yanfeng12342000

Microsoft should work with Google, and we will have a perfect world.

I will continue flying in other sims in VR until MSFS has VR.

I don't agree. It's kind of segregation that will cut off communication between VR people and non VR people. Recently we see a lot of enlightening discussion between different groups. Some might not be very constructive, but it's common on the net, and no big deal. Segregation might look peaceful in a short run, but ultimately stagnant in the long run. If it's not for the recent debate, many people still hold the negative impression of VR of the first generation. Sweviver just published through lens video comparion of Pimax 8KX and Reverb, and the difference is quite remarkable. VR headsets are constantly evolving, and they have crossed a critical threshold.

Euro Truck Simulation?

It would be 10 times the immersion if flight simulation and car simulation could be mixed together. Say you are flying in the sky, and you see some cars chasing each other, and you know those cars are driven by real people...

120 people team with an average of $100,000 salary will be $12,000,000 a year for salary alone. I have the vague knowlege that salary occupies 50% of the development cost, so it's roughly $24,000,000 total? Xbox game pass 12 month subscription is $60. So you need 400,000 subscriptions to match the development cost? Now that does not sound too much like a difficult task, if it has both PC and Xbox version on a subscription basis. Well, as long as it's also sold outside flight simmers. Edit: Sorry I correct the math error. Thanks for pointing out!

I was also viewing the preview again and thinking the same. The potential of this "simulation" is immense.It's more than flight, driving, boating, first person shooting, and MMORPG. This could be the virtual living space people have been dreaming about. Google Earth is meant to be sort of this dream, but it's quite primitive, and lacks aesthetics. Facebook wants to create a virtual social space, but it's too abstract and hard to be attached emotionally. Could Microsoft be creating something that will be the ultimate space for second life? We will see. That might also be the reason why Microsoft is rebooting an abandoned niche product with a 120 team. Surely a limited revenue from flight simmers could not match such massive investment?

Yes that's the very reason that upsets the "VR fanatics" and make them doubt Microsoft's committment to VR. IPCS developed Aerofly FS2 which has built-in VR at launch, and it is the best VR implementation for any current flight simulator. The entire team of this flight sim consists of two main programmers. https://www.aerofly.com/community/forum/index.php?thread/8210-slow-progress/&pageNo=2

The analogy to 3D TV is relevant but incomplete. If you agree with my first 3 points, 1. We all long for bigger view, 2. We all long for realism, 3. We all long for freedom, then we can see 3D TV is on the way to VR, yet it's only a transitional product. 3D TV adds a dimension, which brings more information and more realism, but its view is still limited. It does not have headtracking, and it's not 6DOF or even 3DOF. Many of the problems of 3D TV are actually being overcome by VR.

Obviously you have not seen my point 7. VR is simple. You imagine "VR world tour" is in conflict with "Flight Simulator", but that's not the case. According to the developer, adding a "simple mode" of VR is indeed very simple. It will not obstruct "Flight Simulator" in any way. For Unity and Unreal engine, it's as simple as adding one line of code such as "VR: ON". MSFS uses its own engine, but it shouldn't be much more difficult. Then you'd ask: why don't they just do the simple mode first? Please read my point 8. VR is difficult and urgent. That's the advanced mode of VR which involves optimization of a lot things for VR. That indeed takes time, and resources that are also much needed by other part of the simulator: Seasons, ATC, AI, etc. I presume the developer wants the advanced VR instead of simple VR, but it's not an easy task, so they intend to put it off until later consideration. And I think that's a wrong decision. My point is that if you want to build a future proof flight simulator, you have to implement VR from the very beginning, and I have listed my reasons. Now if you and the development team still think VR is difficult and NOT urgent, that's OK. Can we make a compromise: Just implement the simple mode of VR. It will not hinder or delay the simulator in any way, yet it offers at least a spectacular world tour for everybody. It's at least better than no VR at all at launch.

