HughesMDflyer4

To expand on this as I'm the one who set up the cameras - they are in this category as I believe MSFS does not (or did not at the time, I'll need to re-check this at some point) allow Showcase cameras to be panned/moved, and I felt it might be fun to have non-static cameras in the cabin. 🙂

A screenshot of the switch: It is! This is actually how I found out it existed. Saw that package and peaked through the files.

@vbazillio Great work on the airport! Have you tried it with the SU10 beta? I'm not sure if the beta is to blame or something else, but the default buildings aren't getting excluded on my install. I also don't see a yellow star on the World Map with the airport installed (which usually indicates a custom airport). I don't have this problem with KRNM, interestingly enough. I've tried removing a couple other scenery add-ons in the area, ensured all official content is up to date, and cleared my content.xml.

Apologies for the lack of documentation on this! I had a rough draft written up for the Livery Manager, but it didn't quite make it into the release build. For now, an explanation: A symbolic link is essentially a shortcut. This can be used to keep the liveries in a folder other than the Community folder, such as one on an entirely different drive. A symbolic link is created in the real Community folder for each livery, linking them to the external location. To use it, you set the Microsoft Store folder to your actual Microsoft Flight Simulator content folder (this is usually detected by default and no action is needed). Then, set the Microsoft Store Symbolic Link to a folder where you want the liveries stored. Upon downloading liveries (you'll need to reinstall liveries for the symbolic link to take effect), they will be stored in that new location, with a symbolic link created in the Community folder. Hope this helps!

JetBlue does not operate A320s with CFM engines. When the IAE engine variant is available, you can expect to see appropriate liveries.

You can also disable a mod by renaming the layout.json or manifest.json in its root folder to something else (ex. layout-disabled.json).

https://github.com/HughesMDflyer4/MSFSLayoutGenerator Here's a simple application to automate the process of updating layout.json files in MSFS packages. You can place the exe wherever, and drag-and-drop layout.json files onto it to update them. It will iterate through every file in the same folder and subfolders of the layout.json, and write the necessary data to the file. Hopefully this will be useful to livery artists who are currently adding each file entry by hand.

Well considering it's not called Flight Simulator 2020, that was never guaranteed.

That's no different than selling on SimMarket or similar (still would love to see no more than 15-20% cut from the official marketplace, but that's probably wishful thinking). However, in this case, you're exposed to the entire playerbase instead of those that happen to find out add-ons exist through Google.

Yep, always find it funny when people freak out when the idea of a marketplace is brought up. It's no different than buying from SimMarket or similar. It's probably one of the best things one could ask for - a centralized place to buy all add-ons without worrying about a bunch of installers or trying to keep track of what sites you've bought from. I'm sure traditional stores will never go away, but having the option would be nice, both from a consumer and developer standpoint.

Really amazing stuff! I know it's on the feedback list, but I'm really surprised shared cockpit wasn't mentioned in this episode and isn't a higher priority. I feel like it would be a super useful thing to have this time around (ex. taking a friend flying who just wants to see the scenery while you fly, or even for training newcomers). Would be really cool to be able to get my non-flight sim friends loaded into a Cessna and take them flying. 😄

From what I've been reading, and depending on how you look at it, there is a bit of a downside to WebAssembly. In the past, most devs who have made any even remotely complex aircraft have needed to write hooks to read values that the game does not expose. As WebAssembly modules run in a sandbox environment, I believe this significantly limits what a programmer can do outside of the API. This is great, as it prevents malicious activity. It's also bad, as it could limit innovation and really specific types of add-ons from being possible. That said, if Asobo provides a proper API for all of the stuff devs have had to hook in the past (ex. weather and terrain data to create weather radar and terrain radar), it shouldn't be much of an issue.

I know what's involved in implementing it, my point is it's useless unless the testers actually use it instead of other third party tools/the print screen button, AND the community knows where to find the data, which most wouldn't. IMO it would be kind of a shame not to show a screenshot just because location/build information isn't embedded. Hell, it's easy enough to track down the locations of many of the shots they've shown anyway. That said, a photo mode with the features you mention would really be great, as lots of games are getting them nowadays. Would be nice to see them take it a step further and implement functionality similar to FSRecorder so that you can rewind/save flights and take screenshots/videos after your flight.

