10 hours ago, rka said:

So no proof. 

Just as you have none. Ones complaints do not count as proof.

41 minutes ago, mjrhealth said:

Just as you have none. Ones complaints do not count as proof.

EXACTLY! Shift in the burden of proof ...

18 hours ago, rka said:

Well, we'll see how ignoring most of your potential customers works out, won't we?

Are you referring to those whose Pavlovian response is bound to seeing orthophotos? Don't sweat that. That demographic is solidly locked down in the "complain about no XP Mobile updates" crowd which is also the largest revenue stream for LR. Now, I would stress the fact that you sound like you need to stretch your thumb muscles a bit more for your game, but XP will be available on Steam deck...though that won't be the mobile version.

(Orth4)xp broke the ground for making orthophotos available to the masses and I swear some of the scenery I've seen in XP looks like it was derived from photogrammetry. Not only are those both flight simming "firsts", but the latest dev post explicitly lists the desire to maintain backward compatibility with v11 ortho packs. 

Sorry, I should have been more specific in my first clarification question... what feature(s) are you implying that they are ignoring?

7 hours ago, Murmur said:

But that isn't exclusive of XP.

For years FS users were saying "a BET flight model doesn't matter", and then MSFS declared they were introducing one, and suddenly FS users were enthusiast about it.

"XP is only good at night", and then FS added global lighting, etc.

The fact is, at the moment (and probably in the future as well), LR has not the resources to implement a streaming satellite scenery, so discussing about that is basically useless. In any case, XP has the possibility to use satellite scenery for those interested in it, although of course it requires more work than a product natively streaming it (but that also has advantages, for example the possibility of choosing the preferred resolution, the source of data, it works offline, etc.)

I think it's natural that if FS tr0lls (not you) come in the XP forum only to provoke, people here are defending their product of choice and counter-attacking them...

I respect your opinion and just a reminder that I have both sims as a user and as a scenery developer... I look forward to see XP12 go beyond the actual terrain tech... And that does not mean they need to implement aerial or satellite imagery

Edited May 30, 20224 yr by Claviateur

9 hours ago, mSparks said:

Very clear, you are promoting this "many words not allowed" 

As better than this

and want to demonstrate it by comparing MSFS with 10 year old XP scenery.... which even though the XP screenshot of 10 year old scenery looks better than the blobs of green playdoh you posted, the mighty MSFS must be better because of the mythical blackshark AI..

I'm not speechless, I find your logic hilarious.

I believe this discussion is weird, I find it weird... Really weird...

No I am not promoting anything, not MSFS, not Blackshark whatever they are, not the Photogrammetry, I am trying to use logic against weird denial...

I am trying to explain to you in the same way I also commented on the video where Austin was mentioning that MSFS scenery is melting shapes and it seems it becomes a symphony now in the community... I do not work for MS and I don't care but I am fair... I own both sims...

What it is being spread is misinformation as simple as that... MSFS scenery is NOT photogrammetry and you can DISABLE photogrammetry...

MSFS scenery outside the Photogrammetry (Enabled or disabled) is a worldwide, data driven procedural scenery with Facade Type 2 like infrastructure per region...

Vegetation takes the hues of the texture colors underneath to avoid standing out...

XP12 (screenshot above) is also data driven procedural scenery as well... And you know what, it looks great... 

Now the only difference that I was underlining here, is the coverage and tech...

And yes AI is a modern technology that replaces thousands of Real Intellegence for so many purposes including scanning a huge database of imagery to extract footprints!!

This is why MSFS covers areas with its procedural facade type 2 like infrastructure and vegetation for the whole world that unfortunately XP11 or even 12 might not be able to cover...

But you keep going back to the Photogrammetry while you know very well and the community too as well as Austin himself, that 90% of MSFS scenery is not photogrammetry... And that is exactly the scenery Austin himself always wanted to have...

Picking one detail in something and making it the rule, does not work... 

Now these are some houses in a remote areas somewhere in south America... Users there will enjoy flying VFR over their region... 

