Jump to content

OSJJ1985

Members
  • Content Count

    239
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

130 Excellent

About OSJJ1985

  • Rank
    Member

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    Other
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Why should I require a specific addon to be functional for the new Sim when the Sim itself can do a better job on its own? For example there really is no need for FTX Global products to be compatible with the new Sim.
  2. Honestly?? I couldn't care less if Azure can't 100% recreate the correct dimensions of several buildings. I thought the main concern was that Azure would transfer satellite imagery one-to-one from Bing, which will clearly NOT be the case. Otherwise you're going to have clouds on the ground in Dallas, TX and being a major US city that'd be a HUGE no-go. And if they are able to straight out Azure right to give a visually appealing representation of Dallas (this is just speculation of course) then why shouldn't the very same technique be able to get an equally visual appealing representation of Pyongyang?? If you're really that nuts about a 10-story building being represented as a 5-story building then you very well may be disappointed. I don't really give a ..... as long as it doesn't produce skyscrapers in suburbs or mansions within the CBD. Azure doesn't know the difference between North Korea or the US. a hay-field in the US will be the same as a hay-field in Mozambique. So it will obviously create the same detail for both of them.
  3. I don't think satellite data for Africa or any other "exotic" destination will be any less than Papua New Guinea (they showed us a brief clip of PNG... and it wasn't even Port Moresby). The best way to get an idea is check Bing Maps and check the places of lowest definition. I guess a good bet would be North Korea. Who ever said satellite imagery was the only technique of producing VFR-capable terrain? Azure is capable of reading 2d rooftops and creating 3d buildings.... so why shouldn't it be capable of reading a river, road, etc... and then telling the sim "hey we need a river here and a road there following this path" ... "this field should be placed here with these dimensions". So my guess is for places with very little or poor photographic data it might have some new form of landclass technique (in P3D it was ... city here, sand here, grass there and each landclass had it's textures with all the features on it). In this case it wouldn't be large areas and than have all the features on the texture. It would be all the features dictated by what the AI reads and THEN add the texture and definition to each and every single detail. I'd like to remind that this is all speculation. In the end I am sure that the visual quality as in definition will be the same thought the world. You will still get high resolution pavements, buildings, trees, road textures, etc.... in North Korea. Runway textures and buildings textures and detail will be the same for ZKPY as it's for KSFO. What really falls short is the accuracy. You might get a runway with incorrect number of piano keys or roads with false markings or a house without a pool where there should be one.... or a specific field my have another green tone than what it would be in real life. Or a building may be 30 m taller or whatever. Just my thoughts
  4. At this stage AI trees are better looking (or let's say actually look like trees) than the photogrammetry trees (sometimes very blocky). I am sure they are doing all the best in trying to improve the overall experience. At high altitudes it may not be a big thingy or flying fast. But when taxiing down the taxiway/apron I do want to see "real" trees. Trees are among those things that greatly enhance the immersion, especially if you see the correct trees at your location (which even that wasn't always a given with P3D). Anyways I was thinking when it comes to dense forests, where I actually prefer this "blocky" presentation, because you're usually unable to see anything but the tree tops, this mesh style might greatly enhance performance without the cost of immersion (right now you need millions of trees to correctly represent a dense forest). I hope I haven't lost you at this point. My idea is to have dense forests (and other smaller areas where a larger number of trees are very close to each other) be depicted in this mesh style of rendering and have it surrounded by AI trees (produced by the AI engine according to whatever is fitting). This way it will just produce a small number of AI trees (a single row of around the forests perimeter) but still give an "illusion" of depth when close up on ground (or near to ground) level and preserve that dense appearance when flying over it AND keep performance high. I hope I haven't lost you there and you get the idea 😉
  5. ...of needing to upgrade my CPU+RAM+MB combo. I was hoping I could wait until the release of MSFS, but P3D is showing the limits of my 4790k + 1070ti + 16GB DDR3. It's not just MSFS..... RDR2 is also giving my system a hard time it seems, getting occasional freezes (not stutters real freezes)... I was really hoping to blame Rockstar Games for that, but it does seem it's time for a CPU upgrade. Anyway will keep the 1070ti for the time being as I see it still as good enough to keep the price tag a good bit lower. Here is what I have come up with so far: i7-9700k ASUS PRIME Z390-A G.SKILL RipJaws V DIMM Kit 16 GB, DDR4-3200 NOCTUA NH-D15 CPU-Cooler That sums up to about €774, I would like to keep it under 1000 if possible. My question of course are, is the cooler going to do it and does it fit within my midi desktop case?! What's the best power unit for this setup, consider I do intend to upgrade to an xx80 GPU in the future. Or maybe you have other ideas, but generally the CPU decision is final.
