Gamereactor interview with Jorg Neumann

[turbomax 3,307]

53 minutes ago, tonywob said:

Last time I installed, it took nearly 2 days

2 days? that's funtastic. my install was already over after only 2 hours.

[Krakin 5,853]

If 2024 ends up looking like FH5 across the globe, minds will be blown. I remember bringing FH5 up when the grand canyon scenery was shown in the 2024 trailer. FH5 uses machine learning paired with TIN to produce highly detailed results so I figured what we saw didn't need to be something that was specially made for a mission while other areas looked subpar. I'm even more excited for 2024 now!

[bvdboomen 261]

I've not read the whole topic yet but I think the level of detail brings a lot of immersion for the helicopter or bush plane flyers.

Edited November 8, 2023 by bvdboomen

[Cognita 1,114]

14 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

agree, competition is good. But the competition to MSFS moved way too slow and did little to advance flight simulation in the 10 years that Microsoft was away from flight simulation. The competition was complacent for 10 years, before MSFS came out.

I am not sure it was simply complacency, the players at the time likely did not have the combination of focus and material resources to undertake the kind of development needed to bring MSFS about. At one point it was reported there were over 100 people working directly on MSFS and they had access to all of Microsoft's extensive and very expensive infrastructure in order to be able to deliver the product they were working on. We are talking about an investment of tens of millions of dollars and piggybacking on billions of dollars of infrastructure; not to mention a deep level of human resources needed for such an online model. You really cannot expect an organization like Laminar Research or even Lockheed Martin to be able to take the kind of step that Microsoft could and did. Both lack the resources; and even if you think Lockheed could muster the money to do the development, why would it -- it is not in the business of offerings a civilian flight simulator to the masses.

This is not about competition. There was no competition. There could be no competition.

[Cognita 1,114]

23 minutes ago, turbomax said:

2 days? that's funtastic. my install was already over after only 2 hours.

A lot of this depends on the connection speed, which for me has varied but it generally takes 24 to 36 hours -- to install everything, including the world updates and all my scenery.

[turbomax 3,307]

Franz007, let's meet in our cozy SU14-beta bar. that's where we meet after another another night of ASSISTANCE bug testing. hurry up before it gets fixed. First drink is on me. 

[F737MAX 5,738]

Just now, bvdboomen said:

the level of detail brings a lot of immersion for the helicopter or bush plane flyers.

Sounds that way.

The problem is that for such a long time the world in a flight sim has looked far better at FL350 than it does at 350 ft. So we've ended up with a strong bias towards airliner flying. There's more to aviation than tube flying for 2 - 12 hours at six and a half miles above the ground.

Even as a tubeliner fan myself, I cannot wait to see what detail the MSFS2024 world brings to open up previously ignored genres of flying.

[wiejag 1]

The aircraft simulation has already matched the cars in Forza Horizon 5, so now they are focusing on the scenery to match that of FH5. 🙂

Edited November 8, 2023 by wiejag

[Franz007 581]

1 hour ago, lwt1971 said:

And now they're backpedaling given they've been clued into what the interview was actually about 🙂

I think you missunderstood that. The interview in a gaming-magazine was a confirmation of what is known since a long time; MSFS adressing the arcade-gamers as first priority. And seeing the excitement of some talking about new technologies when in fact they are going back to stone-age or pebble-age has also nothing to do with backpedaling and much more with amusement 😁

Edited November 8, 2023 by Franz007

[turbomax 3,307]

36 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

for such a long time the world in a flight sim has looked far better at FL350 than it does at 350 ft. So we've ended up with a strong bias towards airliner flying.

good point. a gradual shift from former IFR to more VFR flying, percentage wise. remember ELITE IFR trainer? no sound, no scenery, only IFR procedures. with MSFS new graphics technology, world wide photo real scenery and powerful GPU/CPUs, flight simulators today "boldly go where no man has gone before!" 🤣, at least not enjoying it as much. I for example just finished a short day VFR flight 1.000 ft. over the Mojave desert to KPSP. I would never have done that without MSFS's new scenery and graphics.

Edited November 8, 2023 by turbomax

[Franz007 581]

47 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

But the competition to MSFS moved way too slow and did little to advance flight simulation in the 10 years that Microsoft was away from flight simulation. The competition was complacent for 10 years, before MSFS came out.

Yes what a shame. Competitors improved flight dynamics/inertia, offered 3D-weather-radars or worked on requirements for FAA-certification. And MSFS has none of them to offer but built-in-arcade-races. When MSFS came out it was a huge step back compared to what we had before, except the visuals. Only after years the could make it a bit more usuable. Let’s hope they won’t do the same mistake again.

[lwt1971 7,464]

22 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

The interview in a gaming-magazine was a confirmation of what is known since a long time; MSFS adressing the arcade-gamers as first priority.

Well, that's not really known is it. How do you come to the conclusion that MS/Asobo are "addressing the arcade-gamers as first priority"? 🙂 They absolutely want to expand the audience for flight simming, and yes also include extra platforms like XBox in addition to the PC. That doesn't mean that's their first priority, and nor does it mean that all/most XBoxer's interested in MSFS are arcade gamers. Hey it's even possible that Serious Simmers ™️ could also be interested in arcade games 🤯. They happened to give this interview to a Swedish gaming magazine, about the recent Sweden world update, trying to extract grander schemes and priorities from that is a fool's errand.
 

Edited November 8, 2023 by lwt1971

[lwt1971 7,464]

12 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

Yes what a shame. Competitors improved flight dynamics/inertia, offered 3D-weather-radars or worked on requirements for FAA-certification. And MSFS has none of them to offer but built-in-arcade-races. When MSFS came out it was a huge step back compared to what we had before, except the visuals. Only after years the could make it a bit more usuable. Let’s hope they won’t do the same mistake again.

Lol you're trying too hard here, perhaps a refreshing beverage at Turbo's bar might make you less triggered. Yup absolutely, MSFS has nothing to offer but built-in-arcade-races, please share more of your insightful wisdom with us! 😃
 

[abrams_tank 7,477]

16 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

Yes what a shame. Competitors improved flight dynamics/inertia, offered 3D-weather-radars or worked on requirements for FAA-certification. And MSFS has none of them to offer but built-in-arcade-races. When MSFS came out it was a huge step back compared to what we had before, except the visuals. Only after years the could make it a bit more usuable. Let’s hope they won’t do the same mistake again.

It actually has better default avionics than your preferred simulator. MSFS has the best default G1000, G3000, G5000, GNS 430, and GNS 530 for a civilian flight simulator.  Within 2 years, MSFS leapfrogged the default default avionics of your preferred simulator.

Edited November 8, 2023 by abrams_tank

[HiFlyer 9,376]

1 minute ago, Franz007 said:

Yes what a shame. Competitors improved flight dynamics/inertia, offered 3D-weather-radars or worked on requirements for FAA-certification. And MSFS has none of them to offer but built-in-arcade-races. When MSFS came out it was a huge step back compared to what we had before, except the visuals. Only after years the could make it a bit more usuable. Let’s hope they won’t do the same mistake again.

My memory is that it took literally decades, and multiple iterations, for our legacy sims to reach that level.

What are we at now? Flight simulator 10? Xplane 12?

How many years of cumulative improvement was behind those?

The (kind of) unspoken truth, is that the community as a whole has shown it will never be satisfied. No matter what asobo/Microsoft do, there will always be those that immediately raise their hands and go "But what about....?"

Same stuff, different decade.