AI or Any other data made this remote area come to life...And yes no matter how many glitches we can find here, the data driven procedural coverage is insane... And I hope XP12 will reach this at one point... 

Admitting evolution is Ok... And please do not go back to the Blackshark or Orange Gold Fish or any company who cares... Tech evolution is nice and we can allow ourself to appreciate it even if it is not part of what we have...

 

Edited May 30, 20224 yr by Claviateur

8 minutes ago, Claviateur said:

Tech evolution is nice and we can allow ourself to appreciate it even if it is not part of what we have...

Love this. Still not sure whether there’s enough in XP12 to justify another sim for me, but love to see the tech developing, especially through the lens of Austin’s infectious passion.

Heck, if the coastal mesh and bathymetry work together as well as he’s suggesting, this may become the go-to choice for island hopping which might actually be worth a punt for me.

On 5/28/2022 at 11:15 AM, David Mills said:

data that cost Microsoft billions of dollars to develop and maintain. It  appears that the years of pilfering ortho scenery have completely anesthetized all sense of propriety or property or ethics.

Pilfering? Ethics? If the jpegs were sitting behind a paywall or at least watermarked in some way, this statement wouldn't be so laughable. Do you also call Microsoft to beg for permission before you start up the game?

22 minutes ago, Claviateur said:

AI or Any other data made this remote area come to life...And yes no matter how many glitches we can find here, the data driven procedural coverage is insane... And I hope XP12 will reach this at one point... 

Admitting evolution is Ok... And please do not go back to the Blackshark or Orange Gold Fish or any company who cares... Tech evolution is nice and we can allow ourself to appreciate it even if it is not part of what we have...

This is very true. The AI is very impressive. I do admire the vegetation matching at the very least.

However, it will never beat the potential that OSM offers in terms of building footprints and zoning/functionality. Granted, there's a lot more leg work and snags when dealing with crowd-sourced databases (actually, AI could probably help there too), and we are yet to see LR taking advantage of what OSM could and does provide in terms of autogen.

 

2 minutes ago, blingthinger said:

This is very true. The AI is very impressive. I do admire the vegetation matching at the very least.

However, it will never beat the potential that OSM offers in terms of building footprints and zoning/functionality. Granted, there's a lot more leg work and snags when dealing with crowd-sourced databases (actually, AI could probably help there too), and we are yet to see LR taking advantage of what OSM could and does provide in terms of autogen.

 

Totally, the machine learning was good to augment the data of the footprints and vegetation zones... As for the other vector data OSM was used and must be used... Yet the machine learning algorithms (if we can call them this way?) could also be trained to detect many other things in aerial imagery... 

XP11 data did not take advantage of the whole OSM I guess yet the data is constantly growing and getting better... And OSM does not cover the whole planet, hence the help of AI scanning...

 Let's see what XP12 will have 

24 minutes ago, scotchegg said:

Love this. Still not sure whether there’s enough in XP12 to justify another sim for me, but love to see the tech developing, especially through the lens of Austin’s infectious passion.

Heck, if the coastal mesh and bathymetry work together as well as he’s suggesting, this may become the go-to choice for island hopping which might actually be worth a punt for me.

We know LR don't have the MS budget to do what MS did but I am confident many alternative modern solutions can help build procedural virtual worlds with high immersive factors...

XP12 or future versions as well as other simulators are important and essential because they create an ecosystem that force the others to evolve and make the next step toward a new tech etc.

10 hours ago, uwespeed said:

Ok, so ... following scenario: I'm the decider for buying a new level D simulator. There are 2 competitors, and I have to decide whom to give my money:

1. The one has a worldwide coverage of streaming satellite imagery, and some simulation aspects, but a lot of them are missing.
2. The second one has birdstrikes, loss of control due to iced control surfaces, knife edge flying, complex failures, hypoxia, turbulences within clouds, wake turbulences, microbursts, landing on frigates/oil rigs/aircraft carrier/ ... but only a generic scenery without satellite imagery (however with correct placement of roads, power lines, rivers, ...)

