I hear that you can make XP11 looks as good as MSFS

[VFXSimmer 1,310]

4 hours ago, tonywob said:

I very much dislike photogrammetry in MFS and have it switched off. The autogen is much nicer IMO and less heavy on my system. For me, it's spikey, low quality and visually very distracting as it pops in and out. I know this is all related to machine and internet speed, but for me, I just don't like it.

X-Plane's default autogen actually looks pretty good at ground level, but once you're viewing it from above it looks very unnatural, robotic and just not realistic at all. Maybe having everything in grids is fine in the US, but just looks wrong here in Europe. 

On the flip-side of the coin, MFS's autogen does not look good to me at ground level even though the models are very detailed. However, it looks fantastic once up in the air, and this is the whole point of a flight simulator is it not? I honestly couldn't care less about seeing little mailboxes and cars on driveways, as long as when I'm flying over it at 130kts at 3000ft it's believable and accurate enough.

Thanks Tony, this was kind of the point I was trying to make.  Both sims make use of autogen.  Right now I think MSFS is doing it better in the default sim because it is doing more of what World2XPlane did for xplane in that it places buildings of the right shape position, etc based on OSM and whatever image processing alchemy actually makes it into the sauce in terms of roof color, etc. as opposed to randomized tiles along roadways based on landclass which seems to be the case for far too much of the xplane landscape right now for my taste.

Photogrammetry is in the eyes of the beholder.  I personally love it at anything 400' or higher because at that point it really looks like the neighborhoods I'm familiar with.. down to the signage I was talking about earlier... and its flaws are minimized.

Maybe some brilliant mind could find a way to merge the best of both worlds - projecting PG onto OSM models perhaps?  

Bigger question, what is my point in terms of why am I bothering to write this in the X-plane forums.  Its because I actually love X-plane.  I pumped thousands of dollars and spent untold hours getting it to look as real as I could.  And flying helos in VR is an awesome experience.  But msfs just looks too word not allowed good now.  I equally enjoy being as much a virtual tourist as I am a virtual pilot.  I do find it interesting to learn proper procedures and did fly Goran's TBM and was watching many a youtube video to learn it.  But I'm not a real pilot that is not the only thing that interests me in a flight sim.  The visceral realism of being over an accurate world is an equally enjoyable experience.

I would love it if XP12 could start to incorporate some of these things that are drawing me to msfs right now.  I hear rumors, but would love to hear more of anything (tease, roadmap?). And on this very forum, by their own admission are at least two people in direct communication with the LR staff.  If they chose to listen to the requests from fans of their software they would keep at least one interested customer.  If they don't then I guess I'll just give a saddened shrug and be on my way...

[FlyBaby 659]

9 hours ago, Greazer said:

https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2020/12/17/microsoft-flight-simulator-is-fastest-growing-entry-in-the-series-with-over-2-million-players-to-date/

That was 3 months ago before Xmas. Giving that X box version will release soon, by Xmas 2021 there could be 9-10 million MSFS users, and that's being conservative.

I would not link this for @GoranM. Apparently he did not know that MSFS had reached 2 million pilots and wanted someone else to spoon feed him.

 

9 hours ago, GoranM said:

Ok, so they're not ACTUAL pilots.  They're virtual pilots.  

Thanks for the link!  Let us all know when multi wing aircraft are available, with TRUE multi wing flight models.

 

They are pilots in the MSFS world...did you happen to see the other stat???

One of the top 3 planes flown by these 2 million "pilots" is the...default TBM.

So you really need to think about the cost of opportunity (as a Dev) when you sit around in your own little bubble "splitting hairs" on a forum site.

What if, just what if...a Dev considered the opportunity of reaching millions of pilots with their very own "virtual" plane. Not @GoranM, he is too busy sending memes around the stagnant XP Dev community.

Austin claimed he did not watch the competition....and look where that got him...

 

Edited March 26, 2021 by FlyBaby

[FlyBaby 659]

8 hours ago, GoranM said:

Actually, I've seen a very nice sales INCREASE in my own add ons ever since MSFS came out.

Was that increase in the millions??? If not, you might want to consider MSFS as a platform, I "hear" that they have millions of pilots flying in their virtual world.

[mSparks 2,086]

2 hours ago, efis007 said:

The FS2020 rendering engine is better than Xplane.

Actually this _isn't_ true. "on a technicality".

