Jump to content

badderjet

Frozen-Inactivity
  • Content Count

    3,526
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by badderjet

  1. Correct, then again the eyes have a much greater dynamic range than cameras. And the adaption can be seen in the sim, although being probably not as fast as the human eye.
  2. That’s what I was asking myself. Did they say that? On the feedback snapshot they say „Bing Improvement Plan/Update Frequency — Answered“. Maybe I missed it. When new photogrammetry pops up, they will let the algorithm run over everything at some point and then what? I guess what you stream comes from some source where they have the entire processed globe stored at? Not that it would change much but I’m just curious.
  3. There seem to be those weird new options to "steer the tug to the right or left", again via ATC. 🤪
  4. We know 8.33 kHz channel spacing will be there since the IFR Episode and in the very same video we also had to witness it's faulty implementation. Any news on the issue that are publicly available, anything in the many videos which no one can possibly watch? I might have missed something but I feel nobody is really messing around with those basic features. Have never seen just one person tune in a frequency by hand in any of those videos. Not that I couldn't wait another week or so to find out myself it might still be wrong, just being curious as we're a few versions further down the road.
  5. Thanks. I believe I watched it without sound so I missed that one.
  6. Agree 100% (yes I read it all). Though to this I might wanna add, Vehicles are never driven into persons! 🤣 I'd prefer a sort of automatic solution as has been suggested before, as you just don't interfere with most of this stuff. Deciding on the fuel amount at some point is wise as it's one of the things you'd obviously do irl. All other services would just do their thing and you'd only intervene with ops when there are issues (that shall better not be simulated, thank you). If they do some sort of an "ops freq", it should definitely be seperate from the ATC. I don't even care if they get correct frequencies (those might be hard to get) or a frequency at all. Just some menu option would do, and without all the unnecessary voice interaction. I don't know if that pushback was recorded in real time but it seemed extremely slow. Usually you can expect to see 2-3 knots GS during pushback. You talked about TRPs, some airports have breakaway areas that serve for a number of stands, or ATC clears you to a specific one. In FSX the pushback would end just about anywhere, I surely hope they at least fixed this in a way you'd end up on a taxiway centerline. That would already make me happy for now as it would be a major improvement. Although for the future I would not mind to have some entity in the BGLs (or their newer equivalent) to specify TRPs resp. breakaway areas. They introduced these weird new options to "steer the tug to the left/right" and to "stop pushback". Instead they should have made the ATC decide which direction to face based on the runway in use, and if the comm with the rampie was simulated, then forward that information to him. Just as irl. The bugs that are quite obvious (jetway speed, animation and movement, vehicle movement, vehicle running into persons, ...) will hopefully be fixed soon after release. As I don't think they will before. As Chuck already said, there is quite a difference between ATC and operations comm. Actually I hate it when people will explain in greath lengths what CB formation they are seeing in front of them, and the multiple options of how they could/might/would eventually divert around them etc. and all the other unnecessary jibber-jabber. Something like "ABC123 turning right 20° to avoid" is sufficient and effective. On operations frequencies though things get way more natural in terms of language usage, but then again there is no given phraseology that needs to be adhered to.
  7. At least for this one there was a hint when someone scrolled through the view settings, as there seem to be hotkeys ALT+0 thru 9 to "Load Custom Camera 0 thru 9". I have a screenshot but can't find the video anymore. I believe it was one of the leaks a while ago.
  8. Why? I’m pretty sure it could even be a lot darker on an actual photograph. You may argue it’s a matter of taste, but it’s the very first time we have an actually photorealistic lighting… instead of the „pseudo–HDR“ of the past that wasn’t even intentional for the lack of better graphical possibilities, where every part of the image was exposed „correctly“, looking directly into the sun and having a perfectly lit and readable panel in front, under the glareshield. Completely unrealistic and I’m glad these times are over as it seems. As I stated before as a hobby photographer I’m very happy to have this effect. Super cool. Exactly what I was saying above. I wonder though what it would do on an HDR display. Guess the exposure shouldn’t adjust then. That’s great. Don’t know much about other (especially current) games, but I can’t remember I have seen it in any flight sim so far. Another first!
  9. I’m not exactly sure if we’ll be able to edit existing taxiways. Then of course I don’t know much about the current scenery system (still BGLs etc?). In the past I believe it would’ve been necessary to exclude the old airport out and start anew altogether. But who knows, maybe that’s doable even for non-professionals with the SDK tool that we’ve seen.
  10. Exactly what I was suggesting above. I still think it's the fastest way to remember a clearance, especially if you're not quite prepared for longer clearances or unexpected non-standard routings. Heck, even more with the "less paper" concepts, as it becomes harder to actually find some paper to write on quick enough 🤣
