You are at netAirspace : Forum : Air and Space Forums : Aviation Sports & Hobby

New MS Flight Simulator, R U Getting It?

General Aviation, Air Races, Gliding, RC Aircraft, Model Collections, Flight Simulators.
 

Lucas (netAirspace ATC & Founding Member) 17 Jul 20, 14:18Post
We all know that it comes out next month for $60, some other amount, and to get a few extra planes and airports, $120. It will have a marketplace to share your mods (for $$$ or not, I guess).

I will probably hold off until there is a mod like FSPassengers available.

mhodgson (ATC & Photo Quality Screener & Founding Member) 17 Jul 20, 15:51Post
Yes - because it looks impressive, and although I don't anticipate the default aircraft to be outstanding, various well reputed third party providers (PMDG etc) are known to be bringing their expertise to the marketplace.
There's the right way, the wrong way and the railway.
PA110 (Founding Member) 17 Jul 20, 16:06Post
I hope they'll eventually make it compatible and fully interactive with VR headsets.
Look, it's been swell, but the swelling's gone down.
Lucas (netAirspace ATC & Founding Member) 17 Jul 20, 16:18Post
@PA, I would think that they'd tackle that eventually, but I'd have to imagine that the graphics would require being cranked way down. When I say imagine, I mean it, as I'm basically ignorant to VR, despite the fact that I own a VR headset...which is somewhere in storage, as I have never used it. I think that CCD likes them a lot.

mhodgson I hope that there will still be people making freeware, but with the graphics as advanced as they are, that might be unlikely. I really liked how FSPax basically let you do your own missions and scored you, so I hope that the man who created it makes a comeback with a new version!
PA110 (Founding Member) 17 Jul 20, 16:26Post
@Lucas, My other half is a serious gamer and got me to try Elite Dangerous with the VR headset. Being able to control the cockpit as if you were actually sitting in the seat is amazing. It's a much more immersive experience. Now, to build a full motion chair... :))
Look, it's been swell, but the swelling's gone down.
mhodgson (ATC & Photo Quality Screener & Founding Member) 17 Jul 20, 22:05Post
Lucas wrote:mhodgson I hope that there will still be people making freeware, but with the graphics as advanced as they are, that might be unlikely. I really liked how FSPax basically let you do your own missions and scored you, so I hope that the man who created it makes a comeback with a new version!


I'm sure there will be, Xplane is still seeing impressive freeware being created but obviously these days you can't get away with non-spinning fan blades and minimal poly models!
There's the right way, the wrong way and the railway.
DXing 17 Jul 20, 23:33Post
So I see the Xbox logo at the bottom. Is that the only format it will work on or will they make one for ms edge or ms 10?
What's the point of an open door policy if inside the open door sits a closed mind?
Lucas (netAirspace ATC & Founding Member) 18 Jul 20, 00:32Post
PA110 wrote:@Lucas, My other half is a serious gamer and got me to try Elite Dangerous with the VR headset. Being able to control the cockpit as if you were actually sitting in the seat is amazing. It's a much more immersive experience. Now, to build a full motion chair... :))


Well I have a decent PC (AMD 3900X, 32GB RAM, 2070 Super, etc.), but I was under the impression that VR is very, very taxing on a system. I'd like to try out a VR flight sim, though. It's wild how far we've come!

And I like space games...so...get thee behind me, Satan! lol


@mhodgson
, yeah, it's kind of sad in its way. I remember finding the best mods for FS2000. I had the AI traffic where you had to fly the route first and record it, and then it would blast the traffic at you. Obviously very fake, but have you seen a Concord do a 10' flyover of ORD at 800 kts? Ha!

@dxing it's primarily PC from what I've heard and will release to XBOX in the future, though there is no date for it there.
ShyFlyer (Founding Member) 18 Jul 20, 05:51Post
For me, I don't think it's a question of if I'll get it, but when. Certainly, I won't be among the first to get it. I follow a couple of YouTubers that will be the first and I'll see how their experiences are with it.

I've been watching the official videos put out and some of the commentary and analysis of said videos and I'm cautiously optimistic that the finished product is going to be surprising. However, that's tempered with the following: In the game release trailer, one YouTuber (Jeff Favignano) noted that the video of the aircraft looked manipulated. The tipoff for him with the speed of the strobe lights, which if I remember correctly, he said may be due to the game play being captured at low speed and then sped up for the trailer.

Another thing that's on my mind is past experiences with other MSFS releases. I started with FS98, and jumped on FS2K, then FS2K4 and lastly FSX. Each time, I experienced disappointment with running it with any significant high quality on the best machine my budget would allow. Microsoft has, at least with flightsim, a really bad habit of releasing a product that taxes even the most advanced PCs available.

It's impressive that they'll be using satellite imagery for the scenery, but outside of select areas, I'm not sure how "hands on" they will have been editing out junk. There was a video or two where they showed a bit about the process of "cleaning up" an airport. Since scenery is largely going to be streamed verses installed locally, I guess this is how they will address the work of cleaning up the rest of the planet.

I have to say I wasn't impressed with the Garmin avionics. They look cartoonish. Could it change? Maybe. But the Garmins in XPlane look far better, as in nearly identical to the actual units.

I'm happy with X-Plane, especially the work that they've done recently with Vulcan. Hopefully, Microsoft's reentry into the FS World will have X-Plane the hard push it needs to address areas that they've neglected such as AI Traffic and ATC.
OTS UFN
Lucas (netAirspace ATC & Founding Member) 19 Jul 20, 22:02Post
ShyFlyer wrote:For me, I don't think it's a question of if I'll get it, but when. Certainly, I won't be among the first to get it. I follow a couple of YouTubers that will be the first and I'll see how their experiences are with it.

I've been watching the official videos put out and some of the commentary and analysis of said videos and I'm cautiously optimistic that the finished product is going to be surprising. However, that's tempered with the following: In the game release trailer, one YouTuber (Jeff Favignano) noted that the video of the aircraft looked manipulated. The tipoff for him with the speed of the strobe lights, which if I remember correctly, he said may be due to the game play being captured at low speed and then sped up for the trailer.

Another thing that's on my mind is past experiences with other MSFS releases. I started with FS98, and jumped on FS2K, then FS2K4 and lastly FSX. Each time, I experienced disappointment with running it with any significant high quality on the best machine my budget would allow. Microsoft has, at least with flightsim, a really bad habit of releasing a product that taxes even the most advanced PCs available.

It's impressive that they'll be using satellite imagery for the scenery, but outside of select areas, I'm not sure how "hands on" they will have been editing out junk. There was a video or two where they showed a bit about the process of "cleaning up" an airport. Since scenery is largely going to be streamed verses installed locally, I guess this is how they will address the work of cleaning up the rest of the planet.

I have to say I wasn't impressed with the Garmin avionics. They look cartoonish. Could it change? Maybe. But the Garmins in XPlane look far better, as in nearly identical to the actual units.

I'm happy with X-Plane, especially the work that they've done recently with Vulcan. Hopefully, Microsoft's reentry into the FS World will have X-Plane the hard push it needs to address areas that they've neglected such as AI Traffic and ATC.


My biggest question is how fast one's internet will need to be to get a good experience, and what it'll look like where the sat imagery is garbage.
ShyFlyer (Founding Member) 20 Jul 20, 00:07Post
Lucas wrote:...how fast one's internet will need to be...

I seem to remember seeing Microsoft recommending at least 20Mbps. Not sure if that was a minimum or a recommended minimum.

Lucas wrote:...what it'll look like where the sat imagery is garbage.

This is why I won't be getting MSFS on release day. All of the YouTubers are going to be going gaga over the high quality regions/airports and folks like us will be hard pressed to find screen shots/videos of the less popular areas, probably for at least the first month after release.
OTS UFN
ShyFlyer (Founding Member) 20 Jul 20, 00:29Post
Here's a video I found on the specifications.

OTS UFN
ShyFlyer (Founding Member) 30 Jul 20, 17:00Post
Microsoft just released the video showcasing the aircraft and "handcrafted" airports for each version.



No major surprises here, though it was the first time I've actually seen in game footage of the 787.

It still seems as though the Garmin avionics (with the exception of the GNS430/530s) look a bit too cartoonish. I have no way of knowing from which point in the development the footage was taken, so there is still a possibility that the release version will be more true to life.

The handcrafted airports look as amazing as expected. I'm most curious, though, about the other airports. There will be generic buildings for sure, but things like ground textures and such are a concern for me since the sim relies extensively on satellite imagery.

