The P3D graphics engine was sold to Lockheed Martin. M$ has no say whatsoever in the matter.
Priller
Microsoft Flight Simulator Announced 2019
- Thread starter Mach3DS
- Start date
The P3D graphics engine was sold to Lockheed Martin. M$ has no say whatsoever in the matter.
Priller
FlyingsCool
SOH-CM-2019
henrystreet
Charter Member
I'm getting a similar response on another forum after making a similar comment. I'm leaving mine stand to be tested by the review of future historians.
wombat666
Administrator
BendyFlyer
Charter Member
Real as it gets, nice photos Wombat.
Seriously folks - I know everyone is excited but it is going to have to be a license and on line run for this one, maybe just maybe some flight sim aircraft can be added but then again, who knows. The key issue is that is being excitedly overlooked is if they are going to give it as real as it looks then your going to need the server and memory capacity of Google to do it, to do the whole world even using Google tile processes would swamp every PC in the sim world end of story you need banks and banks of servers to do this stuff, cannot happen, nobody has that sort of stored memory capacity except MS and Google and that means a log in and play license. Otherwise you will have nothing worthwhile but again mesh, textures and object files populating it, not to mention shader capacity, focus etc etc and that I do not think is their intention. Sure it will be a reasonable sim but it will be on line by license end of story.
Still exciting though. But then again so was Google's intro but nothing much has happened there either for over two years.
Seriously folks - I know everyone is excited but it is going to have to be a license and on line run for this one, maybe just maybe some flight sim aircraft can be added but then again, who knows. The key issue is that is being excitedly overlooked is if they are going to give it as real as it looks then your going to need the server and memory capacity of Google to do it, to do the whole world even using Google tile processes would swamp every PC in the sim world end of story you need banks and banks of servers to do this stuff, cannot happen, nobody has that sort of stored memory capacity except MS and Google and that means a log in and play license. Otherwise you will have nothing worthwhile but again mesh, textures and object files populating it, not to mention shader capacity, focus etc etc and that I do not think is their intention. Sure it will be a reasonable sim but it will be on line by license end of story.
Still exciting though. But then again so was Google's intro but nothing much has happened there either for over two years.
Maybe. However, the new sim is only likely to appeal to a relatively small audience compared to Microsoft's other games and making it fully cloud-based will make that small audience even smaller. Google's upcoming Stadia cloud gaming service is only being rolled out in limited areas because, according to Google, it needs at least a 35Mbps broadband connection to be able to play at 4k, 60FPS (it needs at least 20 Mbps just to play at 1080p). There probably aren't that many flight sim enthusiasts who can sustain that sort of speed and that's assuming that no one else in your home is doing anything else online to use up bandwidth. Then you come up against problems with latency which, whilst not as bad for us as it would be for first-person-shooters, could still be important for approaches and landings. Whilst cloud gaming is probably the future, it's likely to be quite some time (years?) before broadband speeds become good enough globally for it to become the norm.
One possibility is that you'd run the sim from your desktop but download scenery tiles on the fly as required. We're all just shooting in the dark at the moment!
TuFun
Charter Member
Matt Booty, Head of Xbox Game Studios
We put up that little tag at the beginning about satellite data and Azure AI. I don’t know if you know how that works, but we’re taking satellite map data, which is amazing, because it covers the whole planet, but it has big limitations. Parts of the planet are covered at different levels of detail. In order to make a modern flight simulator at the fidelity you need, you need accurate data. We’re using machine learning to fill in the places where we don’t know more than what the satellite data tells us. We know this is a blank spot in the middle of Nevada. Here’s what the stuff around it looks like. We know what Nevada generally looks like. Now we’ll generate that procedurally. There’s a ton of cool stuff in Flight Simulator.
https://venturebeat.com/2019/06/12/...loaded-for-games-a-new-console-and-the-cloud/
We put up that little tag at the beginning about satellite data and Azure AI. I don’t know if you know how that works, but we’re taking satellite map data, which is amazing, because it covers the whole planet, but it has big limitations. Parts of the planet are covered at different levels of detail. In order to make a modern flight simulator at the fidelity you need, you need accurate data. We’re using machine learning to fill in the places where we don’t know more than what the satellite data tells us. We know this is a blank spot in the middle of Nevada. Here’s what the stuff around it looks like. We know what Nevada generally looks like. Now we’ll generate that procedurally. There’s a ton of cool stuff in Flight Simulator.
https://venturebeat.com/2019/06/12/...loaded-for-games-a-new-console-and-the-cloud/
Actually there's quite a Vast flight simming community outside of FSX/P3D/XP. Those people are playing Il2, DCS, BMS, war Thunder to name a few. So my guess is that when playing on XBOX you'll pull in more people. My neighbor who says Xbox religiously, not an FS fan at all saw the video at E3 and said he's interested based on how good it.looks. so, the market is there...The status quo will likely be challenged.
blanston12
SOH-CM-2024
While I am skeptical about what M$ is going to do with there new sim I am also willing to wait and see and will certainly give it a try when it comes out.