So, if I decide to buy the first one (because it is or might be cheaper and looks nicer - the "immersion factor" - you know ...): who will pay compensation, when the streaming stops due to server error? Our pilots can't train, because the main aspect of that simulator fails.
And what's even worse: my boss will bite my head off, because our pilots can't train when there is a failure/malfunction of all of that numerous equipment inside and outside of the aricraft ... Isn't training of exceptional situations of failing equipment the (main) reason for using simulators? At least for professional use it is.
Watching the scenery is entertainment. Most people, if they do guest flights at the local airfield want to "see their house from above". That's all they want. There's nothing wrong with that, but well ... everyone has different needs and wishes.

But all of that was already discussed to death, so ...

 

Oh sorry, the question is easy here. It is clear that MSFS (no matter how impressive their world engine is), it is a purely entertainment title not meant for any training at all... Same for XP11 and XP12 regular versions...

However as you know XP has a Professional version for that purpose I believe... P3D from LM is another training oriented platform... 

I work at an aircraft manufacturer and the pilots who train on our private jets do not use either platforms... They go for the CAE material... And as you say, they do not need to see the house below.

I think I missed a point here, sorry... Level D sims... Their visual systems are not as advanced as MSFS and do not care about streaming data for the world engine components because indeed, they don't train for VFR as you know... 

However the tech behind the worldwide data coverage of MSFS world engine could be relevant for Helicopter pilot training in simulators with visual systems featuring such immersive environments especially in virtual remote areas etc. But again, it is not in MSFS that they need to get their training obviously...

Also I can think about GA student pilots who can practice VFR navigation with MSFS considering that this is not an alternative to any real world flying hours...

 

Edited May 30, 20224 yr by Claviateur

23 minutes ago, Claviateur said:

XP11 data did not take advantage of the whole OSM I guess yet the data is constantly growing and getting better... And OSM does not cover the whole planet, hence the help of AI scanning...

There's a ton of information in OSM that you can't glean from AI for obvious reasons. 11 only uses a fraction of what's there.

Anyone who has used ortho4xp has cursed at OSM at least a few times. Crowd-sourced anything will have errors that cause problems for the types of semi automatic processes that LR is using to build the scenery. I mention AI in this context specifically for the error correction capabilities...but you also have a train it. Probably not a specialty LR is chomping at the bit to get into! 

I am still intruigeed as to how much money MS are willing to push into this before they say enough is enough. Not sure they could recoupe all there expenses without adding something else to it to raise revenue. Wonder what the Investors are saying. And that is one reason why one must consider how far one is willing to push developers. In the end they need to recoupe all there expenses and make money.

Ill be happy with anything Laminar add, Cant see the point of perfect houses. Since if you where flying a plane into a window, probably be the last thing you do, same with trees.

12 minutes ago, mjrhealth said:

I am still intruigeed as to how much money MS are willing to push into this before they say enough is enough. Not sure they could recoupe all there expenses without adding something else to it to raise revenue. Wonder what the Investors are saying. And that is one reason why one must consider how far one is willing to push developers. In the end they need to recoupe all there expenses and make money.

Ill be happy with anything Laminar add, Cant see the point of perfect houses. Since if you where flying a plane into a window, probably be the last thing you do, same with trees.

Do you want Microsoft/Asobo to fail in their endeavor? And if so, why?

25 minutes ago, mjrhealth said:

how much money MS are willing to push into this

This is an interesting question...but one drenched with asterisks. I would not be surprised at all... not one bit... if there wasn't more than just Microsoft money involved here. Precise building and vegetation placement from mere satellite pictures? That's useful for a great many things. Good and bad. Slapping a flight model into it is most certainly nothing more than a side gig.

None of the organizations involved here deserve any amount of pity when the lowly flight simulation crowd uses their precious space pictures, laser scans, and server bandwidth. As for the latter, we should be more bothered by the videos being streamed across these fiber optic lines, than a handful of still images.