Jump to content


Inactive Members
  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

119 Excellent

About BigDee

  • Rank

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Cannot resist, what about implementing a third party software tool that has been specifically created for a flight simulator, let`s call it Ortho4XP for a flight simulator that we call X-Plane, so fans can build a tool that grabs Google Earth data and implements it to Flight Simulator, because Bing Data is anayway useless? Man this is killing me, hopefully we will see more interviews in the future.
  2. Again entertaining reads finest grade. Could they built a working Airbus cockpit? Working controllers that don`t crash the game? Working Autopilot systems? LOD issues? "Of course "we can", but we don`t want to overshoot. "Yes the same they did with above points. What is it called if you manage to correct your mistakes? Learning. Yes, I can also build study level airliner, but it takes some time and much effort plus extensive knowledge of maths and physics for doing it, but I don`t shout it out n advance. That thing made my day. What about learning first, work afterwards and release the work at last? Not the other way around. They release, work on their errors, and learn by correcting them. So funny.
  3. I think it sounds too good to be true: https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/37150/intel-core-i7-950-processor-8m-cache-3-06-ghz-4-80-gt-s-intel-qpi.html?wapkw=950 Release date of the CPU was Q2 2009. Still a great CPU.
  4. I agree with your point that it`s not a good idea to start discussions about MSFS vs. XP. But, in MSFS forums as also in here, discussions about MSFS vs XP are generally accepted by the moderators, as long as they are not drifting out, (which happened some times). I personally stated MSFS in here because on its release, there were people that commented LR will go bankrupt against MSFS and showed their vision of the survival of LR, to an extent that it was annoying. Their comments were nigligible. I defenately disagree with your point: Posting XP is way better than MSFS does not conclude X-Plane beeing perfect. Of course people who don`t like MSFS at all can still also post improvement suggestions to LR. For me MSFS is a fail when watching videos like these. But it is a personal preference, as physics are most important to me. Also areas outside of the offical videos are graphically really bad compared to the official ones. The old and new upcoming bugs and the great lack of realistic aircraft systems. really makes MSFS a GTA game to me and they have deserved it in my eyes because they fraud sim fans with their hype they were doing. I too think MSFS vs XP discussions are a not a good thing, but I don`t agree with yout antipathy against them.
  5. That`s great to hear. Thanks to MSFS we will have to wait a longer time for anouncements and screenshots. Great :(. Considering X-Plane 11 sells, even 100 000 is a high number for a serious simulator. There are also many videos in YouTube that are close to 1 million views. Austin is a good bussiness man, his X-Avion application is a great tool and both, X-Plane for tablets and X-Avion produce income, that is likely quite relevant for Laminar. Up until now there were many frequent releases of X-Planes and I really wish it will continue this way. there are some examples, like GTA V, which I don`t like anyway. The game was released in 2013, 9 years have passed since then, no anouncement of a new version. It`s not that I do care about about a new version, but one can clearly see, some people are tending to lay off their work, when there is enough money. Or take another example, LFS, it is a sim game that was supported by Williams BMW F1, Intel and VW. I used to play the sim in 2003-2005. Just take a look at this. The release of the new physics was sheduled in 2010, now we have 2021. X-Plane is clearly not built for profilt, LR and Austin are trying to find different ways for their income, with real solutions that might help people, like X-Avion. MSFS is primarily built for masses. MSFS is a complete fail for me.
  6. If there are really only 5 developers in X-Plane, there `s one advantage: It`s much different if you have to pay salaries for 4 people, or a complete army, as it is in MSFS. Some did foresee LR will get bankrupt against MSFS, but I think Austin is in a much comfortable position. He has different incomes (he`s smart) and paying 4 employees is really not difficult from the success X-Plane has. I think the current implementation of Vulkan is an indicator that X-Plane 12 might be currently in the beginning and a long way to go. On the other hand, prior X-Plane releases were released frequently. Who knows.
