What would it take for LR and/or LM to win your money back?

[David Mills 4,736]

41 minutes ago, kaosfere said:

... or even making it myself using time-consuming methods of dubious legality ...

I'm happy someone finally pointed this out. One of the selling points of X-Plane -- the holy ortho scenery -- is probably an illegal copyright violation. 

[Noel 4,487]

4 hours ago, dave2013 said:

I know that LM can do this.  The question is: is it worth their time and money?  Is it really necessary for a mission simulator to have scenery like MSFS?  Only they can answer that.

Dave

LM has had it for 11y now and the corporation had net income of something like $6.8B in 2020--so indeed LM surely could afford to do this but one would think they would have already moved the platform much faster and farther if they really wanted it to shine for the masses.   I don't use v5.x and never will, but I'm ultra familiar w/ 4.5x and the amazingly slow pace of development relative to MSFS is really remarkable.  Do you remember the major version changes and what they brought to the table?  Compared to the incredible quality and quantity MS/A has brought to the table in barely over a year, hardly anything save the eventual port to 64-bit.  To me, it's just an indicator in the context of their deep pockets it is what they always said it was, a commerical simulator, albeit w/ open and expensive to play beta for the rest of us.  I was a heavy user since V2 and despite the maturity of the core product it's just feeling as I've described as a cockpit simulator, instead of a flight simulator.  But of course, that is just how I see it, for me.

[birdguy 3,943]

27 minutes ago, Noel said:

But of course, that is just how I see it, for me.

Hi Noel, I'm a Noel too.  While I go by Birdguy a lot of people here know be Noel so excuse me if I get confused sometimes.

I used to live in Denver and my youngest daughter lives in Centennial.  Used to fly out of Sky Ranch in Aurora before they closed it down and made it into something else.

Noel

[akita 429]

This is actually a good thread in here rather than the constant badgering on the MSFS/XP sections.

I'm already using Xplane sometimes but frankly what sells mostly for me is graphics so when I do virtually fly I tend to use MSFS now.

From the sound of what they are working on there is a lot to expect, They already showed the lighting and forests but they've yet to preview any of the other stuff they mentioned before; clouds and weatherFX, a new terrain pipeline, new water, scenery FMOD and particles, ATIC/AI and IIRC a new recording system.

Frankly when it comes to orthos I'm not a fan of mushy textures, yeah they and photogrammetry look nice from 3000feet but when they are there on final and low altitudes...Yikes...immersion killer. I use autogen only for MSFS and I'm happy but the orthos just can't cut it for me. 

If Xplane will provide some outtera like data driven terrain, I'll be so happy to sacrifice "real roof colors" with some Holy **** art assets, their SDK for scenery is already almost there now but soooo under used as their assets weren't touched for something like a decade what appears. 

But we shouldn't wait for long as in 2 weeks they'll probably lay all the cards on the table.

Edited September 14, 2021 by akita

[RobJC 2,069]

39 minutes ago, akita said:

This is actually a good thread in here rather than the constant badgering on the MSFS/XP sections.

I'm already using Xplane sometimes but frankly what sells mostly for me is graphics so when I do virtually fly I tend to use MSFS now.

From the sound of what they are working on there is a lot to expect, They already showed the lighting and forests but they've yet to preview any of the other stuff they mentioned before; clouds and weatherFX, a new terrain pipeline, new water, scenery FMOD and particles, ATIC/AI and IIRC a new recording system.

Frankly when it comes to orthos I'm not a fan of mushy textures, yeah they and photogrammetry look nice from 3000feet but when they are there on final and low altitudes...Yikes...immersion killer. I use autogen only for MSFS and I'm happy but the orthos just can't cut it for me. 

If Xplane will provide some outtera like data driven terrain, I'll be so happy to sacrifice "real roof colors" with some Holy **** art assets, their SDK for scenery is already almost there now but soooo under used as their assets weren't touched for something like a decade what appears. 

But we shouldn't wait for long as in 2 weeks they'll probably lay all the cards on the table.

I will be looking out to see what they offer.

[David Mills 4,736]

16 hours ago, Rogen said:

Hmmm, maybe some smart dev crew can see a way to CIGI the MSFS scenery into P3D.

I'm sure there would be nothing illegal about this at all.

[Noel 4,487]

2 hours ago, birdguy said:

Hi Noel, I'm a Noel too.  While I go by Birdguy a lot of people here know be Noel so excuse me if I get confused sometimes.

I used to live in Denver and my youngest daughter lives in Centennial.  Used to fly out of Sky Ranch in Aurora before they closed it down and made it into something else.

Noel

Hi Noel!  It's an uncommon name in these parts for sure and to find two in the same thread is even more uncommon.  For folks that have lived here a long time it seems many find it's just become too crowded and they're happy to be moved away, or not happy staying here in any case.  It's a change for us as we were burned out in the infamous Camp Fire which destroyed our home town of Paradise, CA on Nov 8, 2018, and we were truly lucky to get out alive via a dicey evacuation.

[bofhlusr 453]

19 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Speaking of LM/P3D only:

1.  No need, LM have their own very high resolution sats see HERE.

2. All P3D combat aircraft can be armed and shoot weapons with a few simple modifications to a few files (if you have the right license version of P3D) see HERE.

3.  Avatar mode was created to accomplish this:

 

In the case of LM, their survival is based more on Military simulation training contracts ($800M+).  I can't speak for LR but I sure hope they survive (I think they will, Austin isn't one to give up easily nor at all).

What LM are missing are better visuals and that's why they support CIGI (Image Generator) ... the entire graphics engine can be replaced with a 3rd party IG while still using the P3D core simulation engine.

MSFS focus is very different from LM's focus ... some overlap, but moving in different directions.  I never left P3D or XP, MSFS is just one more excellent flight simulator I've added to my virtual flying experience.  For me, all three offer something I enjoy ... three girlfriends and one wife 🙂 (and two furry kids that just eat, sleep, pooh destroy furniture).

Cheers, Rob.

Nice links. Thanks. It seems to me that Austin just needs to do a Steve Jobs (integrate existing technologies already available into the iPhone ie. email, video, audio, games, etc. into one cohesive whole). He needs to be a visionary with an out-of-box vision.

[birdguy 3,943]

2 hours ago, Noel said:

For folks that have lived here a long time it seems many find it's just become too crowded and they're happy to be moved away, or not happy staying here in any case.

We moved down here to New Mexico in1995.  It's not grown much since then.  It's the closest thing to Mayberry I'm ever going to get.  It's great if you like the outdoors but if you're used to the city with fine restaurants and theaters not so great.  Unless you're a teacher or postal worker or would like to work on a dairy farm or pecan orchard or pepper fields you wont find much employment here.  We came here when I retired.

I got my name because I was born on Christmas day.  How did you get yours?

Noel

[JNS 106]

On 9/13/2021 at 3:15 PM, sgreen91 said:

Did the OP really think somebody would say something positive about either company.  

It seems to be just another ***t on other companies simulators topic.

OK, for my full disclosure...I have not purchased MSFS, but do plan on doing so.  I realize that it's graphics are fantastic.  My hesitation is based on three things (Nos. 2 and 3 probably being the biggest ones): (1) Not sure that MS is really interested in making a sim like a lot of people here really want ...i.e. super realistic in terms of something more than just VFR flight, (2) I don't like the forced updates, and (3) it seems to me from what I've seen so far is that the MSFS users enjoy about 2 or 3 weeks of flying and then when the next update comes out, they spend another few weeks trying to sort out all of the problems until the next update comes out that fixes at least SOME of the previous problems and creates new ones.  Actually, I was very excited when I first heard about the new MSFS and its approximately 5  years of previous development.  I really thought maybe it would finally be the "perfect" flight sim, but have become somewhat skeptical.   And BTW, I'm now doing new installs of both P3D and XP, mostly so I will have "something" if everything goes south, servers and all.

But, wow, I'm reading all of these comments and all I can say, I guess, is that since it seems like the concensus is that XP and P3D are total low-lifes and not worth using another MB of hard drive space on them....and that there is no way anybody can ever compete with MSFS.......people should really be saying their prayers that MS doesn't have a change of heart if they see their profits fall below an acceptable level for them and then fold their tent and servers and say bye-bye. It's happened before.  Otherwise, simmers will not have this hobby anymore if the other sims are gone.  I don't think MS is here to do any favors for the flight-sim community as such.  If interest in MSFS on Xbox wanes, things could change quickly. I think that, fortunately, LM and maybe especially LR are willing to accept a lower profit standard and have, so far, decided to stay in the game all these years.

I don't know what the answer is.  I agree that most people don't want to spend their money supporting older technology.  And I admire the patience exhibited by many in the community in supporting MSFS during some rough times.  Maybe the "perfect" flight sim is not possible for the price many people are willing to pay.

Jeff

 

Edited September 15, 2021 by JNS

[birdguy 3,943]

1 hour ago, JNS said:

Maybe the "perfect" flight sim is not possible for the price many people are willing to pay.

