As xbox continues dying a slow agonizing death.

5 hours ago, brinx said:

Looks like you can finally play Microsoft flight simulator on your PS5 on December 8th. Hehehehe

https://www.thesixthaxis.com/2025/09/24/flight-simulator-2024-is-coming-to-ps5-with-psvr2-support-in-development/

"Surprising literally nobody, Flight Simulator 2024 has been announced for PlayStation 5, the latest Xbox exclusive to breach the previous platform divide. The game will arrive on PS5 on 8th December 2025, while PSVR 2 support is also in development for a later date."

There is a "but" tho

I dont actually have a PS5/PSVR2 yet because I was waiting for

https://acesofthunder.net/en/news

Which is now getting towards a year late. And in the meantime went quest 3 instead.

So it's great to know it's planned, and massive congrats to everyone at Asobo for breaking out, but chances of this getting delayed are pretty certain, sony is legendary for their brutal QC. Upside to that is once it passes it I will have no doubt its worth what they are asking.

26 minutes ago, mSparks said:

"Surprising literally nobody, Flight Simulator 2024 has been announced for PlayStation 5, the latest Xbox exclusive to breach the previous platform divide. The game will arrive on PS5 on 8th December 2025, while PSVR 2 support is also in development for a later date."

Yup, not surprise at all about PS5, but I'm surprise that sony is allowing the in-game marketplace. 

28 minutes ago, mSparks said:

I dont actually have a PS5/PSVR2 yet because I was waiting for

Wait, What? You don't have a PS5 or PS VR2? You've been such an advocate for PlayStation and PS VR2, so I thought you had it already. I personally think the PS VR2 is a failure. Sony paused production. I have the meta quest 3 but rarely ever use it.

40 minutes ago, mSparks said:

So it's great to know it's planned, and massive congrats to everyone at Asobo for breaking out, but chances of this getting delayed are pretty certain, sony is legendary for their brutal QC. Upside to that is once it passes it I will have no doubt its worth what they are asking.

Honestly, I didn't expect to hear these words from you based on past statements. I'm assuming WASM made the port possible.

3 hours ago, brinx said:

 but I'm surprise that sony is allowing the in-game marketplace. 

Well, that is the "but", they haven't until they do, and even if they do (which is a lot harder than just saying it will be) they can and do pull stuff from the store if it doesn't get a glowing reception,  e.g. cyberpunk 2077 was pulled in December 2020 and wasn't allowed back for quite some time until they fixed the issues.

3 hours ago, brinx said:

Wait, What? You don't have a PS5 or PS VR2? You've been such an advocate for PlayStation and PS VR2, so I thought you had it already. I personally think the PS VR2 is a failure. Sony paused production. I have the meta quest 3 but rarely ever use it.

It is by far the best hardware, and I really want GT6, but GT6 on it's own is not enough to justify the price and all the effort setting it up, everything else has been delayed, presumably for the reasons I gave above, AoT was supposed to release in April 2024 iirc.

Prior to that I was on the PSVR in Xplane, got bored of waiting for more PSVR2 content and got a Quest back in October, use it with ALVR and xplane on a fairly regular basis, played through Batman Arkham asylum (just wow, I am Batman) and have a lot of hours in population one (although the PC cheaters do spoil it), resident evil is on my list to get when I'm next bored.

PSVR2 as a tech stack is probably good for another 10 years, maybe more, the hardware is well ahead of the software, but at least now the software can and is happening.

3 hours ago, brinx said:

Honestly, I didn't expect to hear these words from you based on past statements. I'm assuming WASM made the port possible.

well, my past statements were very much along the lines of expecting what they delivered not what they promised.  I'm not going to be preordering, wouldn't be surprised if it finally ends up a PS6/PSVR2 release several years from now, but I'll be very happy to wrong and it actually come sooner.

Edited September 25, 2025Sep 25 by mSparks

On 9/15/2025 at 9:37 AM, Franz007 said:

I do seriously prefer XP staying exclusively for people with a true passion for aviation over those searching for eye-candies like photogrammetry

I believe it, and there it is spelled out in all its elitist glory.  And yet, what is the very first stuff suggested to potential new converts like Bobsk8 to help them actually want to stay?  Very simply references to ortho scenery and other addons which fall at some level under the domain of eye candy.  Others will argue ortho is not eye candy per se and I generally agree to me it is a necessary condition, but it's visual enhancement certainly to anyone.  Plus, it provides something that is hard to quantify but is very meaningful:  giving one the sense they're actually seeing what's there in the RW.  'Eye-candy' is frequently used in this context with a derogatory overtone, that it's not about hardcore aviation so *shouldn't* be relevant and yet once again what does everyone do that installs any version of XP?  Start looking for...eye-candy enhancing add-ons:  AutoOrtho, SimHeaven, Orbx ortho regions etc.  Why does eye-candy matter at all in a desktop flight sim?  Well, because flying in a desktop simulator free of eye candy can become tedious at best.  I'm not one, but if I were an aspiring pilot I might install XP and skip the add-ons because at that point, I'm using it 100% as a training tool.  But as we all understand most all desktop simmers are here for the entertainment predominantly.  As some have said Level D sims can have weak scenery.  

