MSFS tops Navigraph 2023 survey results

[Rimshot 1,158]

1 hour ago, Krakin said:

Add-ons are often passed off as default in XP circles

 

5 minutes ago, Krakin said:

I was talking about the misleading practice of showing off a screenshot or video and presenting it as if everything shown is default.

When did that happen?

[Inu 74]

7 minutes ago, Krakin said:

How am I being hypocritical when I specifically mentioned add-ons being passed off AS IF they are default? I never said add-ons are a bad thing, heck, I use plenty of them myself. I was talking about the misleading practice of showing off a screenshot or video and presenting it as if everything shown is default.

Ok my bad 🙂

FWIW I saw many claims that the fact that many people download addons for other simulator is a disadvantage hence I made the wrong assumption about where you were leading with your comment.

[BobFS88 649]

23 minutes ago, Inu said:

With that being said, I agree some there is some hypocrisy here, if there was no demand for 3rd party addons in MSFS then we would not have so many addons for it.

You are correct. 

He is not referring to addon out the box. What he saying somehow LR is passing someone else's work as their own when it comes to those images of pebbles on the beach scene. The hypocrisy in his statement is he is not acknowledging that MSFS is using a 3P contractor for providing services to their default scenery which no one can't deny.

 

[Krakin 5,837]

7 minutes ago, Rimshot said:

 

When did that happen?

It's most common on XP leaning Youtube channels where they do comparison vids, leaving MSFS vanilla while their XP footage has Auto-ortho/Ortho4XP, Global trees etc and they do not specify it anywhere. I asked one of them to put something in the description and he flat out refused, saying his viewers know what's going on anyway. There was also an incident where a certain commercial member posted a tweet with some good looking XP12 clouds. I think LR retweeted it but they had to quickly retract it when it was discovered that the clouds in question were actually being manipulated by a third party add-on. LR did the right thing. The commercial member in question was not the creator of the add-on so the association wouldn't have been obvious.

[lwt1971 7,456]

2 hours ago, Franz007 said:

Hasn‘t that already been posted a few months ago? Because I remember how many had a good laugh at that (me included) 😁

Yes, when Jorg mentioned a tidbit about topography enhancements in MSFS 2024, in an interview about world depiction graphics, and then when some desperately tried to cast it as something else, in turn ending up being their usual comedic selves? Indeed, that was very laugh worthy! The same laugh-worthy individual brought pebbles up here again, so best to point out actual quotes from the interview 🙂

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/639272-gamereactor-interview-with-jorg-neumann/

[Franz007 505]

2 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Yes, when Jorg mentioned a tidbit about topography enhancements in MSFS 2024, in an interview about world depiction graphics, and then when some desperately tried to cast it as something else, in turn ending up being their usual comedic selves? Indeed, that was very laugh worthy! The same laugh-worthy individual brought pebbles up here again, so best to point out actual quotes from the interview 🙂

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/639272-gamereactor-interview-with-jorg-neumann/

Thanks. Just thinking about it made me laugh again (sorry) 😁

[Krakin 5,837]

27 minutes ago, BobFS88 said:

You are correct. 

He is not referring to addon out the box. What he saying somehow LR is passing someone else's work as their own when it comes to those images of pebbles on the beach scene. The hypocrisy in his statement is he is not acknowledging that MSFS is using a 3P contractor for providing services to their default scenery which no one can't deny.

 

You're a man of few words so I expected some wisdom when you did choose to speak. I never said LR did anything, I said "XP circles" as in users/fans. There is no hypocrisy in any of my statements because the work BSai did for MSFS is indeed default and is available out of the box. None of the XP add-ons I mentioned were created, sourced or provided by LR and none of them come packaged with XP. If LR paid someone to make XP better, I would not be petty and fault them for getting help. I didn't even see your post before pointing out the fact that LR showed good transparency with the twitter pic fiasco. This really isn't the "gotcha" you're looking for.

[Rimshot 1,158]

51 minutes ago, Krakin said:

It's most common on XP leaning Youtube channels where they do comparison vids, leaving MSFS vanilla while their XP footage has Auto-ortho/Ortho4XP, Global trees etc and they do not specify it anywhere.

That is indeed not fair to say the least. For what it's worth, I try to keep as far away as possible from all flight sim related Youtube content. There's a lot of rubbish to be found.

[threexgreen 3,156]

2 hours ago, Rimshot said:

When did that happen?

For example, during the numerous discussions comparing MSFS weather (default) to XP and P3D with ActiveSky weather (addon). Compare default MSFS WX to default XP/P3D WX or ActiveSky MSFS WX (maybe some day) to ActiveSky XP/P3D WX. If you're trying to build a case on XP/P3D is better because it has better weather than MSFS, go home, you're drunk.

[fsiscool 251]

 

5 hours ago, Inu said:

You are mixing 2 different aspects here.

1) What kind of ground texture you have to begin, generic or satilite imagery.

2) Procedural rules that are applied to place high-freq detail, typically color keyed, slope-sensitive shaders etc..

