Some people are asking too much but some are just asking for Microsobo to deliver them the game/simulator that they were promised and paid for back in August 2020
They have. I’m quite familiar with their pre-launch marketing and they did not promise a perfect simulator out of the box. There isn’t a single actually promised feature upon which they have not delivered.
May want to conform expectations to what is actually promised and not to perceived or invented promises that never happened.
Yeah, if I hover my mouse on your screenshot, it shows the image is at 5760x1080 so that’s the resolution you’re running.
That’s why I don’t have that many pixel. I’m content with my current 3840x2160.
If I remember right xplane provided the ability to network separate computer together to provide separate views, left, front, right. I assumed that this was there to provide decent FPS for home cockpit set ups for triple monitors. I imagine it will take years for ASOBO to implement the same if at all.
On the other hand MS may become interested when they realize the end user would have to purchase two more copies of the sim to make it work.
Short answer: yes
Long answer: yes, absolutely
It the most common sickness of humanity these days, I am sorry to say so…
Uh… excuse you? I’m pretty sure that’s a valid issue and I’m not throwing a temper tantrum over it like some others might. It’s a casual request for a solution to an issue on a 3rd party aircraft; I’d like to see one reason why it’s “asking too much”.
Pointing out issues is not asking for new things.
If you have a problem with a third party aircraft it’s the third parties problem.
You mean the me, me, me syndrome… no…I don’t see any of that in here!
Salem said it all
thinking in this way, in the 69s we would not have reached the moon…
and to answer the Topic,
we ask only what is still today on the official Microsoft page
Great. I hear FSX is a wonderful program. You should stick with it then. Had they released their program with all the ambition and complexity of FS2020, it would not have run as great on day one. Comparisons of the two are simply daft.
Good answer but this part I quoted is not really the big picture. While the pixel count might be less, the scene complexity as in number of vertices and textures having to be rendered is not. Larger 3d scenes with more objects take more processor and graphics card resources. The output resolution is only a piece of that.
Still for historical reasons, I would like to remember that actually FSX was a very ambitious simulator. Full world, many categories of aircraft, good training with Rod Machado, many interesting missions, advanced graphics for the time.
And, just for all these features, it is not true that it ran great on day one. The cyberspace still resonates with the loud complaints of the people not able to run it because of the high hardware requests. The DX10 preview mode never worked as expected.
These are facts widely known in the sim circles , but the memory these days… (again)
Or maybe it is because subsequent generations lost patience and ability to concentrate on important things that since 1972 no man put foot on Moon again?
And also the AGC (Apollo Guidance Computer) had its share of issues; developing complex software it is not as simple as someone thinks.
Oh I get that. When I’m talking sequential tasks that have to complete before the next begins I’m talking the main ones that are the most resource intensive. 1. Figure out where the heck you are and where you’re looking. 2. Suck in graphics details for that view from some distant server, cache, or local drives dealing with any data slowdowns and dropouts. 3. Assemble ground elements with DEM and textures, adding water areas, roads, vegetation, etc. 4. Deal with building objects either auto-generated or actual models sent. 5. Pay attention to user interactions that can change view points and aircraft details. 5. Add in weather effects which can affect shadowing or blocking of some of the elements you’re already dealing with. 6…7…8. Lots of things have to happen in some logical order (and I could easily have assumed wrong on those) before one piece of into is even sent to the graphics card.
Nearly every one of those steps needs information from the prior one before it can be performed properly.
And programming 3D graphics these days is not reinventing the wheel. The graphical routines for displaying terrain, wrapping textures on it, building water with reflections and texture, displaying objects with lighting, shadows, animations, etc are code that was created over a decade ago not so much by programmers but by absolutely brilliant math wizards and many of those same engines can be found throughout the gaming world. I can assure you Asobo throws things into existing engines with little control over how they are processed by the CPU.
Wow… thanks for your addition to the conversation!
My point was that it worked out of the box. Its old and dead now. Had a good run. Now if these programmers would just fix the new version. It’s been 6 months and it runs and looks worse than release. They don’t seem to know how to fix it. Oh and 15 years ago they couldn’t get close to what you can achieve now. That is with the right development team that knows what they are doing.
It’s so funny that I find myself sticking up for Asobo programmers that are contracted to Microsoft, a company that has caused me innumerable headaches throughout my own life as a programmer. I curse at MS daily writing code in their environment, have had their Windows or Office updates blow out years of work so many times it’s not funny. So many wasted hours dealing with a corporation that to me clearly put profits and forced upgrades over almost every other aspect of user satisfaction. Even with that though, their environment has paid my bills all my life.
However, in all of that angst, there have been a few shining lights for MS. One has been their flight simulator teams and the other MS-SQL (which was actually bought from another company). Like any large entity there are always great parts. I think they found a gem in Asobo and hit them with a tremendously daunting task.
Platitudes like this are just an obfuscation!
This one in particular merely moves the question to one of what are the things we can change and what are the things we can’t!!!