leprechaunlive

On 3/3/2024 at 11:55 PM, bobcat999 said:

The 'Chaun is back!   

How are you doing chap?  Working on anything yourself or with Big Radials?

I loved the Norseman.  I need to get it back out of the hangar and get some air under it's wings again. 
Things move so fast.  I am buying more planes than I have time to fly at the moment.  Sadly there is some good stuff that I worry will never see enough hours.

PS. Totally agree with your post above by the way.  But it just shows it is learning really well from us humans, as there are a lot of BS-ers out there in real life as well.  

Im always working on stuff 😋 fun fact, the TV/EFB in the Norseman was coded with a lot of help from ChatGPT 😂

On 3/4/2024 at 9:34 AM, virtuali said:

That's the main point: for specific usages like that, AI can and should be trained, using much smaller datasets that will improve over the basic "global" knowledge, like user manuals, SDKs specs, databases, etc.

Very true, IF the said SDK's are correct and error free to begin with 😋

Dont bother wasting time on the first mod, the whole set of instructions is 100% WRONG, about basically everything (method, file name, etc).

Its the trick with ChatGPT, sometimes it "thinks" it knows, and spill out answer thats look very convincing, but actually, its basically "adapting" a commonly asked/known solution for similar use cases to other application where it doesnt necesserily apply. 

MSFS dev envirronment is very, VERY, specific, quirky, (some would say outdated lol), so ChatGPT is usually useless for it.

PS: quickly looked at your second "mod case", same as the first, dont bother 🙂

8 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

I guess I should I become a developer. You can pump out low-quality aircraft, rarely update them, tell people your aircraft are meant to be low-quality (!), and people will still celebrate you for being honest and buy your stuff.
I wonder if that works for other things too? "Hey guys, I got a Porsche for you for 2/3 the price of a Porsche, it looks bad and can systems-wise only go as fast as a Volkswagen, but that's exactly how it's meant to be because my Porsche is aimed at people that want a subpar looking Porsche that doesn't overwhelm them with being fast. And if something's broken don't expect it to be fixed for months, because I have to create a new Ferrari that isn't a Ferrari because well I have to eat three times a day you know?"

hey be my guest and do become a dev, lets see what kind of "quality" you can deliver right? 
if it is honestly advertised as a "lite" product, and you still buy even tho you want high fidelity aircraft....guess whos the word not allowed in that story...

30 minutes ago, St Mawgan said:

Interesting. Will generate a lot more sales for sure. 

Very unlikely, there are very few users left that actually wouldnt buy on the MP. The bulk of their sales is already way way behind them now.

8 hours ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

Sorry but what part I don't understand that MSFS has the read the info because its the sim its is feeding to (aircraft.cfg), I actually stated that the systems are done on a on a outside source and nothing to do within the core of the sim. Am I missing something here MSFS is the visuals and not the actual simulation source.? A2A can probably confirm this better.

One could argue everything is actually handled by MSFS, its just that A2A feeds it infos and datas externally, rather than having MSFS doing the calculations itself. But its basically a mix of native and external "simulations".

10 hours ago, Krakin said:

Well that explains a lot.......

wich is what exactly?

9 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

Weird. I guess the Sim Updates and AAUs were all about catering to casual flyers. Or how the World updates provide landmarks and more recognizable ground terrain that is pretty much a requirement to VFR flight, that's also for casual flyers too I'm guessing? Wait a minute, isn't the Comanche.. a primarily VFR GA aircraft?

Again, not what i said, but be my guest and extrapolate. 

9 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

I can guarantee you that's the case in any sim. Xplane, P3D, DCS etc. This stuff isn't easy and just because developer program something to spec, doesn't mean it always works out that way. It's months of trial and error to produce a result that's consistent with references on-hand and with advice from pilots. I'm not really sure where you were going there.

True, and to my point exactly, some development tools and mechanics are still lacking behing a lot, to be able to "easily" and natively devellop very high and detailed simulation. I know a good few devs that are ranting day and night about it behind closed doors.

9 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

 

Have you by chance been able to test FS2024 before the public? Can you tell more about it's feature set and what we can expect? We're all really eager for waiting on more details as Asobo hasn't given us much.

 Then why engage in a topic called "Accusim v2 FM in MSFS2024" AT ALL then if thats the requirements needed to say something. 

12 hours ago, ErichB said:

This FUD is getting tired and old.  Abobo/MS  have proved time and time again that they are able to exceed expectation.  MS has made enough money on this title to date (having sold 12 million copies) to meet any reasonable expectation of a high fidelity sim.

So is having an A2A like FM a reasonable expectation for a high fidelity sim? IF yes, then MSFS doesnt meet that. Wich is my point exactly, they dont need to, having sold ,as you said, 12 million copies without it. Also, i never ever, EVER said they only cater for the casual flyers, they just prioritize them, wich again, makes perfect sense. Wich is why we'r getting cool more hardcore oriented features only 2/3 years after launch.
From the "inside" (wich is plane develloping, wich i do full time) it is quite clear what their business plan and approach is, devellopers of hardcore addons tend to loose way more hair than us (we Big Radials, make planes that are more on the fun/casual side). So im not saying at all its a problem, i actually think its pretty great. But answering the question, is 2024 gonna have an A2A like FM, the answer is still NOPE.

