It's been half a year since 5.3 came out

[Cognita 1,089]

7 hours ago, Afterburner said:

Speaking about past and present, how is it of a progress that a Microsoft flight simulator, two years after its release, does not allow 3rd party weather add-ons to take control of its weather?

I think MSFS is not simply the next version of FSX or P3D, which maybe is why they even choose a different naming convention. Yes, it is building on that Flight Simulator franchise, but it really is quite a different beast than what we were accustomed to from MS95 to P3D5. It is not the same old FSX but with better scenery; the architecture of the application is profoundly different. This is not a game that resides on my computer like P3D, it is principally in the cloud. The app on my computer connects to a half dozen or more online services, takes their data and synthesizes it. Try flying in offline mode and what you experience is basically worse than P3D with addons. To borrow and misuse a phrase from Thomas Kuhn, it is a little like a paradigm shift, and because of this it is not so reasonable to expect it to operate the same way as those earlier versions -- incommensurability is at play.

Weather is an example of this. In P3D live weather (and historical) involved downloading a relatively small file that contained a dozen or so parameters from METAR's around the world and some parameters on winds aloft that together were used to display weather on the users computer. Asobo did not take this route. They partnered with a well respected weather forecasting company and tapped into its NMM weather prediction model to provide MSFS a "living, evolving" global weather system. It is a fundamentally different approach and requires access to data services that may not be so easy for 3PDs to access and likely is understandably restricted by proprietary considerations. The size of that weather model makes providing historical weather quite a challenge, as it would mean storing incredible amounts of data on servers -- likely more that is economical to do. They may figure out how to overcome this, but I can appreciated it is a challenge. However, I think the possibility of Asobo opening this aspect of the program to outside developers is extremely remote -- I am not one to say never, but if I was, this is when I would use the word. This was an architectural decision made early on in development and Asobo has been clear that this is not going to change -- no amount of threads asking for the weather SKD to be opened up is going to get it opened up. This said, they have also been working to make weather better and it certainly has improved over the past couple of years, with more improvements coming in SU10 and SU11.

What Asobo is trying to do is a little revolutionary, it has not been done before. I am amazed at the scope of what they have tried to do. Does it all work flawlessly, of course not. But it is a new approach and they have demonstrated commitment to trying to improve it and address the needs of those using it. For this I give them a lot of credit. 

[ZLA Steve 375]

3 hours ago, Cognita said:

I think MSFS is not simply the next version of FSX or P3D, which maybe is why they even choose a different naming convention. Yes, it is building on that Flight Simulator franchise, but it really is quite a different beast than what we were accustomed to from MS95 to P3D5. It is not the same old FSX but with better scenery; the architecture of the application is profoundly different. This is not a game that resides on my computer like P3D, it is principally in the cloud. The app on my computer connects to a half dozen or more online services, takes their data and synthesizes it. Try flying in offline mode and what you experience is basically worse than P3D with addons. To borrow and misuse a phrase from Thomas Kuhn, it is a little like a paradigm shift, and because of this it is not so reasonable to expect it to operate the same way as those earlier versions -- incommensurability is at play.

Weather is an example of this. In P3D live weather (and historical) involved downloading a relatively small file that contained a dozen or so parameters from METAR's around the world and some parameters on winds aloft that together were used to display weather on the users computer. Asobo did not take this route. They partnered with a well respected weather forecasting company and tapped into its NMM weather prediction model to provide MSFS a "living, evolving" global weather system. It is a fundamentally different approach and requires access to data services that may not be so easy for 3PDs to access and likely is understandably restricted by proprietary considerations. The size of that weather model makes providing historical weather quite a challenge, as it would mean storing incredible amounts of data on servers -- likely more that is economical to do. They may figure out how to overcome this, but I can appreciated it is a challenge. However, I think the possibility of Asobo opening this aspect of the program to outside developers is extremely remote -- I am not one to say never, but if I was, this is when I would use the word. This was an architectural decision made early on in development and Asobo has been clear that this is not going to change -- no amount of threads asking for the weather SKD to be opened up is going to get it opened up. This said, they have also been working to make weather better and it certainly has improved over the past couple of years, with more improvements coming in SU10 and SU11.

What Asobo is trying to do is a little revolutionary, it has not been done before. I am amazed at the scope of what they have tried to do. Does it all work flawlessly, of course not. But it is a new approach and they have demonstrated commitment to trying to improve it and address the needs of those using it. For this I give them a lot of credit. 

This comment should be pinned to the top of every "MSFS v P3D" thread on this forum.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,980]

I didn’t reopen this topic so people could wax lyrical about MSFS.

Stick to P3D discussion please.

