X-Plane 12 Early Alpha - Snow and Ice

[MrBitstFlyer 3,825]

On 2/11/2022 at 7:44 PM, rjetster said:

The runway ice looks good, but honestly MSFS is a completely different league compared to what we are seeing in the X-plane 12 previews.

You mean the previews where the devs keeps stating its an alpha and many things are still to be done?  You mean the ice and snow video where the devs ask us to ignore certain aspects because they aren't finished?

MSFS was released in 2020 where XP12 is in development - it would be amazing if MSFS wasn't in a different league.

[MrBitstFlyer 3,825]

On 2/11/2022 at 5:43 AM, mSparks said:

I actually took a shot while I was skiing that I think captures many of the things that would need to be done to get close to what snow in the real world is like.

I'll get my Cray Supercomputer order in now.

[mSparks 2,086]

1 hour ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I'll get my Cray Supercomputer order in now.

wait a while.

I know the 500 terraflops of a 3080Ti is attractive (Cray stopped at 6 iirc), but moores law resumed so its getting a bit old now, plus by the time XPlane 12 is out and really making efficient use of gpu compute there could even have been a generation after next.

Edited February 13, 2022 by mSparks

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

After numerous reported posts, warnings, bans, etc., it’s time to lock this one.

 

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

After cleaning up some of the trollish posts and arguments, I’ve decided to reopen this topic for those you can discuss the topic and not get into more XP vs MSFS arguments. Some punishments have been handed out to the offenders. 

[akita 429]

14 hours ago, Janov said:

I think your sentiment will be shared by many - I will (with rising desperation) say it again and again: XP12 will not equal or leapfrog MSFS in the visual department.

Another warning - don´t comfort yourself that this is "early alpha" and somehow the release will be looking a ton better.

If you are primarily into the visual aspect of flying aircraft - and I don´t mean this in a bad or derogatory way -  go fly MSFS. This will not change with XP12. Period.

There are about (going by metrics from Steam) 25% of users that still prefer the hopelessly dated XP11 over MSFS even these days! They will gladly take the visual enhancements that XP12 brings.

I think, frankly, that you should stop lowering expectations for others with regards of the visuals of Xplane 12.

LR can't push the amount of scenery data in the default global scenery (servers, streaming) but their new engine is by no means less capable for anyone who is involved in art and scenery creation. In fact it is much more capable in others areas, and other very few "unchanged" areas are definitely on the todo list, lastly other plans are as well way beyond what MSFS can (ever) reach with their current inflexible scenery system and will pretty much leave it to dust.

Will Xplane default global scenery surpass MSFS? probably not. What about pretty much everything else? yes.

Is Xplane 12 scenery engine and SDK less capable? NO, really no. the opposite, and it will be more true post 12.00. 

Besides, for MSFS you have to buy regional addons for seasons, correctly sized trees, correct airport signs etc. This means that for a practical user you will take your wallet out in MSFS as well. In this case, I prefer the one that has the most open SDK for 3rd parties.

*Of course all above is an opinion, but somewhat a sophisticated one...

Edited February 13, 2022 by akita

[Janov 2,383]

37 minutes ago, akita said:

but their new engine is by no means less capable for anyone who is involved in art and scenery creation.

That is - in my opinion - sounding exactly what you get in the MSFS forum when you talk about a shortcoming of that sim. "Yes, but they are still working on it! It´s a ten year project! There is no reason MSFS can´t be..."

We don´t measure simulators by what they could be. We measure them by what they are.

Or maybe I can tell my employer: "Yes, you are right, I don´t do any work around here. But I certainly could! Therefore I am a valuable employee!" 😅

Honestly, I understand the joy of hyping yourself for something that you have waited for for a long time. There is alot to look forward to in XP12 and it will be a transformed simulator.

But it is also important to keep your expectations in check or you will wake up with a huge hangover like a lot of people did on August 19th, 2020 (or even a tad earlier for those living in Kiribati!)

Edited February 13, 2022 by Janov

[akita 429]

@Janov I think both of us can't talk too much. All I can say that you totally missed my point and it was not about hyping myself, others or unrealistic expectations.

 

[Pastaiolo 1,686]

15 hours ago, Janov said:

The nice thing is:  Once XP12 is in public beta everyone can download the demo (a limited area to fly around in with a limited time of joystick input per session) and see for themselves if it fits their needs. No gamepass, no limited time for a full refund. You just provide the harddisk space and download bandwidth.

It is a cool feature, i remember i tried the XP10 demo again and again and again, took me some time before buying the product and then i went forward from it 🙂

Either way i agree with your post about graphics (which i forgot to quote and now i am too lazy to recover), it will be an improvement over XP11 by far because lighting and weather are those technologies which i think greatly affect the overall picture. It will never be on par with the other sims, what i care about is in the XP 11 vs XP 12 leap without having to buy tons of addons for it to work, having to tweak cfg files etc etc. Which it will without any doubt still be needed for orthos and sceneries, but HOPEFULLY not for lighting and clouds 🙂

I think the gamepass is a great thing too to try games before buying, considering you can try anything you want in that timeframe (i think the minimum is 30 days).

warning: for me anything that doesn't make me physically fly is a game, hence why i call them all games.

[MrBitstFlyer 3,825]

19 hours ago, Janov said:

I think your sentiment will be shared by many - I will (with rising desperation) say it again and again: XP12 will not equal or leapfrog MSFS in the visual department.

Another warning - don´t comfort yourself that this is "early alpha" and somehow the release will be looking a ton better.

If you are primarily into the visual aspect of flying aircraft - and I don´t mean this in a bad or derogatory way -  go fly MSFS. This will not change with XP12. Period.

There are about (going by metrics from Steam) 25% of users that still prefer the hopelessly dated XP11 over MSFS even these days! They will gladly take the visual enhancements that XP12 brings.

I don't share your sentiment regarding the visual aspects of XP11/XP12.   What is important to me is the overall flight sim experience - both MSFS and XP11 fulfil that for me.  MSFS still fails in certain areas for now. For example, if I want to practice an RNAV approach to minimums, XP allows me to set conditions just right to go visual at minimums, MSFS doesn't because there isn't a visibility slider.  MSFS is still not displaying overcast as accurately as XP11.

Important to me is that visual elements in the sim are accurately placed.  Those visual elements need not be photo realistic, just be there.  XP11 with SFD Global and X-America give me the ground elements to fly VFR accurately, just as I can in MSFS.  If your as old as me, you will remember playing classic games like Manic Miner, Jet Set Willy and many other classics.  Graphically they were poor even then, especially on the Sinclair Spectrum, but it was the GAMEPLAY that made them a classic.  A game or simulator is no good just looking good, it has to supply gameplay.

I love both MSFS and XP11 and no doubt XP12.  When making a decision which sim to fly, I decide which aircraft I want to use.  If I fancy a flight in the DR400 with REP, MSFS is not going to be an option - why stop flying the DR400 with REP because MSFS has better ground textures?  Why stop flying the Just Flight BAe Professional because MSFS has better ground textures?  If I fancy flying in Papua, I'll choose MSFS because the SWS Kodiak is superb.

Constant arguing about which sim is best is a waste of time and futile.

 

 

[MrBitstFlyer 3,825]

4 hours ago, Janov said:

We don´t measure simulators by what they could be. We measure them by what they are.

You often talk in black and white terms like 'use MSFS for VFR flying'.  My current favourite aircraft is the VFlyteAir Piper Arrow III, so how do better ground textures in MSFS have any bearing whatsoever when deciding which sim to load up? 

[mSparks 2,086]

7 hours ago, akita said:

for anyone who is involved in art and scenery creation. In fact it is much more capable in others areas, and other very few "unchanged" areas are definitely on the todo list, lastly other plans are as well way beyond what MSFS can (ever) reach with their current inflexible scenery system and will pretty much leave it to dust.

I am sure we are in for absolutely stunning scenery addons for XP12, there are a good few for XP11 already. Making artwork for "everywhere in the world" will never compete visually with hardcore effort to make one specific area look perfect, no amount of AI, photogrammetry, raw orthophoto or generic objects is ever going to change that.

Edited February 13, 2022 by mSparks

[Holdit 551]

3 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Important to me is that visual elements in the sim are accurately placed.  Those visual elements need not be photo realistic, just be there.  XP11 with SFD Global and X-America give me the ground elements to fly VFR accurately, just as I can in MSFS.  If your as old as me, you will remember playing classic games like Manic Miner, Jet Set Willy and many other classics.  Graphically they were poor even then, especially on the Sinclair Spectrum, but it was the GAMEPLAY that made them a classic.  A game or simulator is no good just looking good, it has to supply gameplay.

My daughters are proof of this. They started playing Minecraft years ago and now, in their teens, they still play it occasionally. Given that the graphics don't even stack up that well against DOOM in the '90s, I can only conclude that it's the gameplay that keeps them coming back. They play it on an Xbox on which they have other games that are graphically far superior but it's Minecraft that gets the most play time.

It's like Rome2 Total War vs Field of Glory 2. RTW is graphically gorgeous and really looks the part, but if I want a more serious treatment of the history I'll fire up FoG2. 

Edited February 13, 2022 by Holdit

[gauchofree 2]

On 2/12/2022 at 1:46 AM, JGregory said:

A - L - P - H - A.... rinse and repeat!

Relax. Be patient... wait for Xplane 17 and beyond.

[Gary1124 181]

Honestly, give me a sim that performs better than MSFS and not in MS's gulag and A2A level aircraft and looks better than Orbx modded P3D and I will be thrilled. I don't need to see my own house in sim or any other know buildings. Long as the streets and roads are correct and airports duplicated that's good for me. I fly, not sight see. I can do that in a real plane on a nice day.