viz

Not 'pushing' at all, just reading the roadmap and trying to anticipate what is on the horizon. Asobo/MS make the roadmap, and it's associated deliverables.

I'm gonna hazard a guess at the September teaser being fully implemented seasons.

Once PMDG et al start pushing the boundaries you can bet your bottom dollar that the 32GB ideal spec will rapidly become the norm.

SCIP → SCEL might be a bit tricky in the TBM! 😬

I think it's safe to say there will be a lot of world tours commencing in August.

Those warnings are bad edits... they are not in the original shot nor the actual aircraft.

Re-watching some of the videos, I spotted these options in the airport filter during the IFR episode was scrolled past very quickly (perhaps intentionally?) Heliport is there too, and below that (out of shot) there is an option for Other Runways.

The A5 yes, I believe there was also a cub spotted on one of the menu screens at the preview event. I don't recall any videos/screens showing aircraft actually on the water though, and that's primarily what I meant by 'thoughts'. I guess as with everything it's a matter of wait and see. Amid all of the complaints that each dev update is much of a sameness in terms of media updates, the final alpha may yet show us a lot we haven't seen.

As beta's are typically deemed 'feature complete', unless floatplanes appear in the upcoming alpha 5 they are looking more and more likely to arrive post-release. Thoughts?

Yes, it was a big factor back when gaming in the mid to late 90s, having hundreds of milliseconds difference between players could render the game almost unplayable. It still happens today to some degree, most notably in racing sims.

All I'm saying is thank goodness Asobo have added interpolation to multiplayer aircraft... Seeing some of these pings reminds me of all those lagging HPBs (dare I say cannon fodder) dialing up to join quake2 deathmatch servers! 😉

Using 'light-year' is a perfectly valid description of the vast distance between FS and the others. This isn't even subjective at this point. FS is a dynamic, living simulator. The others are static fossils, that require constant CPR just to keep them alive.

Yes that is true, but the point is they could define it smaller than you'd consider a city to be, after all city in French also means town. So, if we're being ultra specific, their definition extends to any defined area with a population over a few thousand.

The question should be wrong tree size or wrong tree species? This is a tough one for Asobo, either way these complaints are likely to crop up again and again if the data sources don't cover such information. Here's a real nitpick for you, is it just me or do the wheels look slightly buckled/loose as they roll down the runway? As for quoted number of cities, that could be as simple as what they define as a city, some would say anything over 20,000 population, other would say more. Physically modelled raindrops, again this probably comes down to interpretation. I'd be inclined to think they mean rain in the broad sense is modelled and that how it interacts with the plane informs the graphical effects on the panels - not that the graphical representation itself is physically accurate. Think of the tyre model in iracing, it calculates everything from pressure to deformation yet we don't see any of it graphically. Oh and those cartoon guages were literally laser scanned and modelled from the real aircraft. Colour saturation is totally subjective and can, in any case, be changed in seconds via your own drivers and/or display. Having said all that, I'm happy with progress so far, it's light years ahead of the others, even with the occasional baked clouds/shadows/shorelines/vehicles etc. All of which will change with each source update.

The user in question: CH Drone Photography (https://www.youtube.com/user/stratochief99), aka Cam from CH-Sim (https://www.twitch.tv/hutchsim) should be removed from the FS insider program if not already. This blatant disregard for the NDA is unbecoming of a private pilot who should know better: Regarding excitement - "Dont get your hopes up, it isnt that great." Regarding the scenery - "All they see is how pretty FS2020 is and assume the rest is amazing (which its not)" Regarding the flight model - "Well none of the other aircraft fly well..." Regarding download - "about 4-5 hours, and I have fiber..." Regarding other sims - "Are you an alpha tester? Because addons for P3D and XP11 are infinitely better than the "out of the box" aircraft in this "game". IMHO, this alpha made me appreciate the addon support that XP11 and P3D do have." Regarding release date - "There is a reason for that....it is riddled with bugs." Regarding casual players - ""I'm not normally a Flight simulator buff"...then wait until it's on Xbox and get it there. This is exactly the problem with this sim and the people who are giving it way too much credit already. They are marketing it as a realistic sim, but in reality, they are mainly attracting people who have no experience, who just want to look at pretty scenery. We are going to have a whole new generation of FS2020 YouTubers who just expletive off on multiplayer. Its not what flight sim is about. The community is toxic enough already. For those of us flight sim "chads", this is not the sim we were expecting. Not until there is some serious study-level aircraft available to match the visuals." Regarding 'non simmers' - "You are the target demographic, and that's why some of us who have been in this hobby for 20+ years are a little annoyed with this "game"." Regarding realism - "Thats the problem, this is a game, not a simulator." Regarding the C172 - "Dude if you're telling me the 172 in this game flies like a real one then I want to see your airman certificate LOL. This is totally a game, not a simulator." These are just his comments towards this ONE video, who knows what else is out there. Totally inappropriate for a product still in development.

The level of sheer ignorance dotted throughout this thread is frankly an embarrassment to this otherwise generally intetillgent community. When all of the ventilators in your local hospitals are in use and one of your loved ones suddenly requires one - whether due to this virus or not - will you still be thinking 'this only affects the old', 'I've had flu, so I'm good', '99% of people will be ok', 'this is just a media hoax'... That is just one of the numerous consequences this pandemic could have on YOU and those around you. Overloaded healthcare services affect everyone. Overloaded supermarkets as a result of stockpiling and lockdown affects everyone.

I think MS has been quite aware of their carbon footprint long before the streaming FS data came about.

The channel in question is primarily an Elite Dangerous channel by someone who, as far as I can tell, isn't and never has been an attention/money seeker. Heck, if we're talking about 'using' the material of others for views/money, all social networks/forums/review/publishing/news outlets are guilty of this, indeed it's the basis of their whole business model. The chap is clearly a fan of large, detailed, open-world exploration games and I for one am glad he is helping to promote Flight Simulator to people who otherwise may not be interested. From what I can gather he typically doesn't drag videos out a second longer than necessary, and they are largely informative, current and well presented - the opposite approach to someone only interested in money. For all we know he may never have used a flight sim in his life, but why should that prevent him from getting enthusiastic about this one? I've also no doubt what-so-ever that over the years he has brought a lot of people to Elite specifically and - by extension - profits to the developers via his 'garbage', sorry, 'pointless' videos 😉. If he does likewise for FS then great, I wish him all the success he gets, and I suspect Microsoft will too.

In GTA quite literally everything is created from scratch. In Flight Simulator almost everything is imported from other sources and/or procedurally generated.

They can't use the photogrammetry airports because up close they just don't have sufficient geometrical or texture fidelity, plus no moving jetways, baked vehicles etc.

I think the point they're making with that 5% is that it's not the physics engine dictating overall performance, it's the rendering engine. Thankfully with today's techniques and hardware they can essentially build the most capable physics engine possible without it having a detrimental affect on other areas, namely rendering. The few million physics calculations per second are almost background tasks in comparison to the billions of ops required to draw the graphics.

Very impressive indeed. I suppose the lack of info regarding the 'hangar' shots suggests that they are indeed part of the UI and not the actual airfields?

Speaking of detail, anyone notice the gutters/drain pipes on the autogen?

It's worth noting that autogen does not equal offline - most of the planet will be autogen. What offline mode lacks is primarily photo imagery, which has to be streamed due to the enormous storage requirements involved.

Let's just hope AMD can bring some decent competition to the high end of the market, like they have finally managed with Intel. Competition is what drives down prices, and currently Nvidia is untouchable.