You are thinking about the MSFS shaders vs the Xplane Shaders, and this is because they intentionally didn't change them during XP11 post launch (other than to fix some things and break others).

X-Planes "rendering engine" - the beast that actually does things like load scenery, manage GPU memory, load, switch and choose the shaders, put geometry onto the GPU and do all the animations was light years ahead of the current MSFS implementation even before they switched to Vulkan.

Vulkan is a marginally more modern API (aka supports newer graphics cards) for rendering engines than DX12. Asobo are still a way off even DX12.

Don't take this as a criticism - its an easy mistake to make, the rendering engine is not visible to an end user, its not something you can compare simply by looking at screenshots or even FPS (unless you know what you are actually looking for).

To simplify it,

The rendering engine determines how much GPU memory getting an identical screenshot consumes, whether you get any stutters, how easy it is for developers to make scenery and aircraft animations, how stable it is (does it crash), what the view distance is (how far you can see into the distance), whether you can do multiple monitors with different view angles (such as 360 degree panoramas, or home cockpits with monitors for windows) and stuff like VR. Rendering engines are really really really hard.

Shaders determine what the rendering engine actually looks like, and more like an art asset such as a model or a texture. They are hard, but have come on a long way since XP11 was released, and everything I've seen in MSFS has free and better versions available as examples on the NVidia developer website.

My main concern there though is better looking shaders generally means lower frames per second.

[efis007 885]

You are right.
I wrote "rendering engine", but I was wrong words, I meant "the overall visual effect" of FS2020 is very convincing, has a beautiful light, good color, contrast, etc.
Xplane is often criticized for having unrealistic lights, colors, contrasts.
But that's not always true.
In the video I posted (not my video) I saw a beautiful XPlane, it looks real.
More beautiful than FS2020?
Probably not, but it's still very very nice.

[RXP 2,338]

43 minutes ago, FlyBaby said:

Was that increase in the millions??? If not, you might want to consider MSFS as a platform, I "hear" that they have millions of pilots flying in their virtual world.

What does this has to do with "I hear you can make XP11 looks as good as MSFS"?

Please, we'd expect you post content explaining whether it is possible from a technical standpoint. Personal feelings, judgment, opinion will never explain why it is possible or not.

[jarmstro 2,405]

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

My main concern there though is better looking shaders generally means lower frames per second.

An interesting and informative post. My experience though is that  X-Vision doesn't seem to effect the FPS much that I've noticed but does wonders for the visuals. I was under the impression that all it does is tweak the shaders? If there is an FPS hit it's well worth it.  (Not that I really understand what shaders are.😩)

[mSparks 2,086]

28 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

My experience though is that  X-Vision doesn't seem to effect the FPS much that I've noticed but does wonders for the visuals

Depends on the shader, graphics card and if you are CPU bound or GPU bound.

A shader adds some amount of time to how long the GPU takes to finish a frame, the more complex the shader the more time it takes. This is always the case.

But its not always the case that how long a frame takes to finish depends on how long the GPU takes to finish a frame.

Best place to browse shaders is

https://www.shadertoy.com/browse

->there's nothing resembling a "rendering engine" there, it literally just sends the text on the right to the GPU and shows what it draws on the left.

e.g. ~200 lines of shader yields

https://www.shadertoy.com/view/Ms2SD1

(360 video, click and drag around!!)

Edited March 26, 2021 by mSparks

[jarmstro 2,405]

13 minutes ago, mSparks said:

Depends on the shader, graphics card and if you are CPU bound or GPU bound.

A shader adds some amount of time to how long the GPU takes to finish a frame, the more complex the shader the more time it takes. This is always the case.

But its not always the case that how long a frame takes to finish depends on how long the GPU takes to finish a frame.

Best place to browse shaders is

https://www.shadertoy.com/browse

->there's nothing resembling a "rendering engine" there, it literally just sends the text on the right to the GPU and shows what it draws on the left.

e.g. ~200 lines of shader yields

https://www.shadertoy.com/view/Ms2SD1

(360 video, click and drag around!!)

Ah! That explains it. I'm definitely cpu bound I would imagine.

[FlyBaby 659]

4 hours ago, RXP said:

What does this has to do with "I hear you can make XP11 looks as good as MSFS"?

 

You should ask the Dev who made the original comment about increasing sales...

4 hours ago, RXP said:

Please, we'd expect you post content explaining whether it is possible from a technical standpoint.

