18 hours ago, Franz007 said:

I think you didn't get the point about landmarks missing. Because if i summarize what you said, this would literally mean that landmarks aren't needed either in flat terrain, nor in mountainous one. Looks like some kind of weird justification.

The reason is simply because you don't know it yourself and just wanted to make that statement, without anything to back it up.

LoLs.

Let's agree to discontinue. Bye now.

There is only one think that worries me and that's FPS. Maybe no problem because it has on X-box to but still.

 

10 hours ago, Alpine Scenery said:

I would personally have fun coding an ATC library for Asobo or MS (with help of course), but don't think they'd hire me for that role. I'd really push to invite a group of about 50 testers to help though, people like Ryanbatc and other knowledgeable folks. For the ATC, they are definitely going about it wrong or they have the wrong coders involved. I mean I'm not the greatest coder in the world or anything (very experienced though), but I am sure I could fix it, it's really not THAT hard. I struggled trying to code AI recognition of buildings and autogen to get a good result when I tried, but that is a LOT harder. Image recognition is a general PITA, so is automated color correction to try to get rid of side effects at the end (the post-post remastering I guess you could call it).

 

 

 

I think it probably is relatively tough. Lots of variables with many subvariables changing in realtime. Certainly not a trivial problem.

16 minutes ago, Bigbluss said:

I think it probably is relatively tough. Lots of variables with many subvariables changing in realtime. Certainly not a trivial problem.

Coding an ATC is not very hard, it's actually very straightforward (if you know how ATC comms and procedures work, obviously). It is however very prone to bugs and immersion-breaking situations due to the - as you said - many involved aircraft. This makes it a chore to develop and that's why you either have ATC tools like P2ATC that only interact with the user (= 1 aircraft to instruct) or like FSHud that drastically reduce the amount of involved aircraft by like 80%.
Also often forgotten: You need a smart traffic engine / AI paired with that, because otherwise even the best ATC will lead to nonsense after nonsense.

Bar some nice looking missions which I think will add to the sim I'm not really sure the point of a brand new 2024. Unless we're talking vast steps forward with AI and much improved  engine then I'm sceptical it'll be much different from the current version of 2020. 

My issue is the big fanfare of promises that came with 2020 haven't been fully realised and we're stuck with a game with tons of issues that they have little enthusiasm to fix. 

I commend their efforts with updates but it just feels like "We're bored now, too many annoying bugs to fix, time to move on and re-energise our revenue stream" and throw in a few shiny bells & whistles and tinker around the edges with the new 2024 version.

57 minutes ago, AllRed said:

Bar some nice looking missions which I think will add to the sim I'm not really sure the point of a brand new 2024. Unless we're talking vast steps forward with AI and much improved  engine then I'm sceptical it'll be much different from the current version of 2020. 

My issue is the big fanfare of promises that came with 2020 haven't been fully realised and we're stuck with a game with tons of issues that they have little enthusiasm to fix. 

I commend their efforts with updates but it just feels like "We're bored now, too many annoying bugs to fix, time to move on and re-energise our revenue stream" and throw in a few shiny bells & whistles and tinker around the edges with the new 2024 version.

Sounds exactly like the FIFA franchise that, I hope MSAsobo don't go down that path and that the graphical/weather/etc areas are advanced enough to warrant a "new" game, time will tell.

You could be correct on the point about their enthusiasm to fix issues with the current Sim, regressions are there for all to see that still remain from many updates ago so it'll be interesting to see what fixes (if any) come for MSFS2020.

Missed a lot of the thread at this point, so please forgive me if this has already been said...

But when thinking about this, what occurs to me is how many times I've done some complex project in the home or elsewhere, and then realized at the end that with what I had learned from the effort, I could easily do the same or a similar project again; better, and in probably half the time.

Imagine that applied to FS2024.....

1 minute ago, HiFlyer said:

I could easily do the same or a similar project again; better, and in probably half the time.

I am hopeful that is the case here and that forking the development onto a new path gave them flexibility to address some of the deeper level work that needed to be done to, for example, open the weather to third parties and incorporate historical weather. We will see. What I do know is that there will still be issues.

ATC programming would be about a 3 of 10 in difficulty rating in the programming world. It is slightly tedious because it's working in the confines of a game and the confines of different air spaces. However, you don't need to know how everything works, you use common sense in this case. Something like real-time image manipulation to enhance imagery isn't common sense, because the level of improvement varies with different types of problems in the images. ATC is nothing like that. Asobo just didn't spend any resources or time on the ATC at all. They never bothered with coding any of it so it appears. Someone just randomly added the FSX ATC in the game and changed it up a bit without properly adjusting it. 

