Search the archive:
YaBB - Yet another Bulletin Board
 
   
 
Pages: 1 
Send Topic Print
About the new features. (Read 1977 times)
May 17th, 2006 at 11:27am

Katahu   Offline
Colonel

Gender: male
Posts: 6920
*****
 
Let's do a recap of what we have just witnessed after seeing all the latest videos and screenshots from M$.

***The following informations is based soley on observation and speculation. I "cannot" garantee that the information is accurate.***


1. Self-shadow render [new]
2. Car traffic and animals [new]
3. 99,999-foot barrier has probably been raised [a lot]
4. Possibility that the globe is now a perfect sphere
5. Missions [new]
6. Awsome vegetation [denser and more eleborate trees]
7. Water reflections [improved and reflects scenery and aircraft].

Possible reasons:

1. The self-shadow render has become popular in LOMAC so it's obvious that M$ is trying to keep up with the competition.

2. With all the new miscellaneous addons becoming more popular in FS [boats, cars, birds, etc.] it's possible that M$ has put these in for the bush flyers.

3. Judging from the video, it looks as if the barrier has been increase do to popular demand. Awsome transition BTW.

4. If Orbiter Space Flight Simulator [a free sim] can render awsome surface textures on a perfect sphere rather than a cylinder then it should be easy for M$ to achieve the same.

5. Missions also appear to be added by popular demand.

6. I guess M$ found a way to optimize the rendering a more trees without sacrificing frame rates.

7. Water that reflects the scenery and objects have been most popular in games like Silent Hunter III [a commercial product].
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #1 - May 17th, 2006 at 1:50pm

Ashar   Ex Member
Forza Lazio!!

Gender: male
*****
 
I really hope that my system can handle the water...and traffic...and FSX itself...

I like the list...much more easier to understand what the stuff is 8)
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #2 - May 17th, 2006 at 2:22pm

FSGT Gabe   Offline
Colonel
Member of StudioV Gallery
Board
Home airport: CYOO

Gender: male
Posts: 1597
*****
 
Quote:
I really hope that my system can handle the water...and traffic...and FSX itself...


Same here.  I am really hoping that my computer will be able to handle it when it can hardly handle 2k4:Smiley!
 

...&&
Studio V - Your destination for all your screenshot needs...
&&
Windows Vista Premium Edition - Pentium® D Processor 820 Dual Core @ 2.8 GHz, 2 GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM, 250 GB HD w/ DataBurst Cache, 256 MB ATI Radeon X1300 Pro, 19 inch E197FP Analog Flat Panel, Saitek X45 Joystick
IP Logged
 
Reply #3 - May 18th, 2006 at 6:12am

Ashar   Ex Member
Forza Lazio!!

Gender: male
*****
 
Quote:
Same here.  I am really hoping that my computer will be able to handle it when it can hardly handle 2k4:Smiley!


FS2004 is no problem for me...I run it maxed out and I still get 30+FPS almost everywhere I fly....just that FSX will be so detailed is what I am worried about Lips Sealed
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #4 - May 18th, 2006 at 5:33pm

GuitarFreak   Offline
Colonel
Home Airport: KWBW/KAVP
KWBW/KAVP

Gender: male
Posts: 272
*****
 
Quote:
FS2004 is no problem for me...I run it maxed out and I still get 30+FPS almost everywhere I fly....just that FSX will be so detailed is what I am worried about Lips Sealed

So am I. I know I'll need a new processor and video card. My processor is only at 990ish MHz, but I have overclocked it a few times to around 2GHz. My videocard sucks...Nvidia 5200 hah.
 

Current Computer specs:&&&&e8600@4.5GHz 1.31v/swiftech apogee GTZ/MCR320/MCP655&&EVGA 790i Ultra&&MSI GTX280 / XSPC Razor &&4GB Patriot Viper DDR3-1800&&PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750w&&Auzentech X-Fi Prelude&&1500GB Seagate 7200.11&&500GB Samsung 2.5"| 500GB Seagate 7200.11&&320GB WD Caviar | 160GB Samsung&&Cosmos S&&28" Hanns-G + 22" Gateway monitors
IP Logged
 
Reply #5 - May 18th, 2006 at 6:25pm

Ecko   Offline
Colonel
-
Denmark

Gender: male
Posts: 4012
*****
 
Quote:
So am I. I know I'll need a new processor and video card. My processor is only at 990ish MHz, but I have overclocked it a few times to around 2GHz. My videocard sucks...Nvidia 5200 hah.


So your sig is what? ???
 

...
IP Logged
 
Reply #6 - May 18th, 2006 at 6:30pm

GuitarFreak   Offline
Colonel
Home Airport: KWBW/KAVP
KWBW/KAVP

Gender: male
Posts: 272
*****
 
Quote:
So your sig is what? ???


The computer I want  Grin
 

Current Computer specs:&&&&e8600@4.5GHz 1.31v/swiftech apogee GTZ/MCR320/MCP655&&EVGA 790i Ultra&&MSI GTX280 / XSPC Razor &&4GB Patriot Viper DDR3-1800&&PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750w&&Auzentech X-Fi Prelude&&1500GB Seagate 7200.11&&500GB Samsung 2.5"| 500GB Seagate 7200.11&&320GB WD Caviar | 160GB Samsung&&Cosmos S&&28" Hanns-G + 22" Gateway monitors
IP Logged
 
Reply #7 - May 18th, 2006 at 7:10pm

kipman725   Offline
Colonel
out of the shadows..
Bedroom

Gender: male
Posts: 904
*****
 
FSx's altitude limits low earth orbit for this to look ok the earth has to be a perfect sphere.
 

5900xt/2800+/280GB/1GB PC3200/Cyborg Evo Force/ABIT NF7&&Gpu clock: 475mhz core, 800mhz mem&&CPU at: 12.5x175 = 2187.5 &&memory: 2.5, 3, 3, 8 Duel channel on &&Os: windows xp pro, ubuntu 5.10 breazy badger
IP Logged
 
Reply #8 - May 18th, 2006 at 7:30pm

Travis   Offline
Colonel
Cannot find REALITY.SYS.
Universe halted.
Dripping Springs, TX

Gender: male
Posts: 4515
*****
 
Quote:
FSx's altitude limits low earth orbit for this to look ok the earth has to be a perfect sphere.


Have you checked the newest videos from here?  It looks to me as though they have fixed that particular problem . . .
 

...
IP Logged
 
Reply #9 - May 18th, 2006 at 8:26pm

Katahu   Offline
Colonel

Gender: male
Posts: 6920
*****
 
Compare the FSX video with these screenshots from Orbiter and tell me if notice a difference in sense of height. The following shots were taken with a 60* field of view while the Delta Glider is orbiting 357.9 kilometers above the earth.

...
...

Note that the Delta Glider and ISS are established in a low earth orbit. IMHO, the video and screenshots are about the same height. So, if this is really how high FSX would allow then sign me up for a trip to the ISS in FSX. Grin

EDIT: 357.9 Kilometers is about 1,174,209 feet.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #10 - May 18th, 2006 at 11:06pm
Jakemaster   Ex Member

 
As far as missions go, we do have them now, althought they have no real purpose.  I just hope the missions are just there as an option, and not something you have to do, turning the sim into a game
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #11 - May 19th, 2006 at 7:48am
Tweek   Ex Member

 
Quote:
As far as missions go, we do have them now, althought they have no real purpose.  I just hope the missions are just there as an option, and not something you have to do, turning the sim into a game


I agree and disagree there.

Firstly, I agree with the fact that you shouldn't HAVE to do the missions, they should be optional.

Secondly, I don't think missions would turn it into a game. TBH, how often do you see an aircraft flying round doing whatever the hell it wants, for real?

If anything, the missions will add to the realism, as you will have a certain goal (like rescuing trapped workers on an oil rig), rather than just pretending that you are flying a couple of hundred passengers from one place to the next.

Hopefully, the mission feature can be expanded on, with third party developers able to create their own missions. Most likely, for bush flying.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #12 - May 19th, 2006 at 9:04am

FSGT Gabe   Offline
Colonel
Member of StudioV Gallery
Board
Home airport: CYOO

Gender: male
Posts: 1597
*****
 
Quote:
If anything, the missions will add to the realism, as you will have a certain goal (like rescuing trapped workers on an oil rig), rather than just pretending that you are flying a couple of hundred passengers from one place to the next.


I agree completely, Tweek.  Missions will ADD to the realism...as long as they are realistic missions Grin.  Things like rescuing trapped people are realistic.  I hate the missions in 2k4 where it says "You are taking this person from here to here" and you can't even see the people.  Anyway, I hope they have a lot of nice, realistic, interesting, fun missions. Wink
 

...&&
Studio V - Your destination for all your screenshot needs...
&&
Windows Vista Premium Edition - Pentium® D Processor 820 Dual Core @ 2.8 GHz, 2 GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM, 250 GB HD w/ DataBurst Cache, 256 MB ATI Radeon X1300 Pro, 19 inch E197FP Analog Flat Panel, Saitek X45 Joystick
IP Logged
 
Reply #13 - May 19th, 2006 at 1:18pm

Joe_D   Offline
Colonel
"Takeoffs are optional,
landings are mandatory!"
NY state

Gender: male
Posts: 839
*****
 
Quote:
As far as missions go, we do have them now, althought they have no real purpose.  I just hope the missions are just there as an option, and not something you have to do, turning the sim into a game


I agree and I'm confident the missions will be optional simply because it would not make sense to do otherwise.

BTW, the subject of FSX has been brought up on a few non FS gaming fourms I frequent.
When the subject of missions in FSX was brought up, there were always a few who said that they migh try MSFS/FSX for the first time because of it.
Personally, I, think this is a good thing to interest people in aviation and FS who perviously were not interested.
 

Home airports are KMGJ and KSWF in Orange County, NY&&Stop by and say hello. Smiley
IP Logged
 
Reply #14 - May 19th, 2006 at 1:32pm

Katahu   Offline
Colonel

Gender: male
Posts: 6920
*****
 
IMHO, the missions should have a realistic structure.

For example:

1. New pilots who are not familiar with the FS series should start [as an option] with a campaign structure that requires them to first learn how to fly and fly to earn hours towards earning their private pilots liscense, instrument rating, or commercial rating. After achieving their desired rating, the pilots can then advance to the next avialable campaign structure that has them flying for the airlines or carriers [AA, TWA, UPS, etc.].

2. Experienced FS fans should also have the option of starting off with an advanced rating so that they don't have to go through all the basic stuff that they already know.

3. Also the FS pilots [like the Bush flyers and sightseers] should also be given the option of putting in their free-flight hours into their ratings as well instead of having to go through the missions repeatedly to earn those hours needed for a specific rating.

I like the idea of putting in visual models of people boarding the plane in the sim, but you have to remember that our current computers may not be able to handle such visual details due to the processing requirements. I feel that it's better to just render certain types of people in the sim such as pilots and copilots as well as ground crew. Nothing more. Are you sure your computer can handle over 300 visual models or 2-D images of people at the same time?

Orbiter may have reach that level but that is because it doesn't have to render detailed mountains and such on plane old spheres known as planets and it doesn't have to deal with AI spacecraft that take off from earth and land on mars on their own [yet].
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #15 - May 19th, 2006 at 2:56pm

Ashar   Ex Member
Forza Lazio!!

Gender: male
*****
 
Missions...I would really love too see passengers actually boarding my aircraft...that would be fun 8) 8)
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #16 - May 20th, 2006 at 12:05pm

Holmes_Fans   Offline
Colonel
I need a new video card.

Posts: 50
*****
 
Quote:
IMHO, the missions should have a realistic structure.

For example:

1. New pilots who are not familiar with the FS series should start [as an option] with a campaign structure that requires them to first learn how to fly and fly to earn hours towards earning their private pilots liscense, instrument rating, or commercial rating. After achieving their desired rating, the pilots can then advance to the next avialable campaign structure that has them flying for the airlines or carriers [AA, TWA, UPS, etc.].

2. Experienced FS fans should also have the option of starting off with an advanced rating so that they don't have to go through all the basic stuff that they already know.

3. Also the FS pilots [like the Bush flyers and sightseers] should also be given the option of putting in their free-flight hours into their ratings as well instead of having to go through the missions repeatedly to earn those hours needed for a specific rating.

I like the idea of putting in visual models of people boarding the plane in the sim, but you have to remember that our current computers may not be able to handle such visual details due to the processing requirements. I feel that it's better to just render certain types of people in the sim such as pilots and copilots as well as ground crew. Nothing more. Are you sure your computer can handle over 300 visual models or 2-D images of people at the same time?

Orbiter may have reach that level but that is because it doesn't have to render detailed mountains and such on plane old spheres known as planets and it doesn't have to deal with AI spacecraft that take off from earth and land on mars on their own [yet].



I love this idea. I'm not a real pilot in life, so I don't know everything there is about planes and how to fly them. A mode that would make part of the game different would be what you said, starting out as a pilot flying at a local airfield to being hired to fly 747's acrros the world.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 
Send Topic Print