What would be the 'perfect' flightsim?  Certainly not something in the working man's budget.  If you really want to fly save your money and take flying lessons.  No sim can possible replicate sitting alone in a Cessna or Piper 5,000 feet above the ground with the noise, the feelings and the scenery where you can really fly over your house.  None of that is going to happen sitting in front of your monitor.

Some people, in fact quite a few it seems, are willing to toss what just a couple of years ago was the best flight sim ever (P3Dv5) for the new shiny object...a shiny object which will quickly become tarnished when the next best simulator ever hits the market place.

I got off the merry-go-round with P3D.  It's perfectly adequate for me for the way I fly with Orbx and RTMM scenery.  I grant you some of the RTMM scenery is a bit cartoonish, but my simple mind doesn't care.  I'm not looking for or expecting a simulator to put me back in the cockpit I lost when I couldn't get my FAA medical renewed.

But forgive me.  I'm almost 88 years old and if I prefer sticking with P3D instead of jumping on the MSFS bandwagon I  must certainly be in my second childhood from some of the comments I've read here.

Noel

[HighTowers 1,434]

Its best to thank P3D and XP for being the sims they were for the last decade plus and supporting the desktop flight simulation hobby.   Think it was a rather dark uncertain time around 2012 if anything was going to propel forward.   I have lots of memories with P3D mostly, and a ton of hours in it.  They did great for what they could in its time.   But its now time to put them to rest.  Simple as that.  All good things comes to an end eventually.   

[jcomm 5,890]

2 hours ago, birdguy said:

What would be the 'perfect' flightsim?

  [...]

Noel

For me, the one I shouldn't consider uninstalling 🙂

There was only one flightsim that survived until it died naturally, very early ... MS FLIGHT... and I know it's far from being what these days MFS appears to be !

For a good while IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad was also my goto and preferred flightsim, but it belongs to a class of games that evoke the "bad energies" of whatever deals with War, what it was, what it is and what it can always be, so, it blocked my appreciation for the amazing graphics, fluidity, flight and overall physics...

Strangely, being I a guy who used to read all of the manuals, and try to understand the internals ( the most intricate ) of each aircraft, it's systems, reports and anecdotes of people who flew them IRL, there was a flightsim which captured my attention and kind of addicted me for a while too - War Thunder ! Oops! War again 😕

Aerowinx PSX is the PERFECT Boeing 747-400 simulator, one that does everything it does like no other, but it's too complex these days for me to explore, and I have difficulties understanding what it's sometimes being talked among users, most of them RW 744 pilots / dispatchers / engeneers, and Hardy the most talented flightim producer I ever met. It's graphics, ut of windshield, are so poor though, that most users ended up using FSX, XP, P3D and now also MFS as a visuals generator, but it doesn't feel good... like most solutions based on an external physics model in FSX / P3D.

X-Plane has always been a reference for me too because it allows for some really interesting levels of detail in the modelling of aircraft ( fixed / rotary ... ) that I can't find in other platforms, although in some of them I now are modelled probably even with more detail / accuracy ( like in DCS World and IL-2 ), but it's development has always been a bit too "unstable" for me... It usually takes a lot of time between the moment it get's released and the stable version, and then when it reaches that level it is usually close to the next version 😕

So, difficult, very difficult for me to define it, but I would say that probably for me the "PERFECT" flightsim could be any of the following combinations:

a) Aerowinx PSX with the cockpit 3d and World and weather rendering of MFS, and with the weather engine fine tuned to the level Aerowinx offers;

b) X-Plane with a very good weather engine, and top add-ons that already exist;

c) MFS with the many quirks in t's flight dynamics and overall physics model fixed, as well as a fine tuned weather engine, not doing things wrong with the precious feed it gets from Meteoblue, or allowing or 3pd weather products to do their magic;

d) IL-2 BoS or DCS World with World and weather models similar to those of X-Plane or MFS;

All of the above with a comprehensive / sound ATC / Combat communications robot...

I'd say the easiest to achieve would possibly be the last 3 ( b, c and d )

[W2DR 1,859]

13 hours ago, birdguy said:

I never wrote the post you quoted and attributed to me W2DR unless there is another Noel here.  I tried to find that post to see who wrote it but I couldn't.

Noel

I see you found the "other Noel" 🙂 . The post by him I referenced is at the bottom of page 5.

[cepact 517]

Bing maps can be used outside of MSFS. Unreal Engine gives the ability to stream bing maps for game developers. ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZXTZphgyps) 

So in order to compete with MSFS, one developer might use unreal engine and he would have the same technology available.

Edited September 15, 2021 by cepact