46 minutes ago, turbomax said:

how about a  GPS that is "way way better than the default funky xplane GPS". anything planned tentatively for xp13?

https://developer.x-plane.com/article/x-plane-web-api/

https://realsimgear.com/

3 hours ago, turbomax said:

now since we are back again at MSFS bashing in the xplane forum:

how about a  GPS that is "way way better than the default funky xplane GPS". anything planned tentatively for xp13?

I'm not bashing anyhting starting with the fact that I like and use both sims.

I am simply saying what I feel.

regarding the GPS (default) yes of course what Working Tittle GNSs for MSFS have put it easily ahead of default Xp12, and even the default Airbuses in FS 2024 are way ahead in systems modelled and how they are modelled than, for instance, the default A330 in Xp12, which, in some aspects, is a joke ...

But! as a full experience, everything taken into consideration, I have now good reasons to prefer Xp12.2 than I do MSFS 2024. Maybe it can change in the future, and in both platforms I am in their latest Beta versions.

Edited April 14, 20251 yr by jcomm

8 minutes ago, jcomm said:

the default A330 in Xp12, which, in some aspects, is a joke ...

AFAIK, improvements to the 330 are being worked on.

4 hours ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

as I think 2024 will go the way of flight.

I could see v2024 balancing back to being more disk-based, but I can't see it going away unless MS decide, once again, to exit the flight sim market entirely.

And based on the numbers we know about, that seems highly unlikely.

Don't forget that v2024 is largely built on v2020 technology, and again, the success has been resounding - at least in terms of user adoption. I don't know how profitable they are because their operating expenses must be very high, but still...

1 hour ago, Mike_CFII_MEL said:

For flight simulation it is in its infancy stage and going through its growing pains just like any other piece of software during an integration process! It is your opinion that it is not meant for our dynamic setups, unless you have some documentation to prove your view point.

Doesn't Google have a flying map mode?

Mike, I respect your desire to have photogrammetry in XP. Indeed, I just shared my opinion; for me it doesn‘t really add something to the immersion or at least to little to justify the time spend on developping it.

Yes I think Google has that. And many digital twins from cities around the world use it too. And when used through a network it‘s always disturbing to see the time t needs to build up, passing from melted down to recognizable objects. And some parts of it look just bad (trees and other smaller objects).

double post

Edited April 14, 20251 yr by Franz007

2 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

And based on the numbers we know about, that seems highly unlikely.

I don‘t know how it will be in the future but if we look at the user-statistics of Steam (I know it‘s just part of the platforms but within its own community it is reliable), the average number of users of 2024 have been in a free-fall. They went from 28‘000 a day in nov 2024 down to only 2‘800 now and keep droping week after week.

And even if we add both 2020 and 2024, the average number of users of 2020 have been going from 12‘000 a day before the 2024-release down to around 9‘000 (both 2020 and 2024 added) now. That means that at least on Steam, 1/4 of users have completely stopped using any MSFS-version.

2 hours ago, turbomax said:

how about a  GPS that is "way way better than the default funky xplane GPS". anything planned tentatively for xp13?

There are for sure still some areas for improvements. But just out of interest, what do you mean with GPS? I am using both sims and GPS is just that…so I don‘t understand what you mean. Both can use GPS. Do you mean the precision or something else?

16 hours ago, Mike_CFII_MEL said:

That hyped technology is absolutely necessary if one is practicing any real world dead reckoning in XP12

I couldn't agree LESS.

I've been doing dead reckoning in XP on default scenery for years before MSFS was even a gleam in anyone's eye.

As long as the major geographic & anthropogenic features are there (and they've been there in XP for as long as I've been using it), you can get around just fine, especially if using the other tools of dead reckoning.

I mean, heck, I learned to fly so long ago GPS literally didn't exist, and I managed all my VFR X-country's with nothing but a compass, chart & clock.

And in quite a few road trips before smartphone GPS-enabled navigation, we managed to literally cross the US of A with nothing but a paper book of road maps.

And never in either type of trip would "photogrammetry" been of assistance in the least.

