FedDriver

Lo and behold. I was basically right. But in a way that makes the reality even worse. The devs had no clue about DLSS 5 AI tech.

Im almost certain all of the "Devs" who gave their blessings are suits, and not the people who actually make the game. Mind you a game like MSFS that only focuses on hyper realism could benefit from this. But still looks like slop imo. Id be most interested in how this tech could be applied to clouds. If it could ONLY be applied to clouds to make them indiscernible from real life clouds. Or add hyper realistic rain particles to the cockpit windows that also interacts with wind direction and wipers, etc, Id be down. But full on AI slop controlling everything? Ill pass.

Quite frankly, to me im not very wowed by these clouds. Unsure if it the over all structure of live weather clouds, or the massive chunks of super transparent puffs. I would argue the KSP clouds def look more pretty though. But cant tell if its due to better shaders, or cloud structure.

Clouds in all games are very situational with their own strengths and weaknesses. Sometimes MSFS looks better, sometimes Xplane looks better.

FSrealistic fakes a lot of its physics. Thats why when when you land, its actually shaking the plane, not the camera. And you can see it on replay. I guess the appeal is using Chaseplanes physics system to have complete control over the camera. But id rather just buy Chaseplane and that its...

Yeah im just wondering if it was always like this though.

Is the weather more dangerous in SU4? First time back simming in several months and decided to take out a cessna into a storm hitting the philipines right now and basically got ripped to shreds and dumped into the ocean even on low turbulence setting. Dont remember storms being that scary before.

As I displayed in my 747 clip, im talking about gear physics. Inibuilds A350 doesnt not seem to have gear physic (or atleast very much of it). It simply has a gear animation. The gear touches down, and no matter how hard you land, it doesnt not compress (very much atleast). However when the speed brakes and reversers deploy, and the plane slows down, it plays what seems to be to be an compression animation. It doesnt seem like its doing it through any interaction with physics (Aka, the lift being dumped from the wings, making the plane heavier, which compresses the gear) Im simply talking about shock absorption. If you were to do this exact same time of landing in MSFS with the Ini A350 as in the video posted, you will not see the landing gear compress, and spring the plane back up. On touch down the whole thing just behaves like a plane shaped rock thats also made out of paper. Just completely stiff and not heavy at all. It'll simply plop on the ground. The default 747, while not perfect by a long shot. Replicates this to a far higher degree. Which is why I'm frustrated that an expensive add on, from a developer that has been developing planes for 2024 before anyone else could even get their hands on it, has a worse landing gear physics system than a default plane. And that not only does no one care, they actually defend it.

Literally what are you even on about. If you want to compare gear physics, try not to use a video that involves them basically buttering the plane on the runway. Because the only way Ini350's landing gear physics look "correct" is when you do exactly that since the plane has no shock absorption and simply plays a compression animation that's not physics based (after slam your concrete landing gear into the ground.) So sure. As long as you land very smoothly, its has great realistic physics! Got me there! Now show me a 350-500 fpm A350 landing.

Beating the dead horse but, nice gear, nice physics. https://youtu.be/XNFtACPuRSk?t=1475 An example of how it should be more like using the Default 747 as ref: https://streamable.com/kpw6t0 (Spare the FSrealistic plane shake, forgot to turn that off) Might be worse than I thought, the default 747 and 737 clearly behaves more like an actually heavy plane than this almost 80 dollar add on. (Which also has the best gear implementation of any airliners for msfs, which could be simply new 2024 tech that other add on developers have to make use of). Which makes me wonder if Ini is reusing old stuff from 2020 and not implementing new tech available in 2024.

People aren't flying tubeliners to develop skills in real life. I hope not. Most just want an authentic experience, and Inibuilds concrete landing gears aint givin' it! Bah humbug. I want progression, not regression. I dont want physics inferior to whats been available for several years now. Thats nuts. Feed me slop and I'm spitting it out.

So you think that the fact that your gears dont properly compress and have spring, which means that it could be much more likely for you to bounce your aircraft, which could determine whether your aircraft lands in or outside the touch down zone, does not have any difference on whether your landing was executed correctly. Not sure why defending a lack of proper implementation of physics is even a thing in any capacity.

Have to admit, didn't expect someone say they dont care about physics of all things... It doesnt effect you just from the outside view. It effects whole dynamic of the touch down. Its not just "visuals". Ini's A350 and all their tubeliners dont feel heavy on the ground. Imo, thats a valid complaint.

I have eyes. I fly xplane and msfs. There is a massive difference between the two in regards to this. Yes, if you land faster, you have more lift, which makes the plane "lighter", which means its easier to bounce. Especially upon hard landings where the gear compresses and spring the mass back upward. Yes, landing gears slowly arrest descent of planes to cushion the impact I can clearly see MSFS's lack of proper gear suspension. And I can clearly see Inibuilds completely abysmal gear simulation. Spare me the "Do you fly IRL" nonsense, would you like me to record a video for you to demonstrate?