As far as the failure of FSW I don't think it was because of our skeptical comments or dividing developers from community, I think it was because they knew they had to leapfrog over P3D and XP and did not have the resources to do it. I tried FSW, it had some nice features, I liked the improved ATC and updated airport database. I expect that they planned on revenue from DLC in there early access period to pay for the development and it did not work out. In developing P3D, LM has taken a conservative approach, adding solid improvements to the platform without shaking things up too much, to succeed DoveTail had to shake things up and be better than the P3D team, which was well funded and experienced with members of the original Microsoft studios team and backed by a corporation that knows a little bit about aviation. If they had created a winning sim they would have won us over, but Dovetail was just not up to the task.
Now Microsoft is another animal, they have the resources and the experience to build a solid platform and make it a radical step up. While they sold LM and DT the rights to use the program, I am sure they left themselves enough rights to the code they could still produce a sim, in fact they did with MS flight, which failed because I think because it was too much a game and not enough sim. Now with there new sim I am sure they are thinking they have to not just satisfy us old timers who in all honesty are a declining market, they have to reach out to a new generation of virtual pilots. I do hope they have learned there lesson with flight and keep the platform open enough that the amateurs will be able to get in and build things, for they will be the payware developers that take the platform forward.
As far as the failure of FSW I don't think it was because of our skeptical comments or dividing developers from community, I think it was because they knew they had to leapfrog over P3D and XP and did not have the resources to do it. I tried FSW, it had some nice features, I liked the improved ATC and updated airport database. I expect that they planned on revenue from DLC in there early access period to pay for the development and it did not work out. In developing P3D, LM has taken a conservative approach, adding solid improvements to the platform without shaking things up too much, to succeed DoveTail had to shake things up and be better than the P3D team, which was well funded and experienced with members of the original Microsoft studios team and backed by a corporation that knows a little bit about aviation. If they had created a winning sim they would have won us over, but Dovetail was just not up to the task.
Now Microsoft is another animal, they have the resources and the experience to build a solid platform and make it a radical step up. While they sold LM and DT the rights to use the program, I am sure they left themselves enough rights to the code they could still produce a sim, in fact they did with MS flight, which failed because I think because it was too much a game and not enough sim. Now with there new sim I am sure they are thinking they have to not just satisfy us old timers who in all honesty are a declining market, they have to reach out to a new generation of virtual pilots. I do hope they have learned there lesson with flight and keep the platform open enough that the amateurs will be able to get in and build things, for they will be the payware developers that take the platform forward.
There's no reason that we still couldn't have 3rd party addons injected into the sim, but the question will be will there be a 3rd party pipeline...outside of DLC? Too early to speculate. Hopefully. But that would likely be for PC only. XBOX users would have no other choice....if XBOX stays with current model for gaming. If the new system offers a PC like experience....who knows! Maybe....
Bjoern
worst developer ever
Remember that MS pulled the plug on the Flight Simulator series for (perceived?) lack of revenue, so I'm fairly certain that they're going to milk the cow as good as it gets.
Not sure if things have changed, but console games never really struck me as moddable, so why should MS bother to focus on that? Maybe a SDK and a bit of moddability will be provided for PC users, but if they're also providing a cross-platform multiplayer environment
No, and I intend to keep it that way least I fall off the walls of my glorious PC gaming castle down into the middle of the dirty console peasantry.
(Reference: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/the-glorious-pc-gaming-master-race )
The ESP intellectual property was sold fair and square and belongs to LM now. No way to roll that back.
What we know, so far:
The new sim will be for PC's & the forthcoming new Xbox.
At this stage, there is much speculation, 59 pages on another forum, but, apart from a teaser video clip, nothing else has been released.
There is speculation that it will be released on Xbox Game Pass, which could mean that it may be subscription based, with scenery being streamed into the sim, as you fly.
Nothing about 3rd party add-ons being available, nor min PC specs as yet. It could very well be a 'closed' sim, with add-ons being available in-game (similar to the way FlightGear works)
So, speculation is rife & apart from that 2 minute or so video, nothing else available.
The new sim will be for PC's & the forthcoming new Xbox.
At this stage, there is much speculation, 59 pages on another forum, but, apart from a teaser video clip, nothing else has been released.
There is speculation that it will be released on Xbox Game Pass, which could mean that it may be subscription based, with scenery being streamed into the sim, as you fly.
Nothing about 3rd party add-ons being available, nor min PC specs as yet. It could very well be a 'closed' sim, with add-ons being available in-game (similar to the way FlightGear works)
So, speculation is rife & apart from that 2 minute or so video, nothing else available.
I'll take mine with butter, thank you!
SkippyBing
Charter Member
Although that's true, I think the point being made is that MS could be much stricter about the 'not for entertainment' clause that is currently generously interpreted.
I think it's a moot point. ESP won't be involved with any luck. Brand new coding, etc.