Jump to content

Microsoft Flight


maddz 737
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest MyEmpire

"Based on the previous webisode, we've heard, "This doesn't look any different from FSX!"

As we said in the introduction, we're still early in the development cycle, so the fact that you comment on the similarity to FSX is great! This comment alone should ease some of the arcade concerns. Please follow along with our progress as we continue to release more webisodes, screenshots, and additional information. In the end, we hope that you'll have a great time looking back at these early samples and being part of the evolution. Thank you for all your enthusiasm and support! "

for the people who thinks MSF looks like FSX :P:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Root Admin

Knowing the NDA's from Microsoft I have serious doubts this is legit.

Look at it this way... some of what is shown includes high density mesh. Now mesh is funny. if you increase the density with a factor of two, the size on disk increases a lot more, even if you use good compression. Double the mesh of FSX world wide and you are looking at a 24 DVD product. And I know, I want good mesh for Aerosoft Flight SImulator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knowing the NDA's from Microsoft I have serious doubts this is legit.

Look at it this way... some of what is shown includes high density mesh. Now mesh is funny. if you increase the density with a factor of two, the size on disk increases a lot more, even if you use good compression. Double the mesh of FSX world wide and you are looking at a 24 DVD product. And I know, I want good mesh for Aerosoft Flight SImulator.

Perhaps Aerosoft Flight will be the first sim to come with BluRay installer discs!! Now you only need a few discs! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knowing the NDA's from Microsoft I have serious doubts this is legit.

Look at it this way... some of what is shown includes high density mesh. Now mesh is funny. if you increase the density with a factor of two, the size on disk increases a lot more, even if you use good compression. Double the mesh of FSX world wide and you are looking at a 24 DVD product. And I know, I want good mesh for Aerosoft Flight SImulator.

Mathijs, are you speaking about the screenshots in the video they are indeed real pics taken straight from the msflight offical website.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Deputy Sheriffs

Guys,

don't you think that MS shouldn't show only pics of comparison between "flight" and "FSX", but comparisons from their flight and real world?

I'm sure they just take out what's really bad in FSX and so they can get far better opinions from the customers.

They should show some pics of sceneries which have been made by one of the big scenerie developers like Aerosoft! The Maledives for example would be a good place to show!

And i bet that the Aerosoft scenerie looks far better than what is going on with MSF.

Or they should make a few comparisons to what was done pretty good in FSX.

Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Root Admin

Guys,

don't you think that MS shouldn't show only pics of comparison between "flight" and "FSX", but comparisons from their flight and real world?

I'm sure they just take out what's really bad in FSX and so they can get far better opinions from the customers.

They should show some pics of sceneries which have been made by one of the big scenerie developers like Aerosoft! The Maledives for example would be a good place to show!

And i bet that the Aerosoft scenerie looks far better than what is going on with MSF.

Or they should make a few comparisons to what was done pretty good in FSX.

Just my opinion.

True, but the whole world in detail like in our VFR Germany series would mean a product over 120 TB. Now let's assume HDs will get cheaper but this is still not doable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, but the whole world in detail like in our VFR Germany series would mean a product over 120 TB. Now let's assume HDs will get cheaper but this is still not doable.

Thats only roughly €4500 for hard drives. If I was to walk to work instead of drive Id save that in a few years :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats only roughly €4500 for hard drives. If I was to walk to work instead of drive Id save that in a few years :lol:

Indeed, one could actually achieve a real pilots licence for not a lot more. And fly over some really bumpy and detailed terrain. And smell it... :blink:

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed, one could actually achieve a real pilots licence for not a lot more. And fly over some really bumpy and detailed terrain. And smell it... :blink:

And then have to stump up for the landing fees, and fines for busting controlled airspace :lol: I happen to know someone who was foolish enough not to check the days NOTAMS and get busted for flying into a TRA that was supposed to being used by the Red Arrows. Suffice to say the Red Arrows got cancelled and there were a whole load more pissed off people than just the money grabbers folks at the CAA. Moral of the story: Check the NOTAMS and have a deep wallet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the real problem with screenshots and videos of MS Flight right now, is that when FSX was released there were all sorts of thing being shown (not just the blatant artists renderings) of features that actually didn't make the RTM, so there is little trust in what MS is showing us now is in any way representative of what we will see at the end of the development cycle.

While I can look at the screens with a detached interest, I have no confidence in the unknown development team to deliver a final product that even replicates this, much less something superior. Which is what it will need to be to truly be an advance on what has gone before.

But we are what? 10-11 months from release? Minimum? Plenty of time for features to be dropped, promises not delivered, and lies told. Just as there is masses of opportunity to invoke new features, go beyond mere promises, and actually be truthful about what is coming, and at what cost.

Which would be nice... :rolleyes:

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not so sure I would be so quick to dismiss this.

The fact that the amount of data to do this level of detail was previously prohibitive does not mean that this is necessarily currently the case.

For instance, they might be employing rough data modified by fractals at closer distances.... Or any of a number of possibilities, even streaming the data if the game is online only.........

And the fact that the team is new might be its biggest plus.

They might not be locked into old patterns of thinking and ways of doing things, which can sometimes be quite a benefit since they might not know what is impossible.

Which frees them to just go ahead and do it!

I will wait and see.

http://wwwcg.in.tum.de/Research/Publications/TerrainRendering

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite frankly I don't know how anyone can be impressed with this "new" engine, compared to the XP10 screenshots... Where's the global illumination, the bump maps, the Plausible ™ Autogen... have they done anything to the FSX engine in 5 years except increase the texture size and add 1 extra channel of water data? Both those things have to do more with licensing of data than actual development. Theres a word for that refactoring but somehow MS will manage to do that and break backwards compatibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite frankly I don't know how anyone can be impressed with this "new" engine, compared to the XP10 screenshots... Where's the global illumination, the bump maps, the Plausible ™ Autogen... have they done anything to the FSX engine in 5 years except increase the texture size and add 1 extra channel of water data? Both those things have to do more with licensing of data than actual development. Theres a word for that refactoring but somehow MS will manage to do that and break backwards compatibility.

Well if they aren't going to use the opportunity to start from scratch then they're buggered from the start. Almost any re-use of old code is going to hamstring display, clarity, speed, efficiency, file size, smoothness and ultimately buyer acceptability. There really is no need for any backward-compatiblity, so no need for ANY residual code from a previous MS sim.

After all, if they try to ensure retro compatibility, the only result is they'll stuff it up... :rolleyes:

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...