Not going to happen. They are gonna keep the same recipe that got them millions of dollars in 2020, with a few added features to make it feel up to date. Why would they pour money onto this for very little ROI since 95% of the user base are casual flyers that dont need/care about all this fancy A2A thing. If 2024 wasnt on the schedule, then maybe it would make sense, but thats a big maybe. 

10 minutes ago, Fielder said:

Still no reaction from 

Waiting for A2A to announce a further 2 year wait for their Comanche to make compatible with FS2024 (just kidding).

ok, that was funny i give you that lol

Just now, Zangoose said:

The Beluga? If so Ini made the original Beluga based off the A300 - But yeah not sure who they got for the BelugaXL - Could be Aerosoft maybe.

Not the Beluga, and im not going to say more at this point, its too early. It just came out of nowhere with no real explanations. A marketing genius probably tought about that long and hard in an office far far away. 

21 minutes ago, Zangoose said:

There was also lot of 3rd party devs involved within that trailer. Vision Jet, the Oil rigs are probably Aerosoft for example.

Well, at least one of the seemingly 3rd party planes seen in the vid is NOT from a the 3rd party dev that would normally be associated to it. Wich means its likely an in house remake of a popular MSFS addon. I really hope its not that as it would be a terrible decision from MS to do this kind of things.

Never heard of this, what is this black magic and whats the purpose of it?

9 hours ago, Paul K said:

 

The money raised and donated by Asobo is admirable - nobody is being 'negative' about that, as you imply. It is a matter of blindingly obvious priorities. The people of Ukraine have far more immediate requirements than a new An-225.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Im sure you know Asobo has NOTHING to do with this whole Antonov charity/marketing operation right?

Take off from Luderitz in Namibia ;)

6 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

Not a bad explanation

i doubt it, we had a Goose in the MP for ages before they released another for free, without getting in touch with us, at any point. Granted, its a vintage, so the licences are probably handled differently. Who knows! But yea, its sure is a weird move, would like to know where this is heading. I dont actually own the Twotter, but funnily enough, i added it on my "list of things to buy to fly if i ever get a minute for myself" a few days ago. 

PS: Completely unrelated, but i saw a Twin Otter today doing paradrops, and it sounded like, during taxi, the pilot was using reverse thrust every 10-15 seconds as opposed to brakes. is that a thing? You could very clearly distinguish the Bvvvvvvvvvvvvv of the normal thrust as opposed to the BRAAAAAAAA of the reverse one. 😄

On 3/13/2023 at 8:09 PM, vbazillio said:

Thank you all for your messages! But I would like to clarify a point: most of you don't see how much easy it is with the embedded Scenery Editor and free addons available, to design an enhanced version of an existing small airport. Internet is full of support and the most valuable data is the time you can free for this passion 😉 

Yea, yea, bla bla bla. its NOT easy, you know it, i know it, we all know it. You have an amazing talent for it, just take the compliment :D

Althought, to be fair, on that Discord screenshot, theres a reference to FsAdni being in the credits, but as far as i can see, he never went anywhere near an ATR. So thats weird. Too shady with these blacked out names. 

5 minutes ago, superspud said:

Image 4 in this selection is, or was, the creator's view - 

TLDR - Unimpressed. 

ok, this is bad lol. Poop certainly seems to be pilling up. About to reach the fan, take cover!

We dont really have proper sources for this, it MIGHT be an agreement beetween the authors and FS.TO. We dont kn ow for sure, unless the original author has spoken somewhere i dont know about. And it isnt recent, back in July, they already had their name on it. (source:waybackmachine)

7 minutes ago, JabbleWok said:

That's it.  We shall own nothing and be unhappy 😄 . But it also shows this little crisis is potentially fixable if wise choices are made. Humans are fallible but we can often put right our missteps.

Exactly, its fairly simple for FS.TO. 

"Ok, we copypastaed a ToS widely used , we know realise we probably need a tailor made one, what are your biggest concerns about it? Lets work together and strike a deal we'r both happy with". 

I believe they have done that to a certain extent. They could do a better job at communicating for sure, throwing the the "fake news" argument is never a good look. 

I hold no particular grudge over them.

24 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

Nope, the contrary, some in this community have unfortunately shown again that they could act no better than some brats we see on Steam FPS game forums😅.  

Me-0 You-1  😄

4 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

As I said before, I agree addon creators being upset over the delete clause, but the rest of the TOS seems fine to me. Pretty typical for a mod site.

I do broadly agree with that. But as someone pointed out, widely spread doesnt necessarely mean acceptable. And we all know we are a special kind of simmers/gamers 😄 fs.to needed to be made aware of that 😛

53 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

As I said earlier, the whole thing is an unnecessary drama started in this thread and now spreading fake news and false accusations. 

What fake news exactly? 
They changed some of their ToS (several times) because of all this, so at least not everything was "fake".
While the "drama" was probably unecessary, a clarification from them wasnt. And they did just that, clarify. 

Always good to keep the big guns on their toes.
As far as im concern, i think their reaction was decent enough.