So to you Franz007:  if XP12.x and beyond offered world wide high quality ortho scenery and photogrammetry that was improved over the current offering to the point of eliminating melted objects, would you rather not see that, lest people searching for maximum visuals be enticed into using XP?

@Noel I was refering to the photogrammetry I know from MSFS. It makes close to zero difference to me for immersion and has more negative sides than positive ones. That’s my opinion, so I prefer Laminar to spend more time with more important things related to aviation. I don’t like photogrammetry. It’s unnecessary. Again, that’s my opinion. You are free to have another opinion. Nothing wrong with improving visuals. But there are limits. Orthos massively improves the flying experience; PG do not.

Is this still going on.

I love xp12’s sky candy.

5 hours ago, Franz007 said:

@Noel I was refering to the photogrammetry I know from MSFS. It makes close to zero difference to me for immersion and has more negative sides than positive ones. That’s my opinion, so I prefer Laminar to spend more time with more important things related to aviation. I don’t like photogrammetry. It’s unnecessary. Again, that’s my opinion. You are free to have another opinion. Nothing wrong with improving visuals. But there are limits. Orthos massively improves the flying experience; PG do not.

I've spent the vast amount of my 6-7K hours w/o using PG as I have essentially the same sentiment about the current state of PG, a net loser.  I retry it periodically just to see if anything has changed.  If and when it's improved to the point of losing the melted objects then it will be a worthy upgrade to visuals with little to no significant downside.

I disagree. Yesterday I did the same approach into SBSP with XP12 and MSFS 2024 in VR. The immersion that PG brings is astonishing. 

16 minutes ago, Noel said:

I've spent the vast amount of my 6-7K hours w/o using PG as I have essentially the same sentiment about the current state of PG, a net loser.  I retry it periodically just to see if anything has changed.  If and when it's improved to the point of losing the melted objects then it will be a worthy upgrade to visuals with little to no significant downside.

It depends in my opinion how much work and efforts that would need from LR and how much the impact is on performance. And also, like you are saying, how they can integrate the transition where it will be shown. For very low flying over a big city with a helicopter it may add some immersion, otherwise I prefer a consistent autogen (not changing from default to PG over major cities). For me that option would be one of the last things to add.

Everyone wants better scenery graphics in X-Plane, some do so more, some do so less intensely, it is a personal preference. If someone says otherwise, he is just doing so to be controversial or argumentative.

What we have, however, is an argument over how much effort and to what detrimental effect on other aspects of the simulator Laminar Research should shift and allocated thin resources (dev time, money) to improve scenery.
And here the argument starts. Should they "drop whatever else they are doing, who cares if an airplane flies straight while the scenery looks so ugly!" or should they "uphold the high standards on other aspects of their flight simulator and ONLY use whatever resource they have left over to improve the scenery"?

Its not a question of IF the scenery should be improved, it is a question of HOW other aspects should suffer or prices should increase to achieve it.

That is why you see seemingly deranged statements like "I don´t want the scenery to improve..." - which certainly comes across as "those grapes are too sour anyway", but I believe the actual stance is "I appreciate the past stance of Laminar, who focused on the technical aspects of Flight Simulation, more so than the visual aspect of ground scenery representation". 

If someone walked in with a magic wand and says "Hey, do you want me to wave this around and have the X-Plane scenery be suddenly photorealistic at no cost to performance or the sale price of X-Plane?" - you will probably not find many X-Plane users say: Naaah, I like it just the way it is, thank you.

Edited September 29, 2025Sep 29 by Litjan

On 9/15/2025 at 5:37 PM, Franz007 said:

I do seriously prefer XP staying exclusively for people with a true passion for aviation over those searching for eye-candies like photogrammetry.

An interesting statement. I think I know what you mean, but of course 'people with a true passion for aviation', like me, may very well like 'eye-candies' a lot! I know I do. I agree though, photogrammetry can look very bad sometimes, but when it's rendered properly I find it to be a feast for the eyes.

--

Edited September 29, 2025Sep 29 by Rimshot
Double post

36 minutes ago, Litjan said:

Everyone wants better scenery graphics in X-Plane, some do so more, some do so less intensely

I have no addon scenery pay or free. Dont find it necessary to enjoy xplane. Happy with teh plane textures lighting improvements it what you see in flight