• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 | We Don't Need Roads

The DLC for this game is comically expensive. I guess there is appeal if you are an absolute simulator fanatic and nuts about your home airport or a specific plane, but I guess its an easy no for everybody else!

Don’t waste 15 quid on a fighter jet. I believe there is a free top gun expansion coming soon for some faster flight shenanigans!
Yeah that's how it goes for simulators. The fans will spend stupid amounts of money for their toys. I know a guy who spent hundreds on virtual trains.
 
Yeah that's how it goes for simulators. The fans will spend stupid amounts of money for their toys. I know a guy who spent hundreds on virtual trains.


twuTHs7.jpg
 

Freeman76

Member
Ah, known for the occasional drive-by shit post is this fella? Sort of had that whiff about it.

I cant understand how anybody can expect a project of this magnitude to be 100% accurate down to the last building. I mean at least be real with how fucking enormous this is, we are talking about a whole planet ffs!. Let alone say ppl are being negligent for not pulling them up on it. Ridiculous!
 

Fredrik

Member
So I must admit, have been intrigued by what’s been shown and have been YouTubing a few vids. But all too often almost a ‘bait and switch’ reality strikes….

Generic buildings everywhere, stadiums turned into Gulag style apartment blocks, etc….

Are people merrily visiting locales just accepting gross inaccuracies because they don’t know any better…..thoughts?


You can’t expect them to 1:1 replicate the whole planet, we haven’t even seen a dev replicate a country yet, barely even a city. As someone living in an insignificant part of a tiny country I’m excited that I can even fly over anything resembling a city where I live. The roads and bridges are all there, and my house and work place etc. It’s great!

However, it’s slightly odd that the most iconic church in my city looks like a flat warehouse. It’s not like flattening the eifeltower but irl the church is by far the tallest building so it’s what you first see when seeing the city from afar. I wish there was an easy way to report obvious flaws so they can fix them, but I’m guessing they would be flooded with requests since the game map is the whole planet.
 

Inviusx

Member
You probably have some time before GT7, tho.

- This post is not a financial advice

If I thought I could reasonably get my hands on a PS5 again before early next year I totally would. But things are just too crazy at the moment.
 

Shmunter

Member
You can’t expect them to 1:1 replicate the whole planet, we haven’t even seen a dev replicate a country yet, barely even a city. As someone living in an insignificant part of a tiny country I’m excited that I can even fly over anything resembling a city where I live. The roads and bridges are all there, and my house and work place etc. It’s great!

However, it’s slightly odd that the most iconic church in my city looks like a flat warehouse. It’s not like flattening the eifeltower but irl the church is by far the tallest building so it’s what you first see when seeing the city from afar. I wish there was an easy way to report obvious flaws so they can fix them, but I’m guessing they would be flooded with requests since the game map is the whole planet.
What I don’t get tho is, Apple, Google and I assume bing, has all the satellite photogrammetry which should allow close to 100% accuracy surely.

Random Apple maps capture of Sydney….is it not better?

I was interested in flight sim, but not so much now. Probably because the chill virtual tourism was the hook for me, not so much the intricacies of flying aircraft….

 
Last edited:

Schmick

Member
What I don’t get tho is, Apple, Google and I assume bing, has all the satellite photogrammetry which should allow close to 100% accuracy surely.

Random Apple maps capture of Sydney….is it not better?

I was interested in flight sim, but not so much now. Probably because the chill virtual tourism was the hook for me, not so much the intricacies of flying aircraft….


Nope.

You'll notice that the planet is not completely captured using satellite photogrammetry but Bing maps is being updated all the time. As Bing maps is updated then FS can be updated too.
 

Shmunter

Member
Nope.

You'll notice that the planet is not completely captured using satellite photogrammetry but Bing maps is being updated all the time. As Bing maps is updated then FS can be updated too.
I guess Bing is behind, makes sense considering dominance of Apple and Google phones.

Imagine if they used Apples data, its legit down to each individual building, no filler.
 

Schmick

Member
I guess Bing is behind, makes sense considering dominance of Apple and Google phones.