 

 

Edited June 17, 20232 yr by Alpine Scenery

20 minutes ago, Alpine Scenery said:

ATC programming would be about a 3 of 10 in difficulty rating in the programming world. It is slightly tedious because it's working in the confines of a game and the confines of different air spaces. However, you don't need to know how everything works, you use common sense in this case. Something like real-time image manipulation to enhance imagery isn't common sense, because the level of improvement varies with different types of problems in the images. ATC is nothing like that. Asobo just didn't spend any resources or time on the ATC at all. They never bothered with coding any of it so it appears. Someone just randomly added the FSX ATC in the game and changed it up a bit without properly adjusting it. 

 

 

Yeah, a 3 in 10 difficulty rating on something that absolutely nobody has ever managed to pull off.  Sounds about right…. This place sometimes…

44 minutes ago, ShawnG said:

Yeah, a 3 in 10 difficulty rating on something that absolutely nobody has ever managed to pull off.  Sounds about right…. This place sometimes…

Even iff so, why is the audio not realistic. The same atc operational issues will still be there, but surely realistic audio isnt that difficult for starters,  The robotic voices is immersion non grata to me.

Edited June 17, 20232 yr by icewater5

7 minutes ago, icewater5 said:

Even iff so, why is the audio not realistic. The same atc operational issues will still be there, but surely realistic audio isnt that difficult for starters,  The robotic voices is immersion non grata to me.

Oh yes, human sounding text to speech, with hundreds of voices differentiated by accent by region.  Another easy task, lol.  There are a few atc programs that sound better, but they are generally the ones that just follow a pre determined script and don’t actually control traffic.

1 hour ago, Alpine Scenery said:

ATC is nothing like that. Asobo just didn't spend any resources or time on the ATC at all. They never bothered with coding any of it so it appears

I don't think that's true I see lots of differences between ATC and FSX ATC.  I don't recall in FSX ever having ATC read the correct airlines coming in and going out (FSLTL/FlightAware), calling go-arounds (which now are mainly directed at AI, whereas initially it was often user), having you hold then line up and wait all in correct sequence.  Clearly they left it in a "placeholder" status of sorts but that could all be resolved pretty quickly when they decide to, is my take.  My guess is they've taken some care to insure what they have done already does not need completely redone.  And I think they said ATC was going to be a focus for 2024, no?

I would like to see the list the basic defects in MSFS ATC as it is seen by users here it would be interesting to see how many issues there really, how deep and difficult they might be to tackle etc as a basis for what it will take to resolve them.  

33 minutes ago, Noel said:

I don't think that's true I see lots of differences between ATC and FSX ATC.  I don't recall in FSX ever having ATC read the correct airlines coming in and going out (FSLTL/FlightAware), calling go-arounds (which now are mainly directed at AI, whereas initially it was often user), having you hold then line up and wait all in correct sequence.  Clearly they left it in a "placeholder" status of sorts but that could all be resolved pretty quickly when they decide to, is my take.  My guess is they've taken some care to insure what they have done already does not need completely redone.  And I think they said ATC was going to be a focus for 2024, no?

I would like to see the list the basic defects in MSFS ATC as it is seen by users here it would be interesting to see how many issues there really, how deep and difficult they might be to tackle etc as a basis for what it will take to resolve them.  

It's been a while since I used the default ATC, since it IS fairly issue prone; but in the early 2020 sim days I used it a lot, and on balance it is better than its fsx/p3d predecessors.  it assigns SIDs and STARs,  and you can do a flight with it.  fsx/p3d could vector you to an approach (and sometimes into a mountain) which msfs apparently can't,  but fsx/p3d was really basic otherwise.  The addition of "live" traffic is another complication, and when that isn't fully sussed itself, that creates even more headaches.  but none of the payware alternatives really fit the bill either,  they are either heavily scripted, or don't actually control traffic, or have other issues.  It's a really hard thing to accomplish, despite claims in this thread to the contrary, and if it could be pulled off, they would probably use it in real life.  

IIRC, an AI/ATC revamp is on Working Title's to do list, and I look forward to how they can improve it, I'm not expecting a miracle though.

The ATC in P3D calls go arounds, and it also holds aircraft for departures until cleared. It also uses correct airline call signs (with a little help from EditVoicePack to add missing ones). Oh, and the ATC voices sound a lot more "human" to me than the ones that I have heard in video clips of Microsoft Flight Simulator.