  7. Great video, compared to FSX X-Plane scenery has greatly evolved and the ground scenery looks great and credible. It feels like an old Operation Flashpoint game for example and further more, it does not look like some ground scenery has just been splashed onto the ground. Austin knows what he does, there`s is a good reason why he does not want to implement ortho images. Google Earth does have some errors (altough less than Bing Earth) and second, auto generated buildings look strange because many times the contours of the auto generated buildings don`t match the contours of the satellite imageginery (I don`t know why MSFS is so proud about their auto generated building technology). YouTube. The perfect evidence this is not GTA :D. In MSFS the car would fly a straight line upwards, until it reaches space, MSFS developers with their highly intellectual skills would realize they can move to space in the game, of course in a GTA V manner.
  8. I still visit MSFS forums in here because it is an interesting and entertaining place to visit. Just see right now how many negative threads there are: -Hard stutters -Top immersion killers and so forth. Many of them dominate. Take for example the newest thread: Aircraft flight aerodynamics, that contains the official MSFS aerodynmaics part 2 video: The chief developer is happy to anounce they have hired/are coworking with real Boeing pilots, aircraft engineers. But in the end he asks for feedback from customers regarding the physics. Come on, they are working with real engineers/pilots and still require feedback from a typical MSFS customer (Xbox joypad owners)? This place keeps beeing a funny place. Or take for example the updates, up until the newest update (buildings and terrain issues), they do mess every time something up. The graphics are great in MSFS, but look at the other home made videos, terrain issues, terrain irregularities, greatly blurried distanced textures. It`s a feeling between great visuals (official videos) and "it looks the same in FSX" feeling (some fan made videos). X-Plane is built primarly as a simulator, the physics are great, but still with orthos or scenery add-ons you can get great visual results, not as good as MSFS (at least the official videos), but it is a top quality product.
  9. Update: https://www.proshop.de/RTX-30series-overview/ Flying off the shelf. Sure. 13% of all orders delivered. Either Nvidia is earning its cash on miners or they can`t admit they have somehow failed. Either way, regular retailers selling a 3060Ti for 800$, that`s crime, the same Nvidia did with its RTX card, 400$ RTX 2060, 200$ GTX 960. Sick.
  10. I don`t know how much Forza has contributed graphicswise to MSFS, but Forza utilizes much lower hardware power than other games that are on the same level. At 4K it just uses less than 6 GB Graphics RAM: #1 #2 The hardware requirements of MSFS are the results of very good programming work,( but only graphicswise to me). It`s crazy to see how many games have been cut by half of its size lately, tons of GBs trash that slow down the PC.
  11. It`s good to see that even Ex-Boeing pilots are contributing/working in the game. But, 1) Why didn`t they have the idea from the start, coorporating with aeronautical engineers and pilots? 2) Who knows if they will implement the advices/testings/suggestions from experts right. 3) Knowing they had implemented some so-called "Spaghetti values" in the cfg files, it`s legitimate to question their future work. 4) Are they serious they still need feedback from users when they are working together with professionals, I mean come on. The graph comparison in one of the latest thread in here about rudder and sideslip imlementation just shows the truth, wing flex and damping forces are catastrophical. In the end, they have lots`s of professional stuff, its`s good for Flight Simulation users, but seen from the other perspective, MSFS now competes against X-Plane and P3D, while X-Plane beeing just a small 5 men development team. But automation is only going to happen with an Nvidia RTX Super TI Ultra and what so ever called. For your knowledge, pilots could have been banned from the 60`s, when CAT III ILS was introduced.
  12. This subforum is a real fun place, Kids chasing somebody who says something negative about MSFS. He expresses his opinion, but worse, he has just 4 posts and no respect is shown to him. His points are valid and it`s unbelievable what typical MSFS user responses are like.
  13. Indeed very nice post, good analytical approach. Another topic, damping in MSFS: As it would result in a flat endless straight line, I think this is better way for a visual representation of damping forces in MSFS:
  14. If you look carefully one can see negative threads have the highest activity regarding: -a: the amount of posts in general -b: the shortest time they have been posted Only scenery and update threads are on pair and guess what how much of them do contain critics? Isn`t that funny.
  15. It`s not quite the same, but this did also make me laugh: https://youtu.be/JWHqXYUeNMI?t=370
  • Create New...