[Doug47 574]

13 hours ago, Holdit said:

I've flown with 2D panels and always hated it. The only use I can think of for them is a specific screen for a specific purpose in a home cockpit setup. Otherwise I find them extremely unnatural and counterintuitive. 

Well, since this refers to lowering FPS in P3D, then I guess it’s acceptable. 

 

i usually find the opposite. VC views are always too close meaning one needs to pan and look up and down which doesn’t happen in reality.  Usually one looks down with your eyes and not a complete lowering of the head. So for me, a photorealistic 2D panel where I can scan with my eyes feels far closer to reality than a bad looking VC (99% aren’t impressive at all) requiring panning and lowering to see everything. Watching someone with track ir looks painful and quite frankly, odd. 
 

I save in FPS, the view is enhanced and feels like a real panel in doing so, and I complete the flight not feeling like it’s less realistic lot of in anyway shape of form.  
Interesting that aerowinx didn’t need a VC for what’s considered one of the best (if not the best) simulators available. The lack of 2D panels in **** stopped me from trying it. 

[Stavros 295]

1 hour ago, Doug47 said:

Well, since this refers to lowering FPS in P3D, then I guess it’s acceptable. 

 

i usually find the opposite. VC views are always too close meaning one needs to pan and look up and down which doesn’t happen in reality.  Usually one looks down with your eyes and not a complete lowering of the head. So for me, a photorealistic 2D panel where I can scan with my eyes feels far closer to reality than a bad looking VC (99% aren’t impressive at all) requiring panning and lowering to see everything. Watching someone with track ir looks painful and quite frankly, odd. 
 

I save in FPS, the view is enhanced and feels like a real panel in doing so, and I complete the flight not feeling like it’s less realistic lot of in anyway shape of form.  
Interesting that aerowinx didn’t need a VC for what’s considered one of the best (if not the best) simulators available. The lack of 2D panels in **** stopped me from trying it. 

Are you playing on a small or low-resolution screen? This would profoundly impact VC readability. With a bigger screen (which aren't exactly that expensive these days, a decent 27" 1440p monitor is only a couple hundred dollars and even 34" ultrawide monitors are coming down in price) then there's no question that a VC is a far superior experience.

For me on my 34" ultrawide, these are the views you would normally use. The instruments are legible and clear. Personally, I don't use track IR unless I'm playing DCS, but that would provide a very realistic experience where you can glance up, down, and around the cockpit properly.

That said, the fact that there is even an argument about 3D vs. 2D panels in prepar3d in 2022 says a lot.

 

Edited August 31, 2022 by StAgre

[Doug47 574]

Well, each their own. 🙂

[IanHarrison 522]

14 hours ago, Cognita said:

Try flying in offline mode and what you experience is basically worse than P3D with addons. 

That is a rather cack-handed way of putting it! P3D with add-ons is excellent, therefore I think you mean "Not even anywhere near P3D with add-ons". At least I hope you do.

[Rogen 1,092]

I love my "cack" 🙂

[SimeonWilbury 220]

I think it's understandable that the third-party weather system perhaps makes it difficult to make the system more open to external developers in MSFS, but the lack of support for historical weather will remain a sticking point for me and will make me reluctant to move over (though I imagine I eventually will in a few years). I'm willing to take a downgrade in the weather department for it so that temperatures etc. match the time of day I choose to fly at and effect performance appropriately.

I guess the fact that REX apparently has a workaround is a good thing - I don't know that much about it but if it allows historical weather I imagine it'll be what I use if/ when I move over from P3D, though relying on unofficial workarounds isn't ideal when continued functionality isn't guranteed by updates, even if Asobo are purposely choosing not to patch it.

The 2D Panel debate is interesting, I started simming around the time that they were (or seemed to me to be at least) on the way out (circa 2012/13). I never liked them, especially when there wasn't 16:9 support, though I found them useful in aircraft like the Concorde X for breaking down and learning the Flight Engineers Panel and the other rather crowded parts of the Concorde Flight Deck, ideally though I like to have everything in the VC, being that a good camera addon like chaseplane usually makes positioning one's self in the VC easy. My resolution isn't that high (I guess 1080p is considered fairly low these days) but I don't struggle with VCs at all.

[neilhewitt 494]

11 hours ago, StAgre said:

With a bigger screen (which aren't exactly that expensive these days, a decent 27" 1440p monitor is only a couple hundred dollars and even 34" ultrawide monitors are coming down in price) then there's no question that a VC is a far superior experience.