When you can observe a little nice cushion breaking your descent, followed by a brief battle between mass, gravity, and the gear suspension as the plane settles. In MSFS its instead simply a hard SMASH. Like your struts hydraulics is completely jammed. In real life however (And In *cough*Xplane*cough*) its a soft plop (unless you bottom out the suspension), bounce, and settle. Sometimes, that gear compression will cause you to spring back up into the air, albeit very briefly. Depending on how much air is flowing under your wings on touch down. In MSFS however, this isnt really well simulated, even on a Fenix. Which to me strongly hints at a physics limitation of MSFS. But on all of Inibuild planes, its not simulated at all. Observably less than other competing developers. I don't know why they struggle with it, but its horrendous. Its all bad. No one can deny this. But at the same time, no one seems to care. So oh well.

Based on what I see. I think no matter how hard you land the plane, It'll be stiff. It'll then slowly compress to visually simulates the suspension settling as the lift is dumped from the wings. The only way it will look right, is if you butter the plane so that the gear suspension would never have any impact to absorb. The landing gear from what I see has zero shock absorption. So you cant bottom out the gear suspension on impact. As for the lack of nose gear compression? Yeah, thats on all Ini planes as well. It has slight compression though. If you slam on the brakes to come to a stop you can see it. The problem? The whole plane reacts like a tiny little RC plane rather than a big heavy jet. Horrible. MSFS generally has really bad gear suspension physics for large heavy jets. But this takes the cake. I don't think Ini deserves my money for that alone hah.

Soo, I haven't bought it yet, but am I correct to assume that once again, the A350 doesnt have any gear suspension/compression/bounce physics when touching down? And that it lands like a brick, much like all of its line up?

Well forgive me for noticing patterns! Geesh, tough community.

How optimistic of you to think MSFS will be fixed by SU3. That'd be a first for Asobo! Im betting we'll be celebrating SU3 in December, but celebrating 2024 being fully finished in late 2027. Months before they announce MSFS 2028 for 110 USD and still lacking a weather rada-

In before Its December, and were just then finally celebrating the arrival of SU3

So the A350 still has the classic rock solid inibuilds gear suspension I see. Slam the nose wheel into the ground, and its like the nose gear (and mains) is made out of bricks.

I mean, multiple big streamers have said they do MSFS because it gets them more views. More views. More money. It is the more popular sim and many people who also prefer MSFS are less likely to tune into a Xplane stream. So to say they use MSFS because its just the better sim, is very much false. Theres many reasons as for why they prefer to stream MSFS that has nothing to do with physics fidelity. Flightdeck2sim certainly has critique for MSFS and thinks Xplane handles physics better but MSFS is prettier. And he's a real 737 captain. But no one ever bring up his opinions. Why? Xplane could come out with the most mind boggling update that improves physics to a level we've never seen before in any desktop sim, and makes planes fly exactly like they do in real life (which no sim does at the moment ofc). And MSFS will still be the favored sim for streams and the community overall because more people are fans of it for a variety of reasons unrelated to physics. Even just for how easily accessible it is and how much more add-ons there are because its mainstream. Like theres the fact that landing gears only have one contact point, so a330's touches down same way as an cessna. And its of such little important to the "sim" community, that is so far down in the wishlist forum, that Asobo doesnt even have it in their own wishlist. In my opinion, its another extremely important component for ground physics. So its a shame. TLDR: Streamers likely dont choose what sim they fly in based on how good its physics are. They choose what gets them engagement based on their community. Especially the big ones earning thousands a month from it. And some people certainly refuse to acknowledge MSFS shortcoming due to their own biases since its their main sim, and potentially the only sim they've ever flown. That being said, MSFS is still my favorite sim and I can hardly look at any other.

Just comfortably taxied in the fenix at 30 knots down a runway in a 150kt x-wind. To me, thats just insane that even has to be done. But at the end of the day, these restrictions are in place probably because of the poor physics. Personally I don't have any hope of Asobo even attempting to match Laminar Research's ground physics simulation.

The rocks and displacement on the ground in MSFS are great. One thing that is bad though compared to other sims that takes away from the experience however: The suspension physics. The suspension physics are horrible in 2024. Asobo really needs to copy what ever Xplane does for their suspension physics. Badly lol.

Alright I decided to do another test where I intentionally raise my wing to show the underside of my wing to a strong 25-35 knot Xwind its just not getting any type of response I expect. In case anyone doesnt know the behavior I'm referring to is this and this