5 hours ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

... as I think 2024 will go the way of flight.

 

4 hours ago, jcomm said:

Me thinks that too 😞

Me, too BTW. They introduced missions and as 'compensation' 😄 they removed the failures. Heck, even 2020 had failures. Not too many, IIRC around 5 or so in the default C172 and planes with multiple engines some few more, maybe 10 or so for a 747. If I compare that with the 'myriads' of simulated failures in the XP default planes ...

From what I was told, who could imagine back then (FSX) that MSFS pulls the plug? It was the 'king' of flightsims (at least in regards of sales figures), but then MS possibly got greedy and wanted to make even more money by introducing an arcade game. Big companies often change their mind, e.g. if the new CEO feels he has to do something completely different than his predecessor (otherwise, why would a new CEO would be needed? 😉).

Well ... time will tell.

7 minutes ago, flying_carpet said:

they removed the failures

Wait...really? They did?

33 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

There are for sure still some areas for improvements. But just out of interest, what do you mean with GPS? I am using both sims and GPS is just that…so I don‘t understand what you mean. Both can use GPS. Do you mean the precision or something else?

Without picking sides, the Default GPS systems in MSFS have been (re)built to a higher degree of fidelity to the IRL units upon which they're based.

Originally that was an independent freeware improvement project by the group that became Working Title, who started out with the CJ4.

Then MS saw the results and the popularity, and they decided to officially incorporate Working Title's work into the sim.

I'm not at all sure how necessary that level of fidelity is for default aircraft and such, as, again, I've been getting around just fine with the default XP nav systems for years. BUT, NGL, it's nice to know it's there. 🤙

One thing I would be interested to know is how many people have run into problems with XP's default nav systems...? I bet the number is relatively low.

 

19 minutes ago, flying_carpet said:

 

Me, too BTW. They introduced missions and as 'compensation' 😄 they removed the failures. Heck, even 2020 had failures. Not too many, IIRC around 5 or so in the default C172 and planes with multiple engines some few more, maybe 10 or so for a 747. If I compare that with the 'myriads' of simulated failures in the XP default planes ...

From what I was told, who could imagine back then (FSX) that MSFS pulls the plug? It was the 'king' of flightsims (at least in regards of sales figures), but then MS possibly got greedy and wanted to make even more money by introducing an arcade game. Big companies often change their mind, e.g. if the new CEO feels he has to do something completely different than his predecessor (otherwise, why would a new CEO would be needed? 😉).

Well ... time will tell.

Well, since this is an XP post in the XP forum, I won't go any further than saying I believe y'alls logic is flawed in re MSFS' continued success.

1 hour ago, Franz007 said:

I just shared my opinion; for me it doesn‘t really add something to the immersion or at least to little to justify the time spend on developping it.

Hi,

 

Here I would disagree, have you seen this video using google maps and earth molder for blender. This looks amazing and if included into XP12 would completely change the playing field.
 

 

5 hours ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

I think 2024 will go the way of flight.

 

I guess anything is possible, but I think you are wrong for a few reasons:

• The same thing was said about MSFS 2020. They are still investing heavily in 2024; the current roadmap goes until at least 2028. I believe they said each photogrammetry city costs at least $1 million to fly the planes around to scan, and they have more cities and countrysides planned.
• They seem committed this time around unlike the half-baked effort of MS Flight. They have deals with many companies now, including Lufthansa for LIDO charts and recently signed another with Embraer to bring more planes to 2024.
• 2024 is light on resources. It loads way faster than 2020. I bought an Asus Zephyrus G14 laptop over the weekend (16GB Ram, RTX 4060). The download for MSFS 2024 was only 8GB, and the current installed size is only 26GB. Even with this small install, I was able to get detailed scenery anywhere in the world. MSFS 2020 would have eaten up at least 150GB of my laptop harddrive. 2024 definitely had a rough start with the streaming, but it seems to be working really well right now. The laptop runs a bit hot because it is so thin, but I was surprised at how smooth things ran. Because of the thin client, I'm betting that 2024 will be further expanded to PlayStation and Nintendo Switch.