Claviateur

This is the sad part of the whole thing... Whatever the product I prefer to use does not have is Ok but a tiny thing that is missing in the product I don't like is a big deal... Many airfields in XP11 are missing and many have only a runway... No way to taxi out of the runway... That is more important than a 3D VOR installation I suppose Many additional packages add a huge amount of details to XP11 empty landscape in areas outside major cities / US that are not there out of the box... Same for MS Sim... I tried a few as well and they add a lot of VFR details to the landscape

Is it a VOR installation that is missing? NDB? Antenna? Shame on them... But as someone who uses XP11, it has much less airfields and airports worldwide than MSFS? Out of the box? I mean the places where an aircraft lands in areas outside major countries and cities... For people who do not live in the US let's say? I like it when the discussion is informational but It is constantly turning into this:

I believe when the discussion is between users or add on developers of multi sim platforms who happen to comment on and compare scenery technology and a user who belongs to the circle of one of those sim companies, then we can say that the connection and discussion will never be healthy and logical... As for the monotonous trees, I look forward to seeing XP12 3D tree tech how it will render dense forests... EDIT: Speaking of 3D trees, I tried this App to see if one can create custom tree types for sim scenery but did not try to export and implement it yet: https://www.evolved-software.com/treeit/treeit

What does not make sense? That the AI builds the scenery on the fly or that it scans Bing imagery and detects footprints and other metadata? MS did this before MSFS and the data is available to download and use... https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/maps/building-footprints And I learned in an earlier post that Simheaven are using MS data for XP world overlays in addition to OSM... https://github.com/microsoft/GlobalMLBuildingFootprints So no magic in that at all, machine learning can do more than this but in this specific workflow, the AI was used to detect and build a database for infrastructure and vegetation footprints and other attributes...

No, the AI does not do that obviously... The machine learning / scanning process worked during production phases to produce the data and that was it. Then Algorithms were written based on data and metadata (OSM + Bing + AI fetched) to filter and produce the infrastructure (Scripts that could be similar to W2XP) but the 3D extruded infrastructure are more advanced in terms of detail and adaptation to the environment (roof types, colors etc) than the basic facades in XP11 and previous gen. Same process for vegetation data... Any new machine learning scanning process that might happen or have happened could be either for the Regional Addons or World Updates (with better Bing and other data) or if new worldwide sets of Bing are processed and implemented...

This is exactly what I look forward to seeing: how XP12 will be able to digest that scale of footprint data (vs XP11) as we fly in dense cities (default or with the Simheaven packages)... Ok I did not know that Simheaven used the MS footprints that are by the way AI generated... https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/maps/building-footprints So finally it seems MS and AI did not completely fail but succeeded to do something useful for XP12 expansion packs if we can call Simheaven packages this way... I can't wait to try all this in XP12

Yes, I am familiar with both facades types, as I mentioned I created scenery for XP11 (since I bought the beta) including procedural scripting with W2XP using OSM data... But when Facade type 2 came out as terminal kits, I wished if these will make it to the urban world... In fact I even used facade type 2 (traced them in WED) for some city buildings by using some terminal components that could look like offices or shopping centers... I then stopped creating scenery for XP11 after Vulkan so no idea what happened with Facade type 2 (if still only for terminal kits or went beyond).. I hope facade type 2 will be the new world facades in XP12 instead of the older default types...

Ok and the more I look at the screens the more I see that these are not Facades that ate performance but detailed 3D objects that are deployed using multiple ways including putting infrastructure on one side and/or another of roads or in lots or in defined areas etc as W2XP scripting allows... The thing is if one needs to extrude an OSM footprint, then a facade technique must be used... And this is when performance is affected... Yet if the exact shape of the infrastructure is not important because there is no ortho underneath to contradict the shape but generic textures as in these screens, then using generic 3D objects from a library is a better option as each is loaded once in memory... What I showed in the MS Sim examples are not 3D objects from a library but rather extruded footprints with facades like method but with more 3D aspect... And I hope XP12 will have the facades tech revamped to allow the same performance and details because those who will generate ortho, would prefer to have the same footprint over the Ortho...

I understand you are under NDA for 12 but is it 11? Because the infrastructure (if data driven not 3D library assets) seem much more detailed than 11 facades I

Glad to hear that XP12 engine will digest a view packed with generated infrastructure from data because unfortunately XP11 struggled with. For example in MS Sim: A view in LA (Photogrammetry / aka Blobs disabled) Objects, Graphic and Lod settings boosted to max possible levels Purely data driven infrastructure With extruded infrastructure that has more 3D / details than XP facades On my son's computer (that was the one I used for XP10.5 and 11) or my new Computer, the performance is really really good for a data streamed... Again, I hope XP12's engine is reworked to digest such dense data!! And I hope XP12 will expand the OSM data use to render islands like this one that I wanted to generate myself for XP11 using the OSM data + W2XP

I will start by saying you are always right in everything... Even the out of this world arguments that deny basic fact in the software / company you hate... But I create scenery since 1998 and I deployed OSM data like Simheaven did as well as used Simheaven packages in XP11... Even if you keep only the facades buildings (no other 3D objects), the performance of XP11 will drop to radical levels even of solid PCs... I am not going to comment on what MS failed or achieved... i do not promote their software but people who have no biased vision to any company or product know the answer...

And I think this is how the data there was filtered to give priority to OSM / Bing and if not available, then the machine learning data is used... I could be wrong but this is what I observed in the way it was deployed.

