Lot of people think that make a simulator is easy. They should had a little more patience, asobo team is doing a great job. Simulators are always a great WIP. (even more this simulator that has such a bold proposal).
1 Like
They should have 40 years or so of experience or at least code to work with since this product has been around that long.
1 Like
The Microsoft Flight simulation series is a passion, tolerance is given, but only up to a point, it requires input from the community, that is why the franchise has endured, and that input can be positive and negative in equal measures, Jorge and Asobo knew this when undertaking this Mammoth task of the re-invention of the series. You have to take the rough with the smooth, passions are running high, because we all want it to succeed. Sort the basic foundations of the sim out first and then add as much eye candy as you like, that’s the icing on the cake. The Xbox community have already taken bate, slow down and reassess the strategy, the PC users will be around along time after the Xbox gamers have moved on, no matter what the Microsoft management think.
There is a system that analyses satellite and aerial photos and find building shapes on them, it is literally objects detection/recognition, which is subset of Machine Learning, which is subset of AI.
Bulk of learning must have been done before MSFS was moved even to alpha.
I don’t know how (if) they do new learning loops now, but one way could be - to use manually created scenery and photogrammetry as expected result, compare it to generated scenery, and feed error/difference back to system for adjusting its parameters.
Just to recap to the main topic and not getting out of topic, the main issue was the world update not fully updated:
Before\ After
1 Like
Sending the scenery developers home, is that a solution?
1 Like
That could work, you could build several sample models and run it against that and increase the number of models. I suspect it’s not real AI though, it’s AI in the meaning of “clever programming” - which it is.
No, but one would have to question the staffing ratios. This may well be appropriate for the sort of programs that Asobo normally turn out - 3D and 2D modellers, sound, storyliners, level designers and so on but there’s a significant level of coding and complexity in here compared to your average game. That’s partly why the problems occur.
would still be good if they would quickly patch and hotfix issues for areas which are broken. for example: the flaps issue. they just decided; “ah, who cares, we can just fix it later.” another example: Unwelcome welcome in the UK
lets see how long before this is gone…
All they need to do is have a place where you report issues with the terrain/man made features/whatever, then they go through and patch the isues and introduce those fixes as part of the next update. Not too hard??
1 Like
That’d be it. XD
Do they really actually read that stuff, and actively strive to patch everything?
So far in my view, No. They seem to notice (the ridiculous) Voting system over posts and even when posting Bug Reports on this forum you’re “advised” to create a Zendesk ticket…which renders the point of having an entire Bug Section kinda redundant IMO.
2 Likes
Yep. At Microsoft, ‘Ten years of support and development’ actually means ‘It’ll be a working product in about a decade.’
2 Likes
I never said these things are bugs. Remember this is 2021, they have had years of a head start from all the others before them. I just want what I paid for. And in all fairness it isn’t just MSFS, it’s the way of the gaming world. Put out a product that is not finished, it will be better in a few years. How about I pay a few bucks now and a few in a couple of years? It’s only this way because people accept it. If most businesses were run like this they would be out of business within a years time. You talk about A.I. algorithms, how about the G1000? How poorly this was implemented in these planes when it was released? Did that have to do with the A.I. algorithms too??? Keep saying it’s ok and it only gets worse.
The bottom line is that this is a bare bones sim.
There does not appear to be any indication that this is supposed to be sim to compete with Xplane or P3D.
It does however have all the hallmarks of a Xbox game. If I were to look at this as a Xbox game then it looks just right. From a flight sim perspective it falls behind on all levels. Fancy graphics matter on a Xbox product. In a sim it is a big plus but not essential.
That explains why the GNS530 is just barebones, the G1000 is barebones, the G3000 is barebones. Heck the planes them selves are bare bones. It is like they said lets make sure rudder, ailerons, flaps and thrust works then send the product out the door so it can get a polish for Xbox version.
From that point of view the quality is perfect.
2 Likes
I don’t think this does explain why these are “barebones” (if I understand correctly what you mean with this adjective). Jorg said so himself: they don’t want to step on the toes of third party vendors for which developing add-ons is their livelihood. Having said this, I’m still looking forward to the time they focus on other projects than the CRJ and they consider there are other 3rd party developer needs than building airliners and airports.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.