  11. Pretty sure there is some exposure compensation going on, something we've never seen before afaik. Watch the scene 21:05-21:15 very closely (also later at 23:45 for example), have a look at the dynamic range and stark brightness difference between outside and inside. Before anyone has the urge to educate us again, I know it's not "the sim" but just a video, but still. It's very clear the exposure will be adjusted based on lighting conditions and obviously viewing direction. While it might make the panels harder to read here and there, I find it super awesome. Kudos Asobo. It's basically what you'd experience irl. I already had the impression this might come from a number of screenshots with remarkably "dark" panels.
  12. Hm, as much as I appreciate the new icing model, but this seems to occur quite regularly. Of course I don't know the conditions that were prevailing, but I'd say I have yet to see that amount of icing in that short time during that weather irl. I'm not saying it can't happen, but that frequency in all these videos seems at least highly unlikely to me. Same with rainbows... Maybe this can be adjusted later.
  13. Plus, at some airports that's not the system at all. They would somehow try to name a 'northern' taxiway N, a 'western' one W and so forth. With tons of variations of course, but they have some very different systems than just going alphabetical sometimes.
  14. We don't know, and we have no indication it will be in there. For a mid-term perspective I surely hope for such functionality, as for an instructor station. That would be great and add up a ton of new possibilities especially for advanced or professional users.
  15. Good to see you don't have a clue about how much I'm worth, as you say. Others do, you don't. That's fine.
  16. There is a setting for road vehicles that can be zeroed if you want.
  17. They are 3d but very low poly as it seems, plus their behavior seems extremely basic as has been pointed out elsewhere.
  18. Would be optimal. Realistically I don't think this is gonna come but anyway. More customization options can't hurt.
  19. Don't waste it. If you have something meaningful to contribute, make sure to let us know. lol Bubble bursted, I'm sure apart from the FSX model you mean all those different settings, that were clearly shown by someone, right?
  20. Did they roll in nicely as they should? With all the new fancy tech in MSFS I expect them to be volumetric, dynamic, and whatnot. Actually, with all that new weather and aerodynamic simulation those contr..., ahm chemtrails, should come out of the ingyne with no further development effort needed.
  21. On airports you're familiar with you'd have an idea of the most probable route. If it's your first time you can write the clearance down of course, and if you have no paper at hand you can just use the CDU s/p (if you have one). Very often you won't even get the entire clearance up to the holding point though, especially at huge airports. You might very well have multiple frequencies to go through along your way, and each one might give you a clearance for the next part ahead of you. There are airports where the tower is like the 4th or 5th frequency you talk to on your flight. If you mean specifically MSFS, since they have NavBlue as a partner there might be charts to help. Or maybe not, we don't really know. At least some planes will have AMM stuff built in.
  22. Sure as hell I need it. Except for full flight sims I haven't used a sim in years.
  23. I hear ya. 'Luckily' these things don't happen a lot right now for obvious reasons. But seriously no one wants that in a sim. It's like having the simulated jetway break down just before retracting and you wait an hour for the mech. These things are bad enough irl, there is zero need to simulate them.
  24. Totally o/t, but me too, especially since the water seems to be completely opaque when the fuselage dives in. Improving that (i. e. adding transparency) might be another big step though, graphics wise. Not even? Are you kidding? So only testers may nit pick and point out things that are wrong from the available information? Jeez... Completely misinformed. There is no such thing as "simple" realism settings anymore. (sorry, couldn't resist 😂) But to add, yes it's very possible to state opinions based on the information, footage, pictures etc. that are available to this day. Guess what, here's 60K posts on a product that, apparently, we can't assess. But that's the point of this forum, somewhat. Otherwise we could wipe this forum clean and we'd have the first thread on the 18th, when we have "the full information to make qualified assessments". That's really not the way it works. To the OP's original topic, the look of the clouds changes quite a bit depending on their settings from low to ultra. There's some footage that will show the effects nicely. In general they are unbelievable much better than anything we've had before, and yet I somewhat agree that they sometimes look "wrong", for the lack of a better term, as it's highly subjective. They say the weather system can simulate all kinds of clouds, yet we always see pretty much the same, mostly cumuliform patterns. We see tons of rainbows (which I see almost never irl), a great amount of airplane icing (which I see a bit more often than rainbows irl), but nothing like simply lenticulari or the like (which I see quite a bit more often than icing). It's a very subjective matter but I'm happy to see what we have at the moment and hope for sure it will get improved even more in the future. While I appreciate and always have appreciated all 3PD's efforts, I really think it's a good thing for this sim to be the very best possible out of the box.
×
×
  • Create New...