  6. D*** you Microsoft. I was just about to fire up P3D and you've just ruined it for me with that trailer.
  7. Well I still have one of the older versions on my system. So I assume the parked aircraft only feature is not available anymore. The version I have is 14.11. Can I still use the current PPG to create airport files even for the older version? Thanks for the reply
  8. Hi, I just installed the latest version (16.10) and the option to disable live traffic to spawn only parked aircraft seems to be missing. My last version was 14.x and it was possible to disable the RealTraffic channel. I know this software was not designed for just parked aircraft, but I don't need it for anything else as I just want to populate the airport with AI aircraft as I let VATSIM produce the "moving" traffic. If the feature was removed is there a possibility to re-download the last version that had this feature?? And would I still be able to use generated xml files from the latest AIL and PPG? Another thing. Everytime I change the liveries folder to the standard folder within PSX main folder it keeps changing back to the AIL output folder. Thanks a alot and best regards, Chris
  9. Whats the difference if the next gen sim is named MSFS or P3Dv5. I don't want another beating at the same dead horse.
  10. Well count me in as one of those that actually bought, because of that credit. I would have been very reluctant otherwise. And am glad I did so as it brought on final life-line to P3D to let it go out with a bang. But without that credit I would probably have passed and waited for the NG3.
  11. No, but if you are planning to get the NG3 then the NGXu is more or less a free product. And considering they want to sell to more than just the NGXu customers, I doubt they will go for $199..... but in a time of $70 expansions who knows.... I am counting on something like 140-150. We'll see.
  12. This is the first time I will defend PMDG. I for myself said I wouldn't buy the NG3 for P3D, because my fear was if the MSFS version gets out they will probably charge full price again. So now they transfered the NG3 to MSFS only and release another 737 base pack named "NGXu". I think the whole naming thing is actually backfiring on PMDG a bit. The thing is if you (like me) are one of those that are sold on MSFS and will most definitely buy the 737 for MSFS when it's out, there is no loss in buying the NGXu for P3D right now. You're gonna have to pay full price for the NG3 for MSFS anyway. Did P3Dv3 owners get an upgrade price for P3Dv4? Did we get upgrade pricing from FS2004 to FSX (2 years time-span)? Do FIFA19 players get upgrade pricing for FIFA20 (1 year time-span)? So why should NGX owners get an upgrade pricing for NG3 (more than 8 years?)? Keeping that in mind and knowing I will be getting MSFS and the NG3 for it, I consider the NGXu to be a free "pre-order" bonus. NG3 = price, NGXu + NG3 = same price. So why not let P3D go out with a bang?
  13. As Microsoft have stated on their own website... "no subscription" the worst case scenario I can see is one-time purchase for offline mode and a subscription model for the streaming service. And I'd much rather take the streaming service then them charging micro-sums for every single city they want to upgrade or whatever add-ons they want to bring forward themselves. It's the same with an amusement park... I rather pay a larger entry fee and ride whatever and how often the H I want than paying a small fee (which in most cases isn't that small) for every single ride. The latter usually gets me to buy less and pay more. I have no clue what their business strategy is or how they are going to keep this thing alive for the planned 10 years. All I do know is that if they do choose to offer this with a subscription just for the online streaming goodies (offline world and whatever you pre-cached prior with a let's say just one-month subscription will still be perfectly usable) it's not that evil thing as many may see in it, albeit obviously not as good as getting everything with just the $?XX.XX one-time purchase. With this model the flying bit will be subscription free in any case. I will say this again I am not trying to figure out what Microsoft could or will do. I am just voicing my opinions should Microsoft choose to go one way or another. And if the decision should be made to charge for streamed goods (not the software critical updates/patches, etc..) I would rather prefer subscription than micro price tags on every single updates building/city or whatever. Imagine paying $1 for every single airport you want to check the charts on navigraph. Maybe it's just me, but I prefer to know what I am paying a month and be able to use a specific service without limitations.
  14. MSFS: The Phenom Menace MSFS: Attack of the Clouds MSFS: Revamp of the Mist MSGS: A new Globe MSFS: Embraer Strikes Back MSFS: Return of the Jet MSFS: The Hangar Games
×
×
  • Create New...