As usual, you are 100% right... And I can't wait for XP12 knowing that it will have great physics for sure but also the adult version of a realistic globe...

Maybe you are right, some worldwide vector data out there that MS only can afford and that allowed Asobo to useto cover the whole planet with data driven plausible crisp and clear infrastructure. And yes, I hope LR won't make the same innovative mistake as Asobo with this orthogrammetryblacksharkai whatever, and will be able to also cover the whole planet with data driven plausible and crisp infrastracture no matter where it comes from, for any user, wherever they are, to enjoy some virtual flying over their area.

I am certainly not going to comment on the Friend statement... As for the footprint data in their engine (since it concerns the topic of this thread), the only way to know if it is Marketing or some machine learning was involved to augment the OSM + Bing data, is to go to remote areas where there is no Bing or OSM footprint available and see if there is any 3D infrastructure over the Bing building that has a matching footprint shape... Also to see if this 3D infrastructure has a type that is plausible to what the Bing building has... More of less of course...

It could be an effect generated with a script perhaps but I am not sure. Perhaps someone else can say more about this.

It should be a discussion about scenery tech and autogen basically but it is clearly not working

As a very curious person / scenery dev guy, may I ask what are the coordinates of this "random town"?

I remember on MS Sim Dev update platform, in the early days, probably following some heated debate about this sim and that sim, they published a note saying something like (and please don't quote me because I forgot the exact wording): FS, XP etc. We are here for the fun of simming or something like that... So basically we learned now that MS is publishing positive notes like the one I mentioned and then hire undercover people to complain about XP? 🙂

If we put MS Sim on the side, I could also mention another engine, I was following closely and where I invested a very modest amount of money for its early (work in progress) access a few years ago... It's Outerra. Unfortunately as a small indie project, it did not go as fast as it should in terms of dev and applications but back then the idea of a procedural world (No Ortho or Photogrammetry) was yet one more tech I admired... It's been a long time I did not download the latest tech demo, but it seems they are still working on it https://forum.outerra.com/index.php?topic=4939.0 Oh, and indeed, now the engine is unfortunately behind in comparison to the newer solutions... That also use data driven procedural methods...

I told you that I learned my lesson with this discussion 🙂 Blobs are the scenery of MS Sim, let's live with this version of reality... I swear that it feels like things you hear in a cult...obsessive focus on a tiny thing that is generalized to make it the rule for positive or negative arguments... And denial of the 90% of facts... It is an unsettling behavior... And usually no logic can win over such psychology... Even the elegant post Tony wrote in this thread to add more logic to this basic discussion, did not make any difference... I am more than familiar with XP11 procedural world (generated W2XP areas from OSM) and the XP screenshot against photogrammetry is from places where data is available or purely procedural (i.e: placing infrastructure on one side and another of roads)... Some of the infrastructure here are facades (OSM Data available or used) and some other infrastructure are 3D houses from the library... But this is clearly a city with coverage... It is not a random location from a remote area ... Because remote areas do not have equivalent as Photogrammetry obviously... My friend prefers to disable Photogrammetry and enjoys 100% fancy procedural coverage... Even in remote areas... As for airports, there are tons of airports in MS Sim unfortunately we don't have in XP... I tried to go to some remote ones to compare but they do not exist in XP... We both can align on this common sense... But not everyone... I look forward to seeing what XP12 will have for users living in areas outside the major covered cities and countries

Your arguments are very logical here but as you noticed, there is no point of discussing common sense with any person who can bring weird distorted arguments to refute that basic logic... So good luck 🙂 This is why, I learned lately new dimensions in logic with precisely arguments such as : a flat tundra texture a la FSX has better variations than a 3D conifer forest that looks like Alaska's forests...Simply because the forest is not in the product we prefer to use 🙂 And then the obsession to focus on the city centers Photogrammetry (that can be disabled) and their low res when seen from low level and the strange act of ignoring the rest of the procedural tech behind the world engine of MS Sim, is very similar to what I heard from LR in a Webinar Video from last summer (on Youtube)... I heard them mentioning that the scenery of MS Sim is melting polys or blobs... They did not mention the procedural tech in the MS Sim world engine... that LR always preferred for XP... So the statements we heard here seem sadly as if they are the echoes of that Webinar and the generalized and inaccurate info about the scenery tech brhind MS Sim etc... I do not care if the company behind that world engine is MS/Asobo or Potato/Banana, what is clear from my perspective as a scenery developer and user of many sims, is that they invested in an advanced tech (did not patch ESP World Engine to make money from it) and delivered a very advanced and honest product for entertainment and it is accessible to a wide audience (and they are adding to that world engine regional details etc)

Unfortunately there is a campaign of misinformation on both sides... This should not happen because we are dealing with software for entertainment that costs less than 100$... Brilliant pieces of code and tech but nothing that will save the world from anything unfortunately...

Just a quick note that I have both simulators by MS and LR and DCS as well... I enjoy them as a user and as a scenery developer too. And I will get XP12... I also follow graphic and world engines development out there... No more no less... I don't belong to any side but I admire evolution in any product I use and I hear about online. That's it 🙂

Sadly, this is the weird feeling I was talking about... It's like a cult behavior... It's like let's find a little tiny thing in the other cult and make it a big issue.. What we have is ok...The same there is a big deal... And let's play down or deny things there because they do not serve our cult interest or agenda and let's twist things to make our cult always superior and feel good about ourselves in it... While the whole discussion is simply about world engine technology for entertainment flight simulation that is obviously evolving like everything else... 🙄