Page 9 of 16 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 151

Thread: FSim 2020 release imminent.

  1. #81
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Wareham, Dorset, U.K.
    Posts
    2,857

    Default

    More Scenery Links:

    London Flawed
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jhUZgh5brk

    Noth American Cities
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kavLImNPL_8

    Not the finished product but some common issues if you watch both.

    Generic Buildings inappropriately placed,

    Tall structures not modelled

    Bridges not modelled

    Submerged vessels and waterside features.

    Note that there are supposed to be 2 World Updates after release according to the 1st Video.

    What I'd like to see is some of the tiny sloping fields that were in the original ORBX NW release? I wouldn't expect the detail ORBX put into the small strips but are they "flyable/landable" in this base scenery?

    ALSO....

    4 default graphics setting comparison
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHm7-AkmX1E
    Last edited by lateagain; 08-11-2020 at 08:35 AM. Reason: Addition
    Geoff
    Dorset - near The Swanage Railway.
    UK

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Wareham, Dorset, U.K.
    Posts
    2,857

    Default

    Geoff
    Dorset - near The Swanage Railway.
    UK

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    863

    Default

    Camera position in the cockpit can be adjusted. It's a bit better if using TrackIR.

    I don't know if the camera in the release version will behave like it's been in testing. I'm sure it's received quite a bit of feedback.

    Also, whatever is in place at release can still change. There will be ongoing updates and refinements.

    Essentially, like I've alluded to before, on the 18th we get version 1.0 of a Microsoft product. That basically means it's a "public beta" and the developers in their comments have effectively stopped just short of coming out and saying so. But long-term users of Microsoft products know this already.

    Reviewers and purchasers who are too young or blinded by marketing to understand this will probably still rant about problems and dislikes, but this will be the first major improvement in flight sims in years, and it's just in its earliest state. It will take some time to smooth off the rough edges.

    Just my opinion. but I kind of suspect the release is being pushed ahead of schedule a bit to get it out into the real world so there's more time to get feedback and fix things before the release of the new XBox hardware and the XBox release of the sim. What we'll get will be perfectly functional but not yet polished. And that's OK. This is intended to be a long-term project. They're building a platform, not game that's released and left alone and then followed by a sequel.


    MSTS-Roundhouse

    On hiatus and moving to a new host -- Probably in 2021
    (Because 2020 has turned out to be b0rked beyond belief...
    )

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Wareham, Dorset, U.K.
    Posts
    2,857

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EricF View Post
    Essentially, like I've alluded to before, on the 18th we get version 1.0 of a Microsoft product. That basically means it's a "public beta" and the developers in their comments have effectively stopped just short of coming out and saying so. But long-term users of Microsoft products know this already.
    LMAO!!!! I'm shocked you should say such a thing You'd think that had been the case for everything since Win 3.1..... oh wait..... LOL!

    Quote Originally Posted by EricF View Post
    ......... I kind of suspect the release is being pushed ahead of schedule a bit to get it out into the real world so there's more time to get feedback and fix things before the release of the new XBox hardware and the XBox release of the sim.
    Yep! If I were a gambler that's the reason I'd put money on! Realistically the product has to make 'em money to survive?

    Of course you're right about it being a platform. No sim EVER got released all singing all dancing. There'll be no shortage of folk happy to pay for the privilege of becoming beta testers. Personally I never buy anything NEW because time and again SP1, SP2, SP...... gets nearer the product they wanted to release.
    Geoff
    Dorset - near The Swanage Railway.
    UK

  5. #85
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    Posts
    163

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lateagain View Post
    More Scenery Links:

    London Flawed
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jhUZgh5brk

    Noth American Cities
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kavLImNPL_8

    Not the finished product but some common issues if you watch both.
    That London is quite jarring, with all the bridges underwater! It's surprising that their highly advanced terrain engine can identify bodies of water but cannot discern boats or bridges (both of which contrast it). That seems to be more of a priority than giving us individual offices (with furniture!) visible in the Shard.

    I watched another of Squirrel's videos because he was flying to Cardiff. After slamming down onto the runway he pans the camera around a bit and we can see what an autogen airport looks like. A lot of specifics are missing, like gates and other structures. The various stands are there but not used prototypically, either.

    I bought the UK2000 CWL scenery for FS2004 and you can see that, happily, there will still be a place for good third party scenery with this new Flight Sim as the difference is amazing. They got it absolutely spot on from my own memories working there.

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Swindon, England
    Posts
    5,264

    Default

    Reminds me of working with DEM in the train sims, when the satellite has mistaken buildings and trees for ground level and you have lumps and bumps instead of level terrain.

    Broken bridges were a huge issue in the first release of FSX, IIRC, though was eventually sorted. This sort of glitch which may or may not get fixed prior to launch, is why I had some concerns over what appears to have been a rapid leap from alpha to a rushed beta with a release date set in stone. Buzzing up the Thames is kind of one of the first things you tend to do in these games.
    Vern.

