7 hours ago, scotchegg said:

 it’s just correcting a misinformation campaign against XP’.

Unfortunately there is a campaign of misinformation on both sides... This should not happen because we are dealing with software for entertainment that costs less than 100$... Brilliant pieces of code and tech but nothing that will save the world from anything unfortunately...

Edited June 1, 20224 yr by Claviateur

On 5/30/2022 at 4:40 PM, mSparks said:

Lots of lovely marketing talk, but once you take into consideration the gap between what the marketeers promise and what the tech guys can deliver you will quickly realise there isnt really anything new or innovative being discussed.

Here is the tech guy disproving you:

https://www.asobostudio.com/files/inline-images/Designing_Terrain_System_Fuentes_Lionel.pdf

They did deliver all the promises, it is unprecedented and innovative. They simply made the best digital model of the whole earth ever created by mankind.

Also, you did go astray terribly, if you think the relevant question here is, which one "has more variation or detail":

On 5/29/2022 at 11:38 AM, mSparks said:

On 5/29/2022 at 5:26 AM, Claviateur said:

And unlike the misinformed comments above, I did not even use the word "terrible"...

 

Because 1. There isn't much of note between those screenshots, both are pretty bad - terrible even, if anything the upper one is slightly better than the lower one, with way more detail and variation.

The question is, which one recreates the real landscape better. And which one creates an alternate reality. And you can bet, that flying in Alaska in this area does not look like Savanna. What good is variation and details (which are not better, see  the pdf linked above), if the generated terrain miserably fails to get the vegetation type right? You've got a delusion with details and variation I would say...

The variation in the lower screenshot simply represents the variation the reaility at this long/lat has.

 

11 hours ago, Claviateur said:

Unfortunately there is a campaign of misinformation on both sides... 

Nope, unlike MS, LR dont have to pay people to complain about the competition, people do it all on their own when they find out they were lied to. 

Edited June 1, 20224 yr by mSparks

2 hours ago, mrueedi said:

Here is the tech guy disproving you:

https://www.asobostudio.com/files/inline-images/Designing_Terrain_System_Fuentes_Lionel.pdf

They did deliver all the promises, it is unprecedented and innovative. They simply made the best digital model of the whole earth ever created by mankind.

Also, you did go astray terribly, if you think the relevant question here is, which one "has more variation or detail":

The question is, which one recreates the real landscape better. And which one creates an alternate reality. And you can bet, that flying in Alaska in this area does not look like Savanna. What good is variation and details (which are not better, see  the pdf linked above), if the generated terrain miserably fails to get the vegetation type right? You've got a delusion with details and variation I would say...

The variation in the lower screenshot simply represents the variation the reaility at this long/lat has.

 

Your arguments are very logical here but as you noticed, there is no point of discussing common sense with any person who can bring weird distorted arguments to refute that  basic logic... So good luck 🙂

This is why, I learned lately new dimensions in logic with precisely arguments such as : a flat tundra texture a la FSX has better variations than a 3D conifer forest that looks like Alaska's forests...Simply because the forest is not in the product we prefer to use 🙂

And then the obsession to focus on the city centers Photogrammetry (that can be disabled) and their low res when seen from low level and the strange act of ignoring the rest of the procedural tech behind the world engine of MS Sim, is very similar to what I heard from LR in a Webinar  Video from last summer (on Youtube)... I heard them mentioning that the scenery of MS Sim is melting polys or blobs... They did not  mention the procedural tech in the MS Sim world engine... that LR always preferred for XP...

So the statements we heard here seem sadly as if they are the echoes of that Webinar and the generalized and inaccurate info about the scenery tech brhind MS Sim etc...

I do not care if the company behind that world engine is MS/Asobo or Potato/Banana, what is clear from my perspective as a scenery developer and user of many sims, is that they invested in an advanced tech (did not patch ESP World Engine to make money from it) and delivered a very advanced and honest product for entertainment and it is accessible to a wide audience (and they are adding to that world engine regional details etc)

Edited June 1, 20224 yr by Claviateur

15 minutes ago, Claviateur said:

Your arguments are very logical here but as you noticed, there is no point of discussing common sense with any person who can bring weird distorted arguments to refute that  basic logic... So good luck 🙂

Heres windows central explaining why it wasnt true.

https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-flight-simulator-airports

Here's a random town in XP11 showing why it isnt unprecedented. Streets in the right places, buildings not perfect but

still better than msfs

Now, maybe MS can turn it all around inside the 6 month budget they have left. maybe XP12 wont include overhauled scenery artwork to take the rough edges off a decade old simulator that still demolishes they best microsoft could get throwing money at the wrong problems.

maybe...

But probably closer to the exact opposites tbh.

Edited June 1, 20224 yr by mSparks

18 minutes ago, mSparks said:

still better than msfs

Are you aware that the second screenshot is representative just for 0.000000000001% of the simulated earths surface (probably even many magnitudes less)? You are only fooling yourself, if you think that this screenshot shows something simmers encounter on a daily basis. What amount of embarrassing screenshot could be gathered from XP with the same diligence, that you demonstrate to collect and rehash the few weak places in MSFS?