That information (build number and lat/lon) still has to come from somewhere. If there isn't a built in screenshot feature, it's entirely up to the user to label every single screenshot they post, which definitely isn't happening. Even if there was a screenshot feature that embedded the data, some users would likely choose to use their own utilities anyway. At that point, I just can't see the effort to implement such a feature and enforce its use being worth it to the team.

Considering the giant watermark across the entire game, I doubt testers would much enjoy having even more text on their screen that doesn't benefit them or Asobo at all.

This is the first we've seen of the Bonanza since the wing shot in the first trailer. https://twitter.com/MSFSofficial/status/1225202432390516736

In case anyone just wants a list: Airbus A320neo Boeing 747-8I Beechcraft G36 Cessna 172 Skyhawk Cessna 208 Grand Caravan EX Cessna Citation CJ4 CubCrafters XCub Daher TBM 930 Diamond DA40 Diamond DA62 Icon A5 Mudry CAP 10 Robin DR-400

How would 360° photos help Asobo with scenery accuracy? There's not nearly enough data to build anything meaningful/consistent. Regardless, Bing does have their own street view.

Sorry for going a bit off topic with this reply, but for what it's worth, bandwidth is a non-issue in this case. The images and ads on this site, relatively speaking, use far more bandwidth than any reply ever will. As an example, saving this page and its content to my desktop results in a roughly 2.6 MB folder. The HTML that makes up your reply is 240 bytes (0.00024 MB) I think the bigger issue with quoting an entire post is that it just makes topics obnoxious to read, which I can totally understand.

Only this community would decide that Microsoft's name is incorrect. Never have I seen another game get a fictional name. 🤣

There's a real DA62 with that registration: http://www.wildbergair.com/photos/airports/Austria/LOAN/20150328/20150328_VSB.htm

It's already been confirmed many times that they built it off of FSX. What the OP is talking about isn't FSX specific and is not an indicator of it being used. It's simply perspective/distortion. It exists in all games that aren't 2D, and in real life (cameras and even your eyes have the same effect).

It's not that black and white. What the Avsim staff wants is irrelevant in the context of an NDA. Every beta testing program at every company is different. There are no set in stone rules or standards that say you can or can't share if you're involved. It's ultimately up to what the NDA/company states. In the case of the MSFS Insider Program NDA, the language is slightly vague, but it's definitely more responsible to say less than to say more. If you're not allowed to talk about your experience or post media, there's no real reason to share that you're involved anyway. Those that were accepted need to remember that members of Asobo browse this forum, so whatever they say about the Insider Program, the devs will likely see. Many alpha/beta programs happen for products outside of flight sim, and some state that you can't share that you're involved. Sometimes it's because the product isn't announced yet. I wouldn't be surprised if sometimes (ie. in the case of MSFS) it's there as a very clear reminder that you can't talk about the details of the beta (if you aren't allowed to even say you're involved, you definitely shouldn't be talking about the beta or sharing media).

Welcome to modern technology. Our PCs are capable of a lot, and flight sims have been some of the last games to actually utilize current hardware to its fullest potential. This is part of why larger, more complex aircraft perform so poorly in FSX/P3D. Not because aircraft systems are so taxing (they're actually fairly cheap compared to the rest of the simulator), but because the sims themselves haven't been designed to handle high resolution digital displays and hundreds of interactive parts. Offloading so much of the rendering engine to the GPU is a big step forward and will allow the CPU to handle all physics calculations quite easily I'd imagine. I have no reason to believe we won't see the same physics in both online and offline mode.

I'd be curious to hear the source on that one. Looking at the little they've shown of offline mode, there is no ortho visible. As has been mentioned above, I believe most, if not all of the terrain textures will be procedural in offline mode based on available data (I say most because a few places in default FSX used ortho, so I wouldn't be surprised if there are some high detail areas that still use it in offline). Basically a more advanced version of landclasses, but with accurately placed buildings. You can see an example of offline mode in the first feature discovery episode at this specific time: https://youtu.be/BZL5PCZO8cc?t=429