Imagine if they used Apples data, its legit down to each individual building, no filler.
Yep and that is exactly how it is in FS when the cities are modelled using photogrammetry.
 

SirTerry-T

Member
What I don’t get tho is, Apple, Google and I assume bing, has all the satellite photogrammetry which should allow close to 100% accuracy surely.

Random Apple maps capture of Sydney….is it not better?

I was interested in flight sim, but not so much now. Probably because the chill virtual tourism was the hook for me, not so much the intricacies of flying aircraft….


Satellite photogrammetry gives you nowhere near enough information to recreate the subjects accurately in 3d.

This is an example of a camera rig set up to capture data for a single, static asset...
soq5BWk.png

Photogrammetry isn't some ”magic bullet"...having some satellite imagery isn't going to unlock the mythical Make This button in an artist's 3d package.
 
Last edited:

Shmunter

Member
Satellite photogrammetry gives you nowhere near enough information to recreate the subjects accurately in 3d.

This is an example of a camera rig set up to capture data for a single, static asset...
soq5BWk.png

Photogrammetry isn't some ”magic bullet"...having some satellite imagery isn't going to unlock the mythical Make This button in an artist's 3d package.
As satellites travel they take enough photos to mathematically extrapolate height data based on the way perspective works.
 

Fredrik

Member
What I don’t get tho is, Apple, Google and I assume bing, has all the satellite photogrammetry which should allow close to 100% accuracy surely.

Random Apple maps capture of Sydney….is it not better?

I was interested in flight sim, but not so much now. Probably because the chill virtual tourism was the hook for me, not so much the intricacies of flying aircraft….


For my city there is only satellite photos in Google, Apple and Bing maps, which don’t show the height of the buildings. There is street view too for bigger streets but my assumption is that they have a program that is placing a 3D building from a selection of suitable buildings on each satellite map object an AI thing decide is a building, and unless they insert more details through those free world detail updates there won’t be correct height.
All the bridges in my city lack the bows too, same reason I assume, it’s just a road over the water.

I’ve sent an email to request an update of my city , which won’t likely happen but I doubt that just complaining here is increasing my chances.

I can tell you though, even with flaws in building details it’s still awesome to fly over familiar places.
 

reksveks

Member
As satellites travel they take enough photos to mathematically extrapolate height data based on the way perspective works.
Depends on the photos and if you have stuff like shadows, but better models and increased photos in the database will make this better in the future obviously.

I don't think any mapping service has any where close to 100% coverage.

I haven't logged back into Google Earth to have a check on how they are doing. I would assume that they have the biggest incentive and therefore best coverage.
 

SirTerry-T

Member
As satellites travel they take enough photos to mathematically extrapolate height data based on the way perspective works.
But that's all they are giving you, photogrammetry when used to accurately recreate the subject in 3d needs more than that, as highlighted by the reply above.

Lighting conditions, focal length...all things that can affect the process need to be as static as possible.

If satellite imagery was all Asobo needed then there wouldn't be a need for the update packs that use hand crafted assets for major landmarks and buildings, right?

Always pays to do your due diligence on these sort of things before wagging a finger at the developers.
 
Last edited:

Shmunter

Member
Depends on the photos and if you have stuff like shadows, but better models and increased photos in the database will make this better in the future obviously.

I don't think any mapping service has any where close to 100% coverage.

I haven't logged back into Google Earth to have a check on how they are doing. I would assume that they have the biggest incentive and therefore best coverage.
Yeah you’d have to refine and refine with countless runs, and take photos at midday when the sun is not creating shifted shadows. It’s time consuming and expensive quite likely. A process that will work on priority areas first.
 
Last edited:

Shmunter

Member
But that's all they are giving you, photogrammetry when used to accurately recreate the subject in 3d needs more than that. If satellite imagery was all Asobo needed then there wouldn't be a need for the update packs that use hand crafted assets for major landmarks and buildings, right?