  7. #87
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    Posts
    163

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NorthernWarrior View Post
    Buzzing up the Thames is kind of one of the first things you tend to do in these games.
    You're meant to do a flat spin over East India Docks while playing the EastEnders theme song.

    I think FS2000 had a patch that added a lot of missing bridges and such, including one of the Severn bridges.

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    863

    Default

    They've been encouraging the alpha/beta testers to report the things you've seen in some of the videos, like the solid/blocked/misplaced bridges and other obvious errors. So some may be fixed at release.

    Even if they aren't fixed right away, I strongly suspect the problem will go away over time.

    Why? Because I suspect that this is yet another form of "YOU are the product."

    Not really in a bad way this time -- we're getting a remarkable sim out of it.

    But here's what's happening. We pay somewhere in the vicinity of $100 US for the game, more or less depending on the version. One time. Yet, we're getting access to effectively infinite data download and data processing in Azure -- something that generally comes with a non-trivial contracted or pay-as-you-go metered cost. Online games in general often have some form of cost to cover bandwidth and server usage -- either in a subscription or other pay-to-play (or worse, pay-to-win) microtransactions. But here? Other than add-ons, one upfront payment and you've got an entire Azure back-end churning out data to you effectively free thereafter. How the heck is that possible?

    Simple. If you've seen Asobo's ongoing "partner spotlight" videos they've been putting out every month or so, all of their partners are involved in various "big data" pursuits. Some are directly related to aviation, others hav broader ambitions. Blackshark.ai is a startup that's developing 3D geospatial processing and datasets, with ambitions in gaming and beyond. Microsoft is actively showing the whole project off as a tech demo and marketing tool for Azure capabilities. Navblue and Meteoblue get a testing sandbox to refine their programming and therefore their products.

    So what's happening is that we'll be flying around in a virtual world while the AI and data processing engines capture information about the 3D environment we're operating in. That, in turn, is input for further processing and dataset-building. Not only will it improve the sim -- it will output useful, marketable refined data that can be sold for profit.

    We're training the more sophisticated levels of AI and data extrapolation. We are, in effect, part of the process and product.

    In this case, it's not the kind of purely exploitative use of our activity that Google and others get accused of. We want a better, advanced flight sim, and we're willing to pay for it. We get that flight sim and its very complex and expensive back-end, for what's really a fire-sale price in the realm of big data applications and development. Instead of hiring people and building systems to run this data-driven system through its paces -- with all the costs that entails, they get enthusiasts to do it for free, and they've even offset the cost of developing an application that helps drive the process.

    There's a potential for mutual benefit here that's a bit better than a lot of what we've seen so far. We fly around in the virtual world, the AI algorithms analyze the data we consume, including bad/inaccurate Bing and Bing-derived images -- and it's progressively improved, refined, and turned into not only a better flight sim but a geospatial dataset that's going to be quite valuable and marketable beyond an enthusiast game. You can find "wins" all around.

    If they were charging a recurring subscription, I think it would actually be more exploitative. (Why pay for entry to the theme park every day when somebody is making a profit off my entertainment and profiting from the output?) Instead, we only pay for the game programmers' efforts and then get to have fun in the bigger sandbox at no extra charge, and they derive something useful along the way.

    I'm pretty sure that flightsim enthusiasts will get more than $100 worth of enjoyment, so it's not like we're getting short-changed here.

    Just my thoughts, based on what I know of the IT and software industries. Everybody in the industry has a profit motive. As long as it doesn't get out of hand, and end-users get real value for participating -- and aren't constantly drained of real funds in relation to what's being delivered to them -- I'm actually fine with it all. Participating in an ongoing experiment and development process like this is actually kind of fun in itself.


    MSTS-Roundhouse

    On hiatus and moving to a new host -- Probably in 2021
    (Because 2020 has turned out to be b0rked beyond belief...
    )

  9. #89
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Yamba, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    3,570

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EricF View Post
    .........Just my thoughts, based on what I know of the IT and software industries. ... Participating in an ongoing experiment and development process like this is actually kind of fun in itself.
    And your thoughts, Eric, are informative and open-minded, as usual.

    Thank you.
    IBM XT i386; 512Kb RAM; 5.25" FDD; 1.4Mb FDD; 5Mb HDD; VGA 256-colour graphics card; AdLib soundcard; DR DOS 6.0; Windows 3.0

  10. #90
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Wareham, Dorset, U.K.
    Posts
    2,857

    Default

    Interesting initial reviews from various PC and Gamer Magazines now with links to stories from Google News.

    PC Gamer reports issues with performance over high detailed cities. Drops in frame rate and one even crashing the Sim. He includes his spec in the review. Obviously I haven't read all of these but "fill yer boots".

    BTW I picked PC Gamer on the logic that their reviewer was likely to have a high spec gaming platform and a broader, non partisan, critical appreciation of what he was testing. The FS fans will be less critical if the balance between what impresses and what depresses is weighted favourably enough?

    https://news.google.com/stories/CAAq...B&ceid=GB%3Aen
    Geoff
    Dorset - near The Swanage Railway.
    UK

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •