5 hours ago, Greazer said:

f fan-boys

See how he gets around teh rules.  Here to poke no more. Was wondering why his showed and mine got deleted.

Edited October 7, 20214 yr by mjrhealth

2 hours ago, GoranM said:

I think people, like rka and Greazer, like to keep repeating the same thing, just to see their post count go up.  I can't even count how many times Greazer has mentioned the water.

Well, good thing is that this time we're all ignoring those trolls. 👍 Let's continue that way. If threads don't get derailed, we win. If trends get derailed, they win.

With the closing of XP12 release, the haters will probably get much more aggressive, so I hope we'll manage to not let the important threads get derailed by them!

11 hours ago, Greazer said:

Lighting looks a bit better than XP11.  The water is really lackluster IMO - it is catching up to early 2000's technology.  MSFS water looks incredible in comparison but even that is average for these days. If you look at Sea of Thieves water, that is more recent technology (released in 2018). I guess if there was an XP demo with water similar to that I would be impressed. LR must do a lot better IMO.

 

You are comparing a game that has to render tens of miles ahead with real world data (MSFS/Xplane) vs a game that has it's main scene pretty much set to only 1 material (water) with a view limited for sea level. Also, if you all want the latest technology in flight simulation as fast as possible you better convince everyone to build a new PC every year, if everyone had top notch PCs the whole optimization/graphics part will be much easier, it is not related to how "talented LR dev team is". 

With that in mind, I don't see anything special in the video you posted compared to what we saw in the Xplane water  aside from some high waves (the Xplane previews were mostly low waves) foam effects and particles, both can be done using the Xplane particle system when your aircraft interacts with water. And I'm a graphics addict you bet 🙂 

Another advantage that seems to not be noticed (besides aircraft interaction), the new Xplane water colors are bathymetry data driven (if I understood correctly), from an art perspective, beach or tropics hand masking may not be needed.

Edited October 7, 20214 yr by akita

1 hour ago, akita said:

beach or tropics hand masking may not be needed.

I think they will always be needed, just that having better automated artwork makes the transitions between one and the other much less harsh and obvious.

The entire world at 1cm resolution makes no sense at all for anyone except the spies and military strategists, but being able to craft points of interest into a fully featured virtual tour is still a nice to have.

8 hours ago, rka said:

I recently read somewhere that someone called XP a "cockpit simulator". That hits the nail on the head IMHO. The outside world is a stepchild for LR and it will stay that way. 

Cockpit, along with correct flight dynamics are two of a simulators essentials. Add to those a realistic weather engine, realistic ATC procedures, correct geography, and correct airports. They don't need to be exact copies of the real-world counterparts but the runways, taxi-ways, navaids, and procedures need to be right.

8 hours ago, rka said:

I recently read somewhere that someone called XP a "cockpit simulator". That hits the nail on the head IMHO. The outside world is a stepchild for LR and it will stay that way. 

Cockpit, along with correct flight dynamics are two of a simulators essentials. Add to those a realistic weather engine, realistic ATC procedures, correct geography, and correct airports. They don't need to be exact copies of the real-world counterparts but the runways, taxi-ways, navaids, and procedures need to be right.         It is also desirable that streets, roads, rivers, and streams be accurate and a towns footprint and street mapping, at least major streets, are accurate. I always fly with a plan loaded in GTN/GPN but at the same time I also use visuals when ground is visible.

8 hours ago, rka said:

I recently read somewhere that someone called XP a "cockpit simulator". That hits the nail on the head IMHO. The outside world is a stepchild for LR and it will stay that way. 

Cockpit, along with correct flight dynamics are two of a simulators essentials. Add to those a realistic weather engine, realistic ATC procedures, correct geography, and correct airports. They don't need to be exact copies of the real-world counterparts but the runways, taxi-ways, navaids, and procedures need to be right.         It is also desirable that streets, roads, rivers, and streams be accurate and a towns footprint and street mapping, at least major streets, are accurate. I always fly with a plan loaded in GTN/GPN but at the same time I also use visuals when ground is visible.

8 hours ago, rka said:

I recently read somewhere that someone called XP a "cockpit simulator". That hits the nail on the head IMHO. The outside world is a stepchild for LR and it will stay that way. 

Cockpit, along with correct flight dynamics are two of a simulators essentials. Add to those a realistic weather engine, realistic ATC procedures, correct geography, and correct airports. They don't need to be exact copies of the real-world counterparts but the runways, taxi-ways, navaids, and procedures need to be right.         It is also desirable that streets, roads, rivers, and streams be accurate and a towns footprint and street mapping, at least major streets, are accurate. I always fly with a plan loaded in GTN/GNS but at the same time I also use visuals when ground is visible.

4 hours ago, mSparks said:

but being able to craft points of interest into a fully featured virtual tour is still a nice to have.

Yes, and in this case I prefer a data approach, with hand masking you are getting the baked detail and it always looks wrong in my eyes lighting wise, more speaking with 3d waves. It's also usually ruined by texel density.

Hand masking can still be useful for apparent on surface polluted water where it's needed.

Just a better art decision imo.

I think it depends what kinda aircraft you are piloting, if it's a chop chop or bush planes / floats  then I want the most realistic scenery around or the best orthos with amazing forest areas and mountains and water areas  , but if it's a tube eh who cares even orthos are perfectly fine when I am 35k. I don't think I would notice a wave in the water from 35k ? anybody ?

 

35 minutes ago, akita said:

masking you are getting the baked detail and it always looks wrong in my eyes

depends what function the mask performs, like they offered with snow buildup I hope over time that more tools get rolled out to artists to add dynamic detail like transparency and color (e.g. rivers meeting the sea) along with tools for things like rivers, ponds lakes etc.

right now xplane has none of those details (dodgy brown flat riverbanks about where it starts and ends) nor the tools to make them.

River thames and manchester canal spring to mind, Im sure US has similar, lake in central park and the grand canyon for example.

13 minutes ago, Humpty said:

but if it's a tube eh who cares

For the tube guys the scenery options in XP11 is probably already almost perfect for them, certainly a league above any of the alternatives, you cant really see anything up close out the window anyway - you can tell which tube pilots practiced in xplane:

 

Edited October 7, 20214 yr by mSparks

2 minutes ago, mSparks said:

For the tube guys the scenery options in XP11 is probably already almost perfect for them, certainly a league above any of the alternatives.

No idea , I never tube. 

Do you mean navs ? 

4 minutes ago, Humpty said:

No idea , I never tube. 

Its not what I expected/believed it would be at all.

VR in the cockpit of the 744 is.... intimidating.

11 minutes ago, Humpty said:

Do you mean navs ? 

?

1 hour ago, Gary1124 said:

They don't need to be exact copies of the real-world counterparts

Well it doesn't hurt if they are, in something that aims to simulate flying realistically through the real world. Granted that's not essential, but following that logic, having more than 16 colors (or even two) is also not essential. 

It's doable and so it is and should be done. I mean that's the actual product here, the world in realtime, not that flight simulator thingy.

 

8 hours ago, mjrhealth said:

See how he gets around teh rules.  Here to poke no more. Was wondering why his showed and mine got deleted.

For goodness sake. You and most on here are obsessed with calling people trolls. Geazer is not a troll he just says things you don't like. Get over it or counter argue it! And keep in mind that but for criticism and competition from MSFS there would be no X-Plane 12 because the lethargy and complacency of LR would have continued forever IMO.

Edited October 7, 20214 yr by jarmstro