Not if you have a home cockpit setup with many screens and hardware panels. I don't want or need to see a VC, pan around, or use the mouse to click on something. At all. My use case is fundamentally different. In fact, everyone's use case is potentially different. We should all respect the ways each of us wants to use the sim, and the sim (and 3rd party products) should cater for as many use cases as possible. It's not hard to provide 2D pop-ups in addition to a VC. It's unfortunate that many developers have already stopped providing 2D panels. It's exclusionary and annoying. Like many, I had to resort to using an extra touch-screen for VC panels and Chaseplane to move the camera between them. 

2 hours ago, SimeonWilbury said:

I guess the fact that REX apparently has a workaround is a good thing - I don't know that much about it but if it allows historical weather I imagine it'll be what I use if/ when I move over from P3D

REX has had historical weather on their roadmap for WeatherForce for years. It was due to appear in the last update, and indeed a historical weather tab did appear, but the feature is not enabled yet. You can get more info on their Discord server.

[SierraDelta 1,342]

It’s now been 9 months since P3D 5.3 came out (Dec. 1 2021) - maybe time to edit the thread title??

[Afterburner 374]

17 hours ago, Cognita said:

Weather is an example of this. In P3D live weather (and historical) involved downloading a relatively small file that contained a dozen or so parameters from METAR's around the world and some parameters on winds aloft that together were used to display weather on the users computer. Asobo did not take this route. They partnered with a well respected weather forecasting company and tapped into its NMM weather prediction model to provide MSFS a "living, evolving" global weather system. It is a fundamentally different approach and requires access to data services that may not be so easy for 3PDs to access and likely is understandably restricted by proprietary considerations. The size of that weather model makes providing historical weather quite a challenge, as it would mean storing incredible amounts of data on servers -- likely more that is economical to do. They may figure out how to overcome this, but I can appreciated it is a challenge. However, I think the possibility of Asobo opening this aspect of the program to outside developers is extremely remote -- I am not one to say never, but if I was, this is when I would use the word. This was an architectural decision made early on in development and Asobo has been clear that this is not going to change -- no amount of threads asking for the weather SKD to be opened up is going to get it opened up. This said, they have also been working to make weather better and it certainly has improved over the past couple of years, with more improvements coming in SU10 and SU11.

I really appreciate your statement, because it is civil and informative. I see which direction MSFS is going, and for those people who like the "set and forget" approach and don't want to fiddle around with all kinds of external add-ons, that simulator serves them very well.

I understand that Asobo is intent on improving the weather over time, but it doesn't come without mishaps; just look back at those "SU X screwed up the clouds..." threads from the past, in which users complained that clouds looked worse after an update. (Specific example: Clouds looking more grainy or blobby). With Asobo's approach, you are at the mercy of whatever ideas they decide to experiment around with (with the goal to accommodate the X-Box version as well, let's not forget that), with no possibility to have a weather add-on correcting that (in form of cloud/sky textures). You understand that some experienced simmers prefer more control in this case. 

As far as historical weather, I understand your point about the need to store tremendous amounts of data, but that amount will be manageable if you provide historical weather just a few weeks into the past (and not necessarily 2+ years, like Active Sky does), which is better than no historical weather at all. Sometimes, you want to repeat a scenario with a specific weather that gave you challenge, which is what a flight "simulator" should be for.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,980]

During a flight sim session in P3D...

1. How much time do you spend looking at the scenery?
2. How much time do you spend monitoring the aircraft systems?
3. How much time do you spend away from the sim doing other things?

To me the answers are based on the aircraft I'm flying and the altitude I'm flying at.

With the vast majority of my flights which are IFR and less than 2 hours the answer is 10%, 50% and 40%.

With lower-level (<14000ft) but still IFR flights it's 30%, 30% and 40%.

With Concorde flights it's 10%, 75% and 15%.

Number 3 is things like my duties on this forum and some web browsing. It's a rare event for me to concentrate 100% on the sim alone.

So with relatively little time spent looking at the scenery it answers the question why I'm happy with what I have and don't seek any great change. Aviate, Navigate, anything else. 😁

[IanHarrison 522]

14 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

During a flight sim session in P3D...

1. How much time do you spend looking at the scenery?
2. How much time do you spend monitoring the aircraft systems?
3. How much time do you spend away from the sim doing other things?

So with relatively little time spent looking at the scenery it answers the question why I'm happy with what I have and don't seek any great change. Aviate, Navigate, anything else. 😁

Interesting. Today I am flying 7 1/2 hours from FAOR to OMDB. Replicating the trip I am physically doing in a months time. Estimated 1 =10% 2 = 15% 3= 75% (eating ,cooking, browsing the weather and news and general messing around in the house).

Edited September 1, 2022 by IanHarrison

[Ray Proudfoot 8,980]

@IanHarrison, it will be interesting to hear from others on this. If they provide similar numbers to yours and mine it dies suggest looking out if the window is far  from the top priority.