.7, which is common for many airliners. It diverges to infinity at Mach 1 anyway. Other than that, I think X-Plane's flight model is the best among all other options for civilian flight simulator games.

Atmospherics: Even P3D got volumetric atmosphere & sky at this point, and I hope X-Plane will be the next.

Lighting: Combined with atmospherics, lighting makes a huge difference.

Ground textures: To be fair I don't care about orthophotos, as it's really time consuming to build and takes a lot of space - not even mentioning color issues. All I want is good looking ground textures, like Orbx Global, I don't care if it matches reality or not.

And lastly, airliners: This is not a wish to Laminar as X-Plane has nothing to do with add-ons available for it, but I love simulating failures and even after many years there isn't much airliners with PMDG/FSLabs/Leonardo Maddog/Majestic accuracy.

Edited March 17, 20215 yr by BiologicalNanobot

5 hours ago, jarmstro said:

Depends on what you prefer. Complaints about Vulkan Device Loss CTDs for months and months and months. Or complaints about a temporary FPS slowdown lasting at most two minutes which will no doubt be promptly fixed?

Developers lost the will to provide any meaningful support the last 6 months. Vulkan was rushed out the door way too fast in order to move on to the next version. So it's the last version and a half broken one that can potentially crash at any given time. 

4 hours ago, FlyBaby said:

I think @jarmstro did...

You wrote a lot about Austin's far off outlook concerning software / hardware convergence...that is about 5 years away. Which is...at this point...all talk.

The idea that someone interested primarily in the PC flight sim could care about mobile initiatives is about as disconnected as Austin showcasing his vertical plane at a "flight sim" convention.

Your comments tend to represent a consumer base so ignored...that they embrace even the distractions that Austin waves in front of them because he really doesn't have much to say about future improvements to the PC app.

Austin "vision" about the "Dynamic Unpredictable World” was political drama at its best, and the hungry crowd cheered faithfully for their candidate...who offered no answers for the here and now.

You also completely missed my point. I do not care a single bit if the code base of my simulator is the same as the one of a mobile app as long as I can get a satisfactory experience, scaled to my preferences, from it on desktop PC. In practical terms, this means that a user of the mobile release gets to see, say, 1000 objects per scene at best while I get to see 1000000 objects at 8k resolution and 16xAA on a PC. If Laminar can pull this off with XP 12 or 13, then all the power to them.

39 minutes ago, BiologicalNanobot said:

Transsonic & supersonic flight accuracy:

100% agree As earlier, in Austins head now, desperate to escape, so should be incoming and one to watch for.

40 minutes ago, BiologicalNanobot said:

Atmospherics

maybe. I hope this doesn't get overdone like I've seen in msfs, because they are fairly rare, and too much is much more a visible problem than to few. 

This is probably one of the most lacking - but its also very hard on the gpu, I have serious doubts they will be able to do much, and that even if they get them working it will be a few more years of innovation from nvidia before we can actually use them, same goes for lighting. 

48 minutes ago, BiologicalNanobot said:

Ground textures:

I'd quite like some ground with some actual substance to it.

Like they do with decals but using fragment shaders - I hope this is among the things they have the art engineers working on.

I've been saying for a while, the literal benchmark there is unigine

But by the looks of it they just arent good enough to do it. If we were remotely close - even one to two years off - doing what unigine were doing 7 years ago on the graphics front it really wouldnt be so hard for them to announce something.

 

 

6 hours ago, BiologicalNanobot said:

At this point I have mainly 5 wishes:

Transsonic & supersonic flight accuracy: X-Plane seems to use Prandtl-Glauert rule for compressible flow effects, but its accuracy quickly deteriorates at the transsonic region, especially above Mach 0.7, which is common for many airliners. It diverges to infinity at Mach 1 anyway. Other than that, I think X-Plane's flight model is the best among all other options for civilian flight simulator games.

Atmospherics: Even P3D got volumetric atmosphere & sky at this point, and I hope X-Plane will be the next.

Lighting: Combined with atmospherics, lighting makes a huge difference.

Ground textures: To be fair I don't care about orthophotos, as it's really time consuming to build and takes a lot of space - not even mentioning color issues. All I want is good looking ground textures, like Orbx Global, I don't care if it matches reality or not.

And lastly, airliners: This is not a wish to Laminar as X-Plane has nothing to do with add-ons available for it, but I love simulating failures and even after many years there isn't much airliners with PMDG/FSLabs/Leonardo Maddog/Majestic accuracy.

Going by the various hints there have been lately I do not think you will be granted any of your wishes. And unless MS pull the plug on Asobo you never will.

What I think they are working on is Mobile Multiplayer. Not a bad gamble from a business point of view.

This is the funniest thread I've read about Austin and speculation about where LR is going.  

You guys, seriously, have zero idea.  And that tells me that what Austin wants, which is everything kept under wraps, is working beautifully!  All the "wishing" and speculation in the world won't stop what LR is doing at the moment.  And that includes ridiculously huge amounts of collaboration with established developers in their Slack channel.

Asobo have proven that they are so bad at creating a flight sim, they actually need help from programmers.

I'll just do what most other developers and X-Plane users are now doing, and sit back and enjoy the "I'm an MSFS user and I'm going to stir the pot and throw my delusional weight and knowledge around in the X-Plane forums" show.