As a Dev...that's your job to figure out or "find a way" to collaborate with MSFS to do so.  

4 hours ago, RXP said:

Personal feelings, judgment, opinion will never explain why it is possible or not.

Personal feelings is the one thing that Devs, like yourself and @GoranM, spew on the forums because of your frustrations. And that...solves nothing...

[RXP 2,338]

@FlyBaby I'm afraid I still don't get what your answer has anything to do with the topic, nor what collaborating with MSFS. has anything to do with making XP11 looking as good as MSFS  But I won't judge what makes you saying so, it's your opinion and I respect this. 

[mSparks 2,086]

41 minutes ago, FlyBaby said:

spew on the forums because of your frustrations.

what you see from devs on forums and in public is a highly sanitized version of what devs really think and say behind closed doors.

So when you see PMDG say

Quote

“We are now a few months beyond the initial release of MSFS

“Unfortunately what we didn’t count on was just how big that work-load would be on the platform side or how slow the update rate would be.

“The bottom line is that while we still remain convinced that MSFS will be the long-term best-platform for simming over the next decade, there are still some major technical challenges that remain to be solved before it can adequately support a product as complex as NG3.

“I am going to whistle-on-by the specifics here because they aren’t important to anyone except the developers involved in the work, but what I can tell you is that we are currently looking at a release timeline for PMDG 737NG3 for MSFS that is out in 3Q21 with some downside risk that it will slide into 4Q21, more than a year from now.

That roughly translates to

"The whole team just worked 8 lots of 72 hour weeks, absolutely nothing works like it should, and a couple of our developers went so insane they murdered some strangers on the way into the office"

Edited March 26, 2021 by mSparks

[GoranM 3,772]

1 hour ago, FlyBaby said:

Personal feelings is the one thing that Devs, like yourself and @GoranM, spew on the forums because of your frustrations. And that...solves nothing...

It takes a lot more than a random person, that I don’t know, who keeps posting negative comments, to even remotely begin to plant a thought in my head of being frustrated. Nice try, though. If it makes you feel better, feel free to keep believing I’m frustrated, while this thread gets back on topic. 

Edited March 26, 2021 by GoranM

[RXP 2,338]

@mSparks Since they've posted this information, the CRJ is now released.

It appears Asobo is working closely with their developers now, and they seem to mention there is no major roadblocks ahead:

There are many comments about this on the following page(s) you might want to read too.

 

 

Edited March 26, 2021 by RXP

[FlyBaby 659]

23 hours ago, GoranM said:

Sorry, I stopped reading after "Apparently...".  I would love to continue this discussions with you, but I have more important things to do.  

Have a wonderful day.

Should have stopped here like you said you would...but...

21 hours ago, GoranM said:

This is precisely why few people take you seriously.  You keep forcing what you believe onto others.  So it's almost impossible to have a proper discussion with you.

Decided to come back because you were frustrated...

20 hours ago, GoranM said:

Do these 2 million pilots fully endorse this unusual behaviour?  

🤣🤣🤣🤣

Disclaimer:  The above post is not meant to be interpreted as "scolding".
 

Edit:  I understand if you don't respond to this.  I'd be embarrassed, too.

Trying to bait me...having no idea that MSFS had more than 2 million pilots in their sim.

How embarrassing for you...

18 hours ago, GoranM said:

Still waiting for that link.

 

Oh wait.  So they're not REAL pilots?  Microsoft is just claiming they are?  

Hey, like someone once said, substitute "lies" for "what you believe".

And even X-Plane dev's take breaks once in a while.  And we all know where we can go to find endless meme material.

😄

Still trying....Still baiting...still clueless...

16 hours ago, GoranM said:

Ok, so they're not ACTUAL pilots.  They're virtual pilots.  

 

Call them what you want, but MSFS has over 2 million of them...

And what platform do you develop for????

11 minutes ago, GoranM said:

It takes a lot more than a random person, that I don’t know, who keeps posting negative comments, to even remotely begin to plant a thought of being frustrated. Nice try, though. Feel free to keep believing I’m frustrated, while this thread gets back on topic. 

So...you went from ignoring (so called), to accusing, to baiting this random person, in less than 24 hours. Only to be educated on the cost of opportunity...when you are busy passing memes amongst developers for a stagnant platform.

Like I said before, I am not a frustrated Dev "scolding" people on a forum because they criticize the platform that I "chose" to stick with...you are

I did not have to try at all, you made this history (above) yourself...