I am not mixing anything. You might read the topic in your original post again. You talked about AI trying to apply the right materials vs artists doing the same and I exactly answered in that context, that artists won't be capable to complete that exact task before you and I will long be gone from this earth.

4 hours ago, SAS443 said:

Is this correct water physics, @flying_carpet?

As mentioned before the physics is terrible. The water transparency is off by a wide margin and the attitude of the floating aircraft is completely wrong.

[Krakin 5,837]

2 hours ago, Inu said:

Ok my bad 🙂

It's quite alright, it happens. The refreshing thing is that you were able to acknowledge the misunderstanding and leave it at that. We'd have far less controversy in this forums if more people we're able to be that mature.

 

2 hours ago, Inu said:

FWIW I saw many claims that the fact that many people download addons for other simulator is a disadvantage hence I made the wrong assumption about where you were leading with your comment.

I think the disadvantage people are pointing out is the fact that the other sims need those add-ons to look anywhere near as good as MSFS does in it's vanilla state.

 

[BobFS88 649]

1 hour ago, Krakin said:

I never said LR did anything, I said "XP circles" as in users/fans.

Why would Flying_carpet show you something that would be anything other than LR default scenery to make a point other than as you put it in the statement below.

4 hours ago, Krakin said:

You can never be too careful. Add-ons are often passed off as default in XP circles.

 Then why do you find it so impossible to believe that LR can actually do something amazing while the other side needs hiring 200 developers and contractors to help them in their cause. It says more of what they're able achieve with fewer resources than an army of programmers and money to achieve the sometime.

 

[flying_carpet 657]

2 hours ago, Krakin said:

It's most common on XP leaning Youtube channels where they do comparison vids, leaving MSFS vanilla while their XP footage has Auto-ortho/Ortho4XP, Global trees etc and they do not specify it anywhere. I asked one of them to put something in the description and he flat out refused, saying his viewers know what's going on anyway. There was also an incident where a certain commercial member posted a tweet with some good looking XP12 clouds. I think LR retweeted it but they had to quickly retract it when it was discovered that the clouds in question were actually being manipulated by a third party add-on. LR did the right thing. The commercial member in question was not the creator of the add-on so the association wouldn't have been obvious.

Aaahhhh !!! ... That's the fly in the ointment !! It's so unfair ... "XP is shown with addons to look as good as MSFS by default". Because THAT'S what's important in a flight simulator - that it looks good. Finally I understood ... So, should XP users also be forced to show why it flies so much better?

BTW, do you know Bill Gates's following quote? See here: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/bill_gates_382270

 

42 minutes ago, fsiscool said:

As mentioned before the physics is terrible. The water transparency is off by a wide margin and the attitude of the floating aircraft is completely wrong.

The water transparency will be fixed in XP 12.1.0 (i.e. in few weeks). When will the off by a wide margin water transparency in MSFS (see my video further above) be fixed? Apart from the planes flying through water ...
However, your response is a perfect example for: "your" molehill is thousand times bigger than "my" mountain 😆. A well known tactics (also from cunning politicians) to distract from the real big problems.

Edited January 3 by flying_carpet

[Krakin 5,837]

39 minutes ago, BobFS88 said:

Then why do you find it so impossible to believe that LR can actually do something amazing while the other side needs hiring 200 developers and contractors to help them in their cause. It says more of what they're able achieve with fewer resources than an army of programmers and money to achieve the sometime.

First of all, all of what you said has no connection to what you quoted so.....what are you doing? In any case, it is abundantly apparent that one of the platforms does have 200 devs working on it. That is actually part of the reason why the survey results came out the way they did (oh wow! We got back on topic!). Yeah, LR achieved quite a lot and they're a bunch of talented people but don't forget they've been plugging away with incremental upgrades for years. What about everything Asobo has achieved on their first crack at an advanced flight sim?

39 minutes ago, flying_carpet said:

Aaahhhh !!! ... That's the fly in the ointment !! It's so unfair ... "XP is shown with addons to look as good as MSFS by default". Because THAT'S what's important in a flight simulator - that it looks good. Finally I understood ... So, should XP users also be forced to show why it flies so much better?

You don't feel weird talking to someone about diversion tactics right after you said all of this? Good visuals aren't the only important thing in a sim but they are important. If you want to dispute that, why don't you tell LR to drop the $20 price hike and forget about the visual improvements that require it. Your used-to-death tactic here is to straw man the discussion to make it seem like all MSFS users care about is good visuals. 

XP users show why and how XP flies better (not much better btw) all the time and no one has an issue with that. The thing is when you're doing a GRAPHICAL comparison of two sims, it makes sense to be transparent about what is and isn't added on. Too much to ask XP users to show some integrity???

Edited January 3 by Krakin

[fsiscool 251]

49 minutes ago, flying_carpet said:

However, your response is a perfect example for: "your" molehill is thousand times bigger than "my" mountain

The video shows just that your "mountain" is totally flawed and wrong. I have not mentioned any other molehill.