I still haven't been able to find answers on the real traffic feature. All I know is that FlightAware will be feeding the data, but there has been no discussion on how the sim will represent aircraft that aren't in the sim. For example, if I'm holding short of 35R at APA (in the sim), and a Falcon 900 is on final (in real life), what will I see in the sim? A Falcon 900 or a "substitute" aircraft from the included flyable aircraft? Or nothing? Perhaps a poorly-rendered tri-engine bizjet supposed to grossly approximate the Falcon? In some of the earlier videos, there is an AI airliner that looks like a cross between a 767 and A330. There are some airliners that look like hastily put together A380s.

From previously released in game footage (visible in this video as well), there is evidence to suggest that the sim will include actual aircraft that aren't flyable, but are just for AI. When an Iberia-liveried A320 appeared in one of the official videos, there was speculation that the sim will include actual airline liveries as well, so this may spill over onto the AI, for airliners anyway. Certainly the sim won't include all liveries simply due to licencing agreements (American, I'm looking at you).
OTS UFN
ShanwickOceanic (netAirspace FAA) 30 Jul 20, 20:27Post
They've since made that video private.
Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast:
For it is the number of a man; and its number is One hundred threescore and twelve.
ShyFlyer (Founding Member) 31 Jul 20, 02:43Post
Uh...weird. It's been reuploaded:



Judging by the comments, apparently a typo was discovered in one of the featured airport's signage. ::shrugs::


Pre-release gameplay is starting to make it's way to the tubes of You. I'm not going to post them all, nor even watch them all, but some Canadian gamer guy by the name of quill18 has (or had) a Press version of the sim. As of this post, he has three videos up and the takeaway from the two that I watched is that even less popular, un hand retouched areas are quite amazing. There are some obvious "flaws," like flat images of cars in a parking lot, on roads, etc which are understandable since to hand rework the entire globe is...well...nutz.

https://www.youtube.com/user/quill18/videos
OTS UFN
mhodgson (ATC & Photo Quality Screener & Founding Member) 31 Jul 20, 08:39Post
I've been watching those - it does look impressive, and seems like as good an effort as can reasonably be expected without re-surveying the entire world. And it looks amazing from 2000' or so. Comparing the airport surroundings and cities I've seen to the barren wastelands of Xplane (Flying over London is terrible!) it seems a whole magnitude better, albeit at a cost of lots of storage.
There's the right way, the wrong way and the railway.
ShanwickOceanic (netAirspace FAA) 31 Jul 20, 08:40Post
Some issues with the vehicles, it seems... 6:10 here:



ShyFlyer wrote:the takeaway from the two that I watched is that even less popular, un hand retouched areas are quite amazing.

That is interesting. I've wanted to see what OUL looks like, since Bing Maps has highly detailed imagery of the town that stops half-way out to the airport. Last time I checked, the airport imagery was even worse than Google's.
Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast:
For it is the number of a man; and its number is One hundred threescore and twelve.
mhodgson (ATC & Photo Quality Screener & Founding Member) 31 Jul 20, 10:42Post
Quill has just released another video from the Scottish Highlands, and it looks amazing from the off - although surprisingly the Bing photodata for the area (Fort William/Glenfinnan) is very good when you zoom in!

And the water looks stunning, although his preview version lacks effects when landing on it - hopefully improved effects for floatplanes are on the way as it would be a shame to waste all that stunning effort on the water!
There's the right way, the wrong way and the railway.
mhodgson (ATC & Photo Quality Screener & Founding Member) 31 Jul 20, 11:12Post
mhodgson wrote:Quill has just released another video from the Scottish Highlands, and it looks amazing from the off - although surprisingly the Bing photodata for the area (Loch Awe/Oban) is very good when you zoom in!

And the water looks stunning, although his preview version lacks effects when landing on it - hopefully improved effects for floatplanes are on the way as it would be a shame to waste all that stunning effort on the water!
There's the right way, the wrong way and the railway.
ShyFlyer (Founding Member) 01 Aug 20, 04:16Post
ShanwickOceanic wrote:Some issues with the vehicles

That was hilarious! {laugh}

ShanwickOceanic wrote:Bing Maps has highly detailed imagery of the town that stops half-way out to the airport.

When it was released that the scenery would be sat-imagery based, one of my concerns was how would poor/missmatched imagery be handled.


mhodgson wrote:...it seems a whole magnitude better, albeit at a cost of lots of storage.

That's why the bulk of the scenery will actually be streamed, rather than stored locally. Though, those with large SSDs will be glad they ponied up for them, what with the cache and all going on.
OTS UFN
 

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

LEFT

RIGHT
CONTENT