Plus the technology shown can be disabled and the fallback, once disabled, looks still much nicer than the first screenshot. And is closer to reality.

About the airports: it is absolutely not true, that the huge number of default airports are not good replications which cover everything needed for occasional visits.

20 minutes ago, mrueedi said:

Are you aware that the second screenshot is representative just for 0.000000000001% of the simulated earths surface (probably even many magnitudes less)? You are only fooling yourself, if you think that this screenshot shows something simmers encounter on a daily basis. What amount of embarrassing screenshot could be gathered from XP with the same diligence, that you demonstrate to collect and rehash the few weak places in MSFS?

Plus the technology shown can be disabled and the fallback, once disabled, looks still much nicer than the first screenshot. And is closer to reality.

About the airports: it is absolutely not true, that the huge number of default airports are not good replications which cover everything needed for occasional visits.

I told you that I learned my lesson with this discussion 🙂 Blobs are the scenery of MS Sim, let's live with this version of reality...

I swear that it feels like things you hear in a cult...obsessive focus on a tiny thing that is generalized to make it the rule for positive or negative arguments... And denial of the 90% of facts... It is an unsettling behavior... 

And usually no logic can win over such psychology... Even the elegant post Tony wrote in this thread to add more logic to this basic discussion, did not make any difference... 

I am more than familiar with XP11 procedural world (generated W2XP areas from OSM) and the XP screenshot against photogrammetry is from places where data is available or purely procedural (i.e: placing infrastructure on one side and another of roads)... Some of the infrastructure here are facades (OSM Data available or used) and some other infrastructure are 3D houses from the library...

But this is clearly a city with coverage... It is not a  random location from a remote area ... Because remote areas do not have equivalent as Photogrammetry obviously...

My friend prefers to disable Photogrammetry and enjoys 100% fancy procedural coverage... Even in remote areas...

As for airports, there are tons of airports in MS Sim unfortunately we don't have in XP... I tried to go to some remote ones to compare but they do not exist in XP...

We both can align on this common sense... But not everyone...

I look forward to seeing what XP12 will have for users living in areas outside the major covered cities and countries

 

Edited June 1, 20224 yr by Claviateur

7 minutes ago, Claviateur said:

I swear that it feels like things you hear in a cult...obsessive focus on a tiny thing that is generalized to make it the rule for positive or negative arguments... And denial of the 90% of facts... It is an unsettling behavior... 

I would point out that it's one or maybe two persons in the whole forum. Most XP users agree that MSFS scenery looks very good and wish that XP scenery will constantly improve. There's plenty of examples of the "cult" you talk about in the MSFS forums as well, so that's something common for any product.

If we put MS Sim on the side, I could also mention another engine, I was following closely and where I invested a very modest amount of money for its early (work in progress) access a few years ago... It's Outerra.

Unfortunately as a small indie project, it did not go as fast as it should in terms of dev and applications but back then the idea of a procedural world (No Ortho or Photogrammetry) was yet one more tech I admired...

It's been a long time I did not download the latest tech demo, but it seems they are still working on it

https://forum.outerra.com/index.php?topic=4939.0

Oh, and indeed, now the engine is unfortunately behind in comparison to the newer solutions... That also use data driven procedural methods...

Edited June 1, 20224 yr by Claviateur

3 hours ago, mSparks said:

Nope, unlike MS, LR dont have to pay people to complain about the competition

Thanks for the reminder to send MS my invoice 🤣 but ehm, really....?

44 minutes ago, Rimshot said:

Thanks for the reminder to send MS my invoice 🤣 but ehm, really....?

I remember on MS Sim Dev update platform, in the early days, probably following some heated debate about this sim and that sim, they published a note saying something like (and please don't quote me because I forgot the exact wording): FS, XP etc. We are here for the fun of simming or something like that...

So basically we learned now that MS is publishing positive notes like the one I mentioned and then hire undercover people to complain about XP? 🙂

31 minutes ago, Claviateur said:

So basically we learned now that MS is publishing positive notes like the one I mentioned and then hire undercover people to complain about XP?

Yes, it's all out in the open now 😂

3 hours ago, mSparks said:

 

As a very curious person / scenery dev guy, may I ask what are the coordinates of this "random town"? 

Edited June 1, 20224 yr by Claviateur

1 hour ago, Rimshot said:

Thanks for the reminder to send MS my invoice 🤣 but ehm, really....?

yes, microsoft did pay someone to write this.

They are well known for paying people to shtpost in forums to - so much so they even have a nickname, albiet a nickname that gets censored here now (starts with x)

9 minutes ago, mSparks said:

yes, microsoft did pay someone to write this.

 

They are well known for paying people to shtpost in forums to - so much so they even have a nickname, albiet a nickname that gets censored here now (starts with x)

LR just uploads a video to youtube with it's CEO talking about molten blobs.

I'm off to check my mailbox, the new paycheck should have arrived today! 😛

Edited June 1, 20224 yr by rka