Always pays to do your due diligence on these sort of things before wagging a finger at the developers.
Are you suggesting apple etc. used that camera setup for all the buildings in a city?
 

SirTerry-T

Member
Are you suggesting apple etc. used that camera setup for all the buildings in a city?
No I'm suggesting that would be the ideal, if impossible setup.
To be honest, your coming across as somewhat disingenuous...MSFS2020 is a ten year project, we are in year one...two? Of course things will improve over time but even so, expecting a perfect 1:1 recreation of the entire Planet is expecting perhaps a little too much?
I think those of us who maybe salivating over this title a little too much for some people on this forum maybe appreciating what the software gets right, rather than wrong?
 
Last edited:

Shmunter

Member
No I'm suggesting that would be the ideal, if impossible setup.
To be honest, your coming across as somewhat disingenuous...MSFS2020 is a ten year project, we are in year one...two? Of course things will improve over time but even so, expecting a perfect 1:1 recreation of the entire Planet is expecting perhaps a little too much?
I think those of us who maybe salivating over this title a little too much for some people on this forum maybe appreciating what the software gets right, rather than wrong?
Seems like a basic debate is triggering you. Have a hot cup of cocoa, a nice nap, and turn that frown upside down!
 

BigLee74

Banned
People are still downplaying this gem of a technical achievement? Until you’ve experienced it, you shouldn’t be dismissing it as simply flying over 2d bing maps, because that is not what it is.

I didn’t think I’d be into the sim side at all, but I’ve started assigning departure and destination airports, and flying them. Heck, I can even land them now.

Worst of all, I obey the taxi rules.

What have I become?
 

Shmunter

Member
I'm not triggered I just see what your playing at. I'm more of a coffee fella, this time of day.
:)
I’ve posted video of Australian cities from FS and Apple map of Sydney. It’s basic evidence based discussion which I bet you didn’t even bother looking at and instead are white knighting the game because of emotions. Be objective and we can talk, otherwise cry on your own.
 

Ammogeddon

Member
The DLC for this game is comically expensive. I guess there is appeal if you are an absolute simulator fanatic and nuts about your home airport or a specific plane, but I guess its an easy no for everybody else!

Don’t waste 15 quid on a fighter jet. I believe there is a free top gun expansion coming soon for some faster flight shenanigans!
Yeah the prices are pretty crazy. I might pay something like £3 for an aircraft I like the look of but not £15.

However one DLC that did pique my interest was the improved NZ terrain for £6. Has anyone bought this, does it make a noticeable difference?
 

Schmick

Member
I’ve posted video of Australian cities from FS and Apple map of Sydney. It’s basic evidence based discussion which I bet you didn’t even bother looking at and instead are white knighting the game because of emotions. Be objective and we can talk, otherwise cry on your own.
You said you were YouTubing.... did you watch just one YouTube video? Have you played the game?
 

Shmunter

Member
You said you were YouTubing.... did you watch just one YouTube video? Have you played the game?
Are you suggesting YouTube video is inadmissible for comparison?

Let me clear up one thing;

FS has an impressing lighting system, it has an amazing cloud system, complex physics for the aircraft, all manner of modern video rendering techniques creating a wonderful image.

But you point out that the accuracy of the infrastructure is below what e.g. Apple maps has, and people’s worlds fall apart and defence mechanisms like it’s a family member kick in. GROW UP.
 
Last edited:

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
I guess Bing is behind, makes sense considering dominance of Apple and Google phones.

Imagine if they used Apples data, its legit down to each individual building, no filler.
Honestly I would wait few years, because bing isn't used as navigation (like a street type of navigation), but hopefully now they will make it better through Flight Sim. Pretty much a lot of it, is actually just Neural Network and satellite scans. Like Google Earth back 10 or so years ago. However if you have GamePass there is still a lot of beatiful places, fully modelled.
 

SirTerry-T

Member
Are you suggesting YouTube video is inadmissible for comparison?

Let me clear up one thing;

FS has an impressing lighting system, it has an amazing cloud system, complex physics for the aircraft, all manner of modern video rendering techniques creating a wonderful image.

