15 minutes ago, akita said:

The only difference are shader stages in the pipeline which can be easily skipped AKA graphics settings, this is due to mobiles not having powerful GPUs yet.

Also if speaking specifically DLSS is proprietary for Nvidia.

My point still stands though.  If Austin drops focusing on the desktop market for X-Plane, he will not invest in stuff that is dedicated for the desktop market, like DLSS.  He will invest in stuff for the mobile version of X-Plane.  And then MSFS and X-Plane will diverge further on the desktop, with MSFS getting much better and more advanced on the desktop.

Edited June 2, 20215 yr by abrams_tank

11 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

My point still stands though.  If Austin drops focusing on the desktop market for X-Plane, he will not invest in stuff that is dedicated for the desktop market, like DLSS.  He will invest in stuff for the mobile version of X-Plane.  And then MSFS and X-Plane will diverge further on the desktop, with MSFS getting much better and more advanced on the desktop.

No... it does not stand whatsoever. Unless you assume: 1) mobile devices stop improving for ever, the age of technology is over and in this case flying MSFS or Xplane would be our last concern. 2) Austin is a stupid man so he merges mobile and desktop in order to downgrade his own platform.

Sorry mate, your lack of understanding/wishful thinking really pops here....

42 minutes ago, akita said:

A scenery can be procedural AND photo realistic too, or completely fictional, depends how it is cut and for what purpose. Procedural texturing simply refers to a texturing tech so that you can blend multiple materials resulting in greater scale, more small PBR details etc.

Sure, and to be on-topic, MSFS has not to get there, it is already there: e.g. the grass is drawn by procedures. Where it has to generate grass it knows from the aerial images. This is an unbeatable system architecture. No other sim will be able to match because global aerial imagery is out of reach (financially). You guys are underestimating the foundation, that has been laid by the MSFS team. The difficult (if not impossible for anybody else) parts MSFS got right. Getting a flight model right is just grunt work. Thats solveable on any platform.

 

52 minutes ago, akita said:

Microsoft experts really has no "hidden secrets" when it comes to graphics, industry standart graphics features all over the place just like P3D DCS XP and others will catch it up soon. So the quoting by Microsoft 50 super ultra talents really is just a marketing hype

You miss the point.

Technology is not holding back the competition. They could catch up. If they could afford it. But they cant. These 50 experts cost a company 10 Million $'s per year. That's double of Laminar Research's yearly revenue. That's not going to happen. Sorry to burst your bubble.

29 minutes ago, akita said:

No... it does not stand whatsoever. Unless you assume: 1) mobile devices stop improving for ever, the age of technology is over and in this case flying MSFS or Xplane would be our last concern. 2) Austin is a stupid man so he merges mobile and desktop in order to downgrade his own platform.

Sorry mate, your lack of understanding/wishful thinking really pops here....

I don't think Austin is a stupid man.  He wants to make a profit.  Therefore, if the sales of X-Planes are not good for X-Plane 12, he will stop investing money into the desktop version of X-Plane.  Yes, some changes he makes in the mobile version may apply to the desktop version of X-Plane, but I already said stuff like DLSS that is mainly for desktop PCs is something Austin won't spend money on.  And MSFS will diverge from X-Plane on the desktop if Austin decides to stop targeting the desktop version of X-Plane.

 

1 hour ago, akita said:

Microsoft experts really has no "hidden secrets" when it comes to graphics, industry standart graphics features all over the place just like P3D DCS XP and others will catch it up soon. So the quoting by Microsoft 50 super ultra talents really is just a marketing hype. Anyone claiming otherwise is: 1) marketing, so you and others will quote those articles here.  or 2) have no idea how gaming industry works when it comes to graphics features. 

What?!

It's not about "hidden secrets". It's about the ammount of resources and number of talents on the subject. You really think P3D and XP will catch up, graphically, SOON? 
Lokheed didn't do it in 12 years and Laminar didn't do it in 26 years and NOW  they are close?

9 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

I don't think Austin is a stupid man.  He wants to make a profit. 

But according to the XP lobby X-Plane is a work of passion whereas MSFS is simply about capitalist greed. Meyers, according to them, has no interest in profit and does it simply for the love of aviation which he gifts to his devotees.

10 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

I don't think Austin is a stupid man.  He wants to make a profit.  Therefore, if the sales of X-Planes are not good for X-Plane 12, he will stop investing money into the desktop version of X-Plane.  Yes, some changes he makes in the mobile version may apply to the desktop version of X-Plane, but I already said stuff like DLSS that is mainly for desktop PCs is something Austin won't spend money on.  And MSFS will diverge from X-Plane on the desktop if Austin decides to stop targeting the desktop version of X-Plane.

 

I don't think Austin would stop investing on the desktop version. But it's clear to me he wouldn't focus on features we would like to see if the not pro version doesn't sell well. I mean, why would they improve scenery and graphics if the sales for the people wanting that isn't good. X-plane would just go back to it's former position (before version 10 and 11), mainly used by the hardcore enthusiasts and professionals.

3 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

But according to the XP lobby X-Plane is a work of passion whereas MSFS is simply about capitalist greed. Meyers, according to them, has no interest in profit and does it simply for the love of aviation which he gifts to his devotees.

Haha, I love this belief.  Austin will happily spend his own wealth and bankrupt himself in the process just to make his X-Plane followers happy 😉 

2 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

But according to the XP lobby X-Plane is a work of passion whereas MSFS is simply about capitalist greed. Meyers, according to them, has no interest in profit and does it simply for the love of aviation which he gifts to his devotees.

Of course he needs to profit, you are right on that regard.

But, to be fair, he's also passional about that. That's not always a good thing, actually. People following X-plane development knows X-plane became more palatable when Ben became probably the main manager on the project.

57 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

Of course he needs to profit, you are right on that regard.

But, to be fair, he's also passional about that. That's not always a good thing, actually. People following X-plane development knows X-plane became more palatable when Ben became probably the main manager on the project.

XP for sure is a work of passion. If you watch one of the videos of Austin, how he explains his engineering stuff about aerodynamics, you can see the child having fun. Just with mathematical equations. 😄 He reminds me of one of my old engineering professors, who was alo very passionate about his profession. Plus, he likes Babylon 5, which is a big plus for Austin in my book. 😄

On the other hand, ASOBO are really smart, chilled guys as well and they are also passionate about what they are doing.

The downside with LR is, that they often focus more on the things they want to do. They've introduced a wishlist system (wonder how they came up with this idea 😄 ), but in general, MSFS needs to listen to the customers whereas LR should. You can see that.

As for commercial success with home users:

 

XP has about the same user count as FSX on Steam.

Edited June 2, 20215 yr by tweekz

3 hours ago, mrueedi said:

Why does Outerra support "bitmap overlays for selected areas for things like the detailed aerial photos of airports and the like"?

If the MSFS approach is required to get best result in Outerra just for selected areas, how could Outerra challenge MSFS, which does the same for the whole globe? 

My conclusion: Outerra is no match to MSFS.

Without the data, that MS extracts from the aerial images, Outerra can only build a scenery that looks how reality could look like, but never how it really looks.

Edit: see the flow in this link:

Outerra: Procedural terrain algorithm visualization

With this procedural approach everything is "invented". True, the landscape could look like that. But the probability, that the real valley looks the 

 

For MSFS fifty experts in KI, geo engineering, data scientists and realtime rendering joined their efforts to get what we have. They extracted the relevant data for 1'500'000'000 buildings from the global imagery. In Graz, they hired two PhDs in "rooftop reconstruction" just to get the building shapes right. Is Austin that wealthy? Imho, MSFS can not be challenged by any other sim. Too profound is the groundwork, that has been laid.

 

In the end its who has the best / most data.

Cheers

bs

4 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

My guess is, if the sales of X-Plane for XP 12 does not justify the money that Austin put into developing XP 12, Austin will probably throw in the white towel and stop further development of XPlane (even if Austin throws in the towel for X-Plane, he can still milk the sales of X-Plane and other revenue from it until the end of time).

I highly doubt that will ever happen as LR is not in competition with MSFS2020.

I believe LR business is geared toward the big companies that are in need of a simulator that gives engineers the ability to design, create and test every single aspect of the aircraft before its even flown, XP development is focused (I think)  more towards the engineering/scientific part of flight, that is why I believe XP will never be labeled as a "game" as oppose to msfs2020. With that said, I find it very hard to believe XP series will ever go away, just like P3D will never go away either as it has a different customer base. 

 

4 minutes ago, CarlosF said:

I highly doubt that will ever happen as LR is not in competition with MSFS2020.

I believe LR business is geared toward the big companies that are in need of a simulator that gives engineers the ability to design, create and test every single aspect of the aircraft before its even flown, XP development is focused (I think)  more towards the engineering/scientific part of flight, that is why I believe XP will never be labeled as a "game" as oppose to msfs2020. With that said, I find it very hard to believe XP series will ever go away, just like P3D will never go away either as it has a different customer base. 

 

XP11 is a game. period. It is sold as a game on Steam. Can we stop this nonsense ? There is even an mobile version. 

Edited June 2, 20215 yr by fogboundturtle

3 hours ago, tweekz said:

and then it got a mobile app

I have never understood why LR as spent so many resources in the mobile app development, on the other side of the coin, if you think about it, it may make sense. Each year technology is moving at an unbelievable pace, and maybe in the distant future there will be no more PC's but very sophisticated and technologically advanced mobile apps, who knows maybe LR is thinking about the future.

21 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

It is sold as a game on Steam

LOL, steam is a business platform, so it makes sense to sell it there too. 

Edited June 2, 20215 yr by CarlosF