VR fans appear to be overzealous about the VR, but this is not without reasons. VR is important, and more important for flight simulation, and even more important and urgent for MSFS. Here is why. 1. We all long for bigger view, from 14'' to 50'', from one monitor to tripple monitors, and there is no bigger view than VR. And MSFS offers the biggest view of the earth, which cries to be fully viewed in VR. 2. We all long for realism, from cga to HD, from HD to 4K. But realism is very limited if it's only two dimensional. We need real 3D with real perspectives to have real sense of the space, and it can only be easily realized with VR. And MSFS offers the unprecedented realism, which cries to be fully appreciated in VR. 3. We all long for freedom. On my heartstrings freedom sings, all day every day. I want to be flower, a bee, a bird. I want to fly C172, A320, AH-64. I have always wanted a home cockpit, but how many people have the freedom to own it? And how many people can have the freedom to switch from C172 to A320 to AH-64 at a snap of the fingers? Flight is freedom. VR is freedom. They are born for each other. 4. VR is about to explode. People have been complaining about the low resolution and discomfort, but this is changing. This year all major manufacturers have turned out their nextgen VR headsets with higher resolution and better comforts: Oculus S, Valve Index, HP Reverb, HTC Cosmos, Pimax 8K+/8KS. Is Microsoft willing to miss the show? 5. Microsoft has been advocating VR for years. It goes back to the early days of Kinect. Yes I do believe it lays the foundation for later VR development. Its 3D space mapping is unsurpassed even today. Unfortunately even it has all the most cutting edge technology, Microsoft tends to do things half-mindedly. Think of smart phone(long before iPhone), UMPC (long before iPad), Kinect (what a piece of technology), Mixed Reality (how its inside out tracking is becoming the trend)...that's the very reason why we are so worried this time. Will Microsoft be blind to its own advantage this time? 6. VR appeals to the general public. It is a great selling point. It is a good opportunity for PR. The general public show wild interest in the new MSFS, because it looks so cutting edge in every way...no, not every way, there will be no VR at launch and they don't have a timeline for it? What? A flight simulator in 2020 and it does not have VR? What a flop! Will Microsoft let the shortest plank decide the volume of the water of their big shining bucket? 7. VR is simple. The implementation of VR is really simple. It's just a parameter of on and off in Unity and Unreal engine. It's instant immersion without hampering other things. Will Microsoft draw a dime and benefit the world? 8. VR is difficult and urgent. We have come to the heart of the matter. VR is simple to implement, but difficult to perfect. That is all the more reason why it should be implemented from the very beginning. The integration of the control, the menu, the view, all should be planned from the ground up. It's the base, and the infrastructure. It should not be some afterthoughts, something to be considered and added "later". 9. VR is the future. VR is the future. MSFS is the future. Future will not come automatically. There will be no future if we don't start it now. Wish MSFS and VR would creat a bright future together, and for each other!

Can't agree more. I have always believed that flight simulator is not a regular piece of software. It touches some parts of our heart, and it reaches somewhere high and above. It's entertaining, educational, and uplifting. Somehow I believe Microsoft is the only enterprise that's capable of doing it. It's business, and it needs a huge budget, but it's more than that. It needs bigger perspective, and forward-looking. We are happy to see it has already done some right things for the future: Azure, cloud gaming, modern game engine...those must all be done as the core and base of the game. But it's not enough. Without VR deeply embedded into its core and base, it's still flight sim of the last generation. Really wish more and more people could see the true meaning of the new MSFS. It's a most cutting edge flight simulator, and it's much more than a flight simulator.

It sounds as if you are really obsessed with a physical panel. Let's ignore the question how many people can afford a physical panel, and take a look at some opinions from a pilot training professional. According to Nick Scarnato, director of global strategy, training and mission systems at Collins Aerospace: Growing up in the digital age, raised on handheld computers, immersive video games and the Internet, younger pilots learn differently than the methods employed by many, traditional pilot training programs, he said. “Today you have smart phones and iPads and cloud-based solutions and a lot more of what I would call very realistic graphical virtual reality, augmented reality solutions,” he added. “When you put students through what would be considered a more hardware-in-the-loop type approach, the interest isn't there, which could have an effect on training.” https://www.aviationtoday.com/2019/08/01/training-brain-mind/

"In April 2019, the U.S. Air Force launched a Pilot Training Next class with 30 students. Using VR headsets and advanced AI biometrics instead of traditional multi-million-dollar flight simulators, 13 pilots were certified in just four months. The usual pilot training system takes about a year. The VR flight training cost came in at $1,000 per unit, instead of the usual cost of $4.5 million for a legacy simulator. Students were able to fully immerse themselves in a cockpit using an HTC Vive virtual reality headset while biometrics monitored heart rate and pupil measurement – giving flight instructors an accurate reading of just how immersed students were in the learning experience – something not possible with traditional flight simulators. Another groundbreaking part of VR flying was the ability to change up one cockpit for another – taking just 10 seconds for a student to go from flying a T-6 trainer to an F-22. The learning experience was further enhanced by allowing students to analyze a flight that had been captured and uploaded into the VR simulator." https://www.airchartermideast.ae/about-us/news-features/blog/are-vr-flight-simulators-the-future-of-pilot-training

I don't understand what you mean by "simulate simulating". According to the TV news, the Chinese pilot is using VR to simulate formation flying. Those are the elitest pilots being trained for the National Anniversary Parade on October 1, which requires the most realistic training. Yet no simulation is 100 percent realistic. You think your 10 grand home cockpit is truly realistic? Do you think you can exactly emulate every buttons of different aircrafts? VR does not have the real feel of the hardware button, but it's more flexible and versatile. Do you think your multi monitor setup can truly emulate the scenery outside? Absolutely not. It has no depth. VR will be so much more realistic for the view, and for the situation awareness because of the true 3D 360 degree view. I am not saying VR is omnipotent, but neither is your home cockpit. Each has its advantage and disadvantage. So let's sit down and talk from different perspectives.