However, neither the snow coverage problems nor the DLSS blurry annoyances seem to getting tackled anymore. Both of these were heavily discussed and, maybe I misunderstood, but to me it really seemed like these would get fixed and are actively being worked on. Or at least improved.
And today Seb said no the snow coverage is the best it’s gonna get. Well, ok, but can we tackle it another way, I dunno like suppress it if temps are above 10C or something, let’s be a bit creative? It really does ruin the experience, and of course they happened to look at it during the height of summer where the problem is least noticeable. Take a look again in october, where the entire Alps will once again enter Winter for 6 solid months
And Martial said the DLSS texture flag is set, it doesn’t really fix it though so nothing can be done. It’s just, dissapointing I guess. To me it sure sounded like they were in contact with NVIDIA over this for a long time and it would indeed be possible to exclude and improve things, but I guess it’s not now
Yes, my issue is, is removing the whole model ok? Or do people want a portion of the model removed, and, if so, which portion (this of course is then a modeling issue, not a feature issue, the request would be for certain planes to have their nose removed or something).
It seems to me, the issue is pretty easily solved by having a cockpit camera mode that hides the model in the internal view, although I’m not sure what effect that has on the function of the plane, but it should be none. This might preclude having side screens in which the model is shown, that’s where the real work would be.
This might be doable today for certain planes by commenting out the internal model from the model.cfg file. Or even just renaming the files that the model.cfg file points to for the internal model. Of course then that kills the multiple monitor idea, but, at least it does what a lot of the pictures of cockpits look like that don’t have any model in them.
Does MSFS support multiple monitors yet like FSX used to and XPlane does?
Well, if you look at FSX, there is a cockpit camera that shows the view from the same eyepoint without any virtual cockpit at all. This is the original outside view camera from before the VC was introduced, on top of which various 2D instrument panels were layered (if they existed for the aircraft). If you remove the 2D panels from the view, you get a full-screen outside view. P3D has more or less the same but has no default aircraft with 2D panels and so is immediately a full-screen outside view.
In this view mode, if you do quickview to the left or right etc, then you do see the interior model of the plane, so it’s a hybrid of two cameras. I personally don’t think that’s the right way to go for MSFS, but I’m sure some people would want to be able to show just the wings of the aircraft on the outside view (for those with full cockpit shells etc). But you could also set up a custom camera view using the no-model cockpit camera and rotate that left / right 90 degrees and get side views without any internal model visible. So there’s a choice.
This is a big topic, though, and we’ve generally been most successful getting new features added by asking for smaller, more self-contained things, rather than suggesting a wholesale revision of the way the view and camera system works (which is what is ultimately needed).
Yes, but the support is experimental, not particularly flexible, and all views have to be from the same frustum origin and using the same camera (and if you change camera or move the eyepoint, this affects all windows at the same time). There’s no internal camera that doesn’t show the interior model (without hacks), and the sometimes-used hack of putting the eyepoint outside the cockpit window causes perspective issues.
I play with a Tobii eye-tracker. So if I were to look down, would the floor be invisible and I would be able to see the terrain below me? I’m still a little confused how this would all work together seamlessly, unless you lock the view to only a couple fixed positions and don’t let the user have full freedom of movement.
I think Martial got the issue really on the point: what you need is a mode which removes the cockpit but NOT exterior models like nose cone, prop, windshield, windshield frames etc pp. - so Asobo seems to look into a solution where you can select different parts of the plane and mark them to not be rendered - this would be the optimal solution for cockpit builders …
Probably. But in general, someone who wants this feature would be someone with multiple screens surrounding them and they would likely not want to move the view at all, so there would be no head-tracking or any other panning or quick-looking. You just don’t need it if you have a wrap-around display setup (at least if it’s large enough) and all your instruments are on separate physical panels. It’s a totally different experience to playing on a single monitor with a mouse / keyboard in the mix. The screen is no longer a window into a cockpit; your home cockpit environment is the cockpit, the screen/s should be a window onto the outside world and that’s it.
Ultimately, it’s a feature which would only really benefit this specific audience. So Asobo would have to decide if this was worth it given the effort that might be involved. OTOH home cockpit builders tend to be some of the most enthusiastic evangelists for a sim platform, so most sim makers want to court them to some degree.
They found it important enough to “include” it in the sim at launch, although it’s never worked. Much like popout panels dropping performance significantly. Both features that home cockpit builders rely on heavily have been in the sim for 4 years, are still terribly broken at this sim’s end of life, and have never really been addressed.
It came out in December 2020. So not quite at launch, but still pretty close to it.
If everyone recalls, the first few months after release were frantic bug fixes every other week. The home cockpit mode feature came out in Sim Update 2, which is one of the first times a new feature was introduced. (This wasn’t the first feature introduced, but it was one of the first features.)
This is definitely something that, to their credit, they identified early on as a need
Unfortunately, it hasn’t been fully realized yet.
To my view this reasoning has a flaw. How can real-estate that was used for the instrument panel be used for outside view? I mean, the part of our view that was used for the FS instrument panel will be blocked by our own panel, won’t it?
To be clear: I’ve wanted a good integration of my own physical cockpit with the sim since it was launched, but in all the four years on this forum I have not found one single post that explains how this would work exactly in a satisfactory way.
I mean: would the plane look like normal, but with a hole in the front through which we see the outer world? That will not look realistic when the physical cockpit does not overlap this hole perfectly. Much less so when one uses a head tracker, but that is not recommended in this scenario, of course.
Hi,
Do you happen to know when in the FSExpo presentation they showed the basilica? I saw the presentation. They talked about MSFS 2024 and went through their own trailer video, breaking it down in detail. I don’t recall seeing POI pictures in the talk, but I could be wrong.
So, we can say that FS2020 has gone four years without any official improvements for South America. On top of that, MS servers in this region rarely go above 20Mb speeds, which makes it pointless for users to have ultra-fast internet connections. Considering that the 2024 version might rely even more on cloud-based data, it could end up being impractical for us.
While I agree that it’s not good optics when there are two US, Nordic, UK and DACH updates, the developers have to plan based on:
Who flies where, and
Availability of data
There was a presentation at FlightSimExpo in June, and they showed where people fly, and a lot of people fly in North America and Europe. I also think some of those world updates are do-overs from issues in the past, like bad photogrammetry in London and no photogrammetry in the Nordics before.
Unfortunately, it also sounds like the team has had a lot of difficulty getting data for Brazil, but it’s finally going to happen.
I’ve been to Brazil, Chile, and Argentina, which I know is only a small part of South America, but I fell in love with all three countries when I went there. I updated two airports in Ushuaia, Argentina in the World Hub, and when the World Hub reopens, I’d like to do a few more.
Regarding the server issue, right now there is a Wishlist topic. It’s specific to Brazil, but it only has nine votes right now:
It’s not a lot right now, but to a certain extent, vote count determines what the team looks at. I would say, add a vote to that topic if you would like. I have.
I want to give skypilotYTS room to answer the question, but I think that in the abstract, if you do see behind the instrument panel, it would be much better to see an empty panel than a bunch of distracting gauges and displays.
I would love options. I would love to see one version absent a panel so that I could switch planes and still see things like the propeller(s) and wings (or helicopter blades). But I think it would require a re-tooling of the SDK and an opt-in on an individual aircraft basis.
For right now, I would be happy with seeing nothing. (Call it “Captain Sim mode.” ) I can’t imagine that that would require any kind of SDK overhaul. In the future, they could consider additional options.
When should we expect Microsoft to increase prices? There was a lady giving these good news in the presentation, but it wasn’t that given a date or something…just a table with 16.49$ and euro
You can watch the recording of their panel during FS Expo on their official YouTube channel. Pause at 5:49, where WU17 and WU18 are shown. As far as I know, WU17 features the University of Glasgow, and indeed, we had a World Update for the British Isles. Next to it, there’s WU18, which shows the Basilica in Gdańsk with the town hall tower in the background.
The WU18 switch from Poland+ to GAS (Germany/Austria/Switzerland) was a huge surprise for those of us who had identified the Gdansk Basilika in the expo WU18 thumbnail.
Personally, i was extremely thrilled to learn about the DEM improvements in GAS (and EDDM on xbox!!!). WU Nordic2 transformed the unnaturally flat lowlands into soft, wavy lowlands with a perfect fit to the aerial images (the approaches to ESMS are excellent examples). The prospect of having the GAS lowlands come to live the same way is very good news!
At the same time, the delay of WU Poland+ really deserved a short mention and explanation!
The word about WU Poland+ had been out for a couple months, and it’s eagerly awaited.
It’s ok that it got delayed for whatever reason. It’s not the first WU getting re-schedule. But Jörg should have aknowledged it with a sentence or two. The pure silence on the WU Poland+ re-schedule was painful.
On a side note, acclaim to Jörg for finally speaking clearly about WU19 being Brazil. Anyone who had done the math knew this already. But it was nice that he finally broke that silly rule of “only reveal one WU location at a time”.
) I can’t imagine that that would require any kind of SDK overhaul. In the future, they could consider additional options.
