Just now, GoranM said:

Your entire post reads like a rotten tomatoes review.
Did you even watch the video?  Did you know the scenery is getting recut and the scenery artists are yet to finish the scenery?  

Did you listen to Daniela and her whole segment on the sounds??  
Did you see the tab on the bottom right corner of each segment highlighting what the focus is?

My guess is no to all the above. 

How about you focus on what is shown instead of skimming through it and passing judgement on things that are not the focus.

 Criticise all you like. But make it constructive and show examples. 
 

And as far as you not wanting to buy my add ons, I think I’ll survive.  I’d rather not have a customer who accuses me of having my nose up Laminars rear end. 

Yes I watched the whole thing live as well. I even watch the Q&A afterward.  Again not everyone is a hater. You have to stop acting like the whole world is against XPlane platform when they have a different opinion.  I am genuinely interested in XP12 and let me remind you that in my post,. I acknowledge that it's work in progress and I am giving them the benefits of the doubt.  I am sure you will survive without my money. It's a shame. 

2 minutes ago, Murmur said:

They are aware that multithreading is important (infact one of the reasons of switching to Vulkan, was to allow XP to be more multithreaded). Ben replied in the developer's blog, basically saying that they try to introduce multi-core for additional features whenever appropriate, that the priority for 12.0 will be to improve FPS as much as possible, and then they'll consider introducing more multithreading again.

Ben Supnik says:

September 27, 2021 at 10:27 pm

There’s no single “we did more multi-core just to get more perf” push in 12.0. All new features go in using multi-core where appropriate, e.g. Austin’s new weather system – the file processing happens while you fly using multi-core – there’s no other way we’d consider doing the feature.

But multicore is a means to an end, not an end to itself. For example, the FFT water _used_ to be multicore and now it’s on the GPU. We made this decision because the whole system runs better when the water starts on the GPU – it means the water is where it needs to be most and we have to haul less data over the bus.

At some point post ship we may do another “make more things multicore” – we have seen bottlenecks on large-core-count systems with DSF loads where things could be better. But more likely our first performance pass will just be “fix anything we can to get better FPS and load times, everything is fair game.”

Moving the load to GPU and reducing CPU usage is good. This is what I want to see. I am glad this is their focus because this is what the platform needs the most, imo. 

1 minute ago, fogboundturtle said:

Yes I watched the whole thing live as well. I even watch the Q&A afterward.  Again not everyone is a hater. You have to stop acting like the whole world is against XPlane platform when they have a different opinion.  I am genuinely interested in XP12 and let me remind you that in my post,. I acknowledge that it's work in progress and I am giving them the benefits of the doubt.  I am sure you will survive without my money. It's a shame. 

I know not everyone is a hater. I never said they were. I said a small percentage were. Again, criticise all you like, but make it constructive with examples. 
If you see problems and want to point them out, post a time mark, so we can all see what you’re talking about. Then we can have a discussion. 

3 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

Again not everyone is a hater.

I think the key issues mostly revolved around about everything you said being wrong, opposite of what was in the actual video, or just unfounded.

But probably time to lock this one to, its a dupe thread anyway, and all this has been done to death now. 

Just now, GoranM said:

I know not everyone is a hater. I never said they were. I said a small percentage were. Again, criticise all you like, but make it constructive with examples. 
If you see problems and want to point them out, post a time mark, so we can all see what you’re talking about. Then we can have a discussion. 

I did in the other threads I posted a grab from the presentation where it looks like very awful autogen  and very flat lighting this was the main slide for  sound segment. Of course, I was pointed out that this was to be focus on sounds and probably just took an XP11 capture but when you are trying to showcase XP12, why would you want to showcase something that doesn't look anything like XP12 ?  This is my criticism, They showed great screenshot for marketing purposes. They look great from a lighting perspective. The cockpit with the rain. that's a fantastic grab. I like it but every segment where they show video footage, it looks very raw and nowhere near the presentation of the screenshot. So my question is , did they mess up with the video production ? Did they show the footage before it was ready ?   I have no idea. That's my criticism. I judge by what I have seen. Daylight video footage was nowhere near a representation of what the marketing screenshot were displaying. 

Things are WIP. I understand this. I am just pointing it out. This is what people see and it gives the wrong impression of the final product. They were no warning that says "alpha footage - this may not reflecting the final product". none of that stuff that would give people an assurance that things will better. 

I think we can honestly agree, that the preview material in the keynote was not presented in the best or the clearest way, with screenshots and videos featuring the product in different phases of development, some material featuring old legacy things mixed with new ones, etc. So it also explains the confusion of many people who watched it and the critical reaction of some.

I think the main reason is that the product is still early in development, and some of the showed material even earlier. But some of the material was really good and promising, so I look forward to see it in more advanced stages of development down the line.

 

6 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

I did in the other threads I posted a grab from the presentation where it looks like very awful autogen  and very flat lighting this was the main slide for  sound segment. Of course, I was pointed out that this was to be focus on sounds and probably just took an XP11 capture but when you are trying to showcase XP12, why would you want to showcase something that doesn't look anything like XP12 ?  This is my criticism, They showed great screenshot for marketing purposes. They look great from a lighting perspective. The cockpit with the rain. that's a fantastic grab. I like it but every segment where they show video footage, it looks very raw and nowhere near the presentation of the screenshot. So my question is , did they mess up with the video production ? Did they show the footage before it was ready ?   I have no idea. That's my criticism. I judge by what I have seen. Daylight video footage was nowhere near a representation of what the marketing screenshot were displaying. 

Things are WIP. I understand this. I am just pointing it out. This is what people see and it gives the wrong impression of the final product. They were no warning that says "alpha footage - this may not reflecting the final product". none of that stuff that would give people an assurance that things will better. 

Ok, I’ll give you a developers point of view.  (And I’ll be serious here)

Community screams for news, videos, images. 
LR tells everyone they’re not ready to show yet. 
Community think LR are not doing anything. 
Community screams more. 
EXPO rolls around. Perfect time to show “something”. At least it’s something, right?

Community complains at the unfinished state. 
 

They can’t win. Can you see what I mean?

My point, be content they’re showing something. And focus on what they’re pointing out. Not what they’re not pointing out. 
 

And I will absolutely agree that the presentation wasn’t as polished as it could have been, but under the circumstances and time constraints, I think they did good by us by showing progress. 

Edited September 28, 20214 yr by GoranM

Just now, GoranM said:

Ok, I’ll give you a developers point of view.  (And I’ll be serious here)

Community screams for news, videos, images. 
LR tells everyone they’re not ready to show yet. 
Community think LR are not doing anything. 
Community screams more. 
EXPO rolls around. Perfect time to show “something”. At least it’s something, right?

Community complains at the unfinished state. 
 

They can’t win. Can you see what I mean?

My point, be content they’re showing something. And focus on what they’re pointing out. Not what they’re not pointing out. 

I actually agree with you on this. This is true but you can't blame users for pointing out the obvious. 

5 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

I actually agree with you on this. This is true but you can't blame users for pointing out the obvious. 

Depends. When something is work in progress, I’ll expect people’s expectations to be low to medium. 
In actuality, this is why I refuse to post work in progress images of my work anymore. People always point out mistakes. 
 

I’m not in this to argue. It’d just be nice to have a civilised discussion. X-Plane isn’t perfect, but I can see dramatic improvements. More than enough to keep me around for more than a few years yet. 

Edited September 28, 20214 yr by GoranM

1 minute ago, GoranM said:

Depends. When something is work in progress, I’ll expect people’s expectations to be low to medium. 
In actuality, this is why I refuse to post work in progress images of my work anymore. People always point out mistakes. 
 

I’m not in this to argue. It’d just be nice to have a civilised discussion. X-Plane isn’t perfect, but I can see dramatic improvements. More than enough to keep me around for more than a few years yet. 

and this is where we have common ground as well.  It's a step in the right direction.  I like they are trying to keep backward compatibility. There is plenty of positive to go around.  The reason people criticized Xplane is that they care in the first place. Well, at least I do. I want to see my GPU getting more than 35% usage. I've read a few things this week that makes me optimistic that we will have much better GPU usage and less CPU bottleneck. This is something important to me. I have a huge pc and I want to take fully advantage of it. this is why my focus is on that.  As far the flying in Xplane for me, it's already good. Anything above that is gravy. 

just redacted my last comment... Just angry.  I don't want this conversation locked like the other one. ##%%*@!!!!!

 

 

 

 

5

 

Edited September 28, 20214 yr by Paul Deluca

1 minute ago, fogboundturtle said:

and this is where we have common ground as well.  It's a step in the right direction.  I like they are trying to keep backward compatibility. There is plenty of positive to go around.  The reason people criticized Xplane is that they care in the first place. Well, at least I do. I want to see my GPU getting more than 35% usage. I've read a few things this week that makes me optimistic that we will have much better GPU usage and less CPU bottleneck. This is something important to me. I have a huge pc and I want to take fully advantage of it. this is why my focus is on that.  As far the flying in Xplane for me, it's already good. Anything above that is gravy. 

And on that note, time for sleep. 345am, and that’s enough AVSIM for today. 

Ah the unending duality of the demands of the average consumer v the realities of a developer 😄

The Good
I was actually pretty impressed with the conference. It was much more to the point, much more visual than anything Laminar had done, and much more honest about where they are. Long term stuff is getting addressed, and we're finally seeing the foundations of a good environment being rendered out

The Bad
Community feedback was sometimes negatively overexaggerated. Still an unrealistic expectation that Laminar will just simply use Google maps. People purposefully trying to downplay advancements of the sim

Playing devils advocate, alot of items shown where unfinished or not even revealed yet. Not a single shot in that conference was the full XP12 compiled from all the dev branches. Could have had tighter control on output imagery (they say you only get one impression).  Whilst I also agree on Austin stance on photogrammetry, I think he's a tiny bit oblivious to alternative methods for autogen e.g. MSFS offline mode and use of Blackshark, Outerra, even some really basic P3D concepts on landclass.

The Ugly
As a dev myself, it's absolutely shambolic that it's 2021 and still no sign of mesh editing, vertex animation, better SSAO, material channel detachment (not needing a 4k metalness or specular in maps), no shader grass and more. Little additions that can carry the sim miles forward. The sim is advancing nicely in some areas, and still clueless in others.

2 minutes ago, DeltaWho said:

Not a single shot in that conference was the full XP12 compiled from all the dev branches

I believe the Landing Competition running XP12 on this wide screen curved monitor was probably the closest to "compiled from all the dev branches" and it was looking nice (apart what I commented earlier about exposure compensation, white balance and tone mapping)

1 minute ago, RXP said:

I believe the Landing Competition running XP12 on this wide screen curved monitor was probably the closest to "compiled from all the dev branches" and it was looking nice (apart what I commented earlier about exposure compensation, white balance and tone mapping)

Yes (although I've not heard about appearances of volumetric clouds... or if Ben is still hiding that). But also again, alot of the effects wasn't done yet. Scenery assets getting further work, snow was mentioned to work in the same way as rain, but not previewed yet (so clearly more weather based effects coming), more water enhancements. So clearly the imagery from laminar is going to improve in the upcoming months.