But you point out that the accuracy of the infrastructure is below what e.g. Apple maps has, and people’s worlds fall apart and defence mechanisms like it’s a family member kick in. GROW UP.
cfpFijx.jpg


Its all banter, enjoy your cocoa/coffee/tea/hot beverage of choice, fella.
 

Schmick

Member
Are you suggesting YouTube video is inadmissible for comparison?

Let me clear up one thing;

FS has an impressing lighting system, it has an amazing cloud system, complex physics for the aircraft, all manner of modern video rendering techniques creating a wonderful image.

But you point out that the accuracy of the infrastructure is below what e.g. Apple maps has, and people’s worlds fall apart and defence mechanisms like it’s a family member kick in. GROW UP.
I'll ignore the last sentence.

What comparison? You only linked one YouTube.
 

Schmick

Member
Seperate posts, 2 vids…here they are in one post….




Sorry but you are asking me if YouTube video is inadmissible for comparison? Yet you are only linking one YouTube video of FS footage. Have you watched more than one YouTube of FS footage?

These are just a few comparison videos between real life and FS (it is by no means perfect and actually they are quite old).





FYI Australia has not been updated in the game with a World Update. This will happen in the future.
 
Last edited:

Connxtion

Member
Sorry but you are asking me if YouTube video is inadmissible for comparison? Yet you are only linking one YouTube video of FS footage. Have you watched more than one YouTube of FS footage?

These are just a few comparison videos between real life and FS (it is by no means perfect and actually they are quite old).





FYI Australia has not been updated in the game with a World Update. This will happen in the future.

That’s nuts, the first video there is basically 1:1 😂

I personally have been flying about my area and places I have been to see how it looks ingame.
Isn’t 100% accurate with building but still nuts I can fly to a location and 99% of its there. (Mostly flat but still there 😂)
 

BLAUcopter

Member
I cant understand how anybody can expect a project of this magnitude to be 100% accurate down to the last building. I mean at least be real with how fucking enormous this is, we are talking about a whole planet ffs!. Let alone say ppl are being negligent for not pulling them up on it. Ridiculous!
Don't waste brain power on trolls and morons.
 

Fredrik

Member
FS has an impressing lighting system, it has an amazing cloud system, complex physics for the aircraft, all manner of modern video rendering techniques creating a wonderful image.

But you point out that the accuracy of the infrastructure is below what e.g. Apple maps has, and people’s worlds fall apart and defence mechanisms like it’s a family member kick in. GROW UP.
Yeah some people are lucky enough to get a detailed 3D version of their city in Apple map but how many are just looking at a boring fuzzy 2D map? Flight Sim is literally the whole planet in 3D.
This is my world… I’m just glad they didn’t make the shoreline after the ice lol
Mi3EO36.jpg
 

MilkyJoe

Member
The DLC for this game is comically expensive. I guess there is appeal if you are an absolute simulator fanatic and nuts about your home airport or a specific plane, but I guess its an easy no for everybody else!

Don’t waste 15 quid on a fighter jet. I believe there is a free top gun expansion coming soon for some faster flight shenanigans!

22 fucking pounds for a Spitfire, they can fuck right off!!
 

nemiroff

Member
Bing maps is being updated all the time. As Bing maps is updated then FS can be updated too.

Not only that, they are not only using satellite imagery, they are literally sending up airplanes to scan/take photos of areas they want to improve. I got this information last week from some source I can't remember, but that's how they do it (as do Google actually), and from what I understand (don't quote me..) Flight Simulator is one of the reasons they have upped the frequencies of these map update photo-shoot flights lately. Perhaps that's where some of the world updates stems from, IDK.
Traditionally Google has been the best at photogrammetry (f.ex. in Google maps my area has great photogrammetry, in MSFS there's NONE, only autogen :(((( ..), and some Google Earth cities where both have photogrammetry unfortunately it looks considerably better in Google than in MSFS/Bing, but let's hope Bing can somehow manage to surpass them soon. I guess Google has the advantage in being able to fuse their huