She actually said it will be in the next few updates.
That sounds a bit more positive, and more like it is as you mentioned, mostly ready.
She actually said it will be in the next few updates.
Ha! Great minds think alike.
would that change anything though?
I guess that the artists that are updating the world dont have the skills it takes to do programming and bug fixing
The issues persisting from Alpha is one thing (I’ve never seen the prerelease version). These things might be difficult to handle indeed.
But I’m more worried about the issues like the coastline glitch (ugly water triangles) which was introduced by World Update 2 USA. Unless it was done on purpose or as accepted (by Asobo) side effect of some performance optimization, it should be easily (?) reversible assuming they have some release/change management in place. Just by returning to pre World Update 2 coastline generation routine, assuming again that the code is nicely structured, not like a big plate of spaghetti.
I was hoping to see VR getting a little more love, at least in the roadmap. I think the controller issue should be a primary. I would imagine there is more going on there than we see, but it sure would be nice for VR receive the attention it deserves.
When I look at the VR update and especially this one which I can’t imagine taking more than 1/2 day work, tests included: “Scaling Slider / Settings (not started / TBD)”
I can’t help thinking it is just about multiplying the matrix returned by OXR by another one to make a translation and optionally a rotation to keep the same focus point, and adding a slider in the UI which value would determine the matrix values representing such position/rotation.
It begs the question whether they are under staffed, can’t change the code because the lead rendering engine developer is working on something else and can’t work on the FS2020 engine until a certain time (and it is not the first time they’re saying so in a Q&A for many other questions related to the visuals and the rendering). Or maybe they can’t change the code because it is not in a maintainable state, or they don’t consider this is important because there is no VR on the XBox.
Whatever the real reasons, I understand adding a matrix multiply might be disruptive in the great scheme of things, but listing this as “Not Started/TBD” for one of the most asked for feature in VR, while being maybe the simplest to implement, is not showing much love to the simmers and VR to me either.
And what about the status of the many other requests and bugs, some having more votes than 2, or even 69, yet not visible in the feedback snapshot?
To illustrate, here are some of my wish list topics to get started (please vote!)
Cockpit Size and World Scale in VR
EFIS Screens Problems and Solutions for higher legibility
Ambient Night Lighting illuminating more than a full moon
Provide a Sharpen strength setting, and more post-processing effect controls in VR
Implement a metering system better suited for VR
Increase distance threshold to see other aircraft navigation and strobe lights
TAA is transforming road traffic into ghosts (self-cancelling moving pixels)
Render the Sun with a fading disk when bloom is disabled
Bake Ambient Occlusion in the cockpit when Ambient Occlusion is disabled
Night lighting issues still present - The community solutions
Can you please add a “Sun Glasses” mode ? (not a joke)
Add support for mouse wheel to change the UI settings sliders
Let users adjusting the Render Scale setting by increments of 5 or 1 (instead of 10)
PS: to illustrate even more, how come Q&A testers can’t get nausea when testing FS2020 prior release when flying in these conditions:
NB: the cockpit seems moving but it is my camera which is moving instead. In the headset (through the lens shot), the cockpit is static and it is the whole world balancing around you in a perfect sinusoid and nausea inducing movement.
I’m confused I didn’t get any update when I launched the game today?
That’s because today is the Development update (i.e. the info on what’s coming) and not the delivery day for the actual software update. That’s due next week on the 11th feb.
Ahhh gotcha “update” as in news update. Dang I got all excited for a second.
To be honest, I never really noticed coastline problems- but I haven’t flown in those areas often. My annoyances are with terrain spikes mainly- but there are fixes here and there for those. Back in X-plane, we could make some tweaks to the orthos and improve coastlines pretty nicely. I wonder if similar logic exists in whatever system Asobo has set up for MSFS too?
I think of it this way.
World updates include some detailed airports, but them detailed airports still have the problematic ground AI.
The World updates include vast roadways, but the roads are still greenish.
So the world updates are meh because the bugs outweigh them by a vast majority. The problem is the vast majority of faithful msfs users are mainly photographers and sightseers, or they submit to this past time as being patient until the bugs get fixed. So the bugs regarding aviation remain a low priority.
If there were as loud a voice for autopilots as there was for VR, certainly autopilots would be working fine this very moment. Loud voices are now forbidden, so nothing gets done aviation wise. We’ll see if sim update 3 correctly fixes all autopilots.
Proof of my position is in some of the marketplace items and a few of the aircraft mods available. Small teams getting things done fast. So if there are separate teams for msfs; one doing world updates and other teams fixing the Autopilots (or ATC, Weather, Seasons, whatever), the question has to be asked: why does it take 2 years to fix autopilots? The only possible answer is because autopilots are unnecessary for screenshot taking…it really is the only logical answer. Its not like before the alpha was released they were not working on the autopilots for at least a year before that. Its not like they could not get some hints from the FSX SDK or even the FS5 SDK!
You’re not getting the point.
The artists / bing maps people working on the world updates, are not the same people as the people who are fixing bugs with AI, flight systems, aerodynamics models etc.
Different jobs requiring completely different skill sets.
I had the point many decades ago.
But your point sounds like it would suggest that the msfs team who are fixing bugs with AI, flight systems, aerodynamics models etc., have little skill. I would not suggest this. I know they could work just as fast and good as the msfs scenery developers and 3rd parties, but the priority is just not there.
For now screenshots/sightseeing are the priority. Perhaps to entice the xbox platform user base, because its very unlikely xbox users will care about an ILS Cat IIIB or PCL or carb ice, they are waiting for the next shooter or EA title; msfs is meh to them in the grand scheme.
So essentially we are still waiting for a flight sim for flight simmers. YAWN…
This is very old news. DC Designs (dev of the this F-15 you are referring to) have already sorted it out (and said so in public numerous times):
Even the garbage Eurofighter Typhoon (now available in the marketplace) can do supersonic.
Thanks for the heads up.
I do not follow the developer and relied on YouTube/Reddit reviews for that aircraft. If they found a way to have accurate physics beyond Mach 1, all power to them. It seemed to me that supersonic flight is not supported by the physics engine yet.
Do what I do and ignore the mainstream media
Three of the very reliable flight simulation sites that you should follow are: FSElite, ThresholdX and AVSim
https://twinfinite.net/ is doing very well as well. At first it might look like a video-gaming site but @Abriael who regularly writes articles there have been writing flight simulation articles too and he fact-checks a lot before publishing something. Great stuff! Highly recommended.
Yes, AVSim is a must for sure. Have been there like 14 years now at least, likely longer. And also some reputable German sites.
Still not really sure if the physics engine can handle proper supersonic flight or not, but I guess with an entertainment level product it doesn’t matter one way or the other.
Well, it is a video gaming website haha. But thanks for the kind words. We do try to cover even technical genres with competence
The F-15 was a pretty funny case, with lots of mainstream outlets going “oh this is cool!” and giving it a lot of… slightly cringy coverage based on second hand info from youtube. Pretty much like all the interviews that are basically just “oh please Jorg and Seb, tell us more about that amazing tech of yours that lets us visit our house!” or that major PC website that won’t be named that still believes that “activating the autopilot” means giving control to the AI copilot.
Sorry about the slight rant, just hit a pet peeve right there lol But again, thanks for the kind words.
The physics engine, as well as literally almost everything else in MSFS, is subject to constant change, development and improvement, as per what the devs have said numerous times. If it doesn’t support proper supersonic flight right now, it will tomorrow. It’s a matter of when and not if. Like I mentioned above, two MSFS developers have already added supersonic support to their respective aircraft.
In case you missed it, here’s when Asobo CEO Sebastian talks about supersonic flight support to the flight model. I fast-forwarded it. Just click Play:
You are entitled to call it whatever you want, be it entertainment product or serious simulation, but like what the devs and producers said countless of times in the past and present, MSFS 2020 is first and foremost a simulator for simmers, not gamers/entertainers (although it can be used as an entertainment tool, just like I can use Prepar3D - a training tool - to go on twitch, put my plane on autopilot and then dance and entertain my viewers). FSLabs created the supersonic Concorde for FSX and Prepar3D several years ago. For MSFS 2020, it’s a matter of when and not if. The developers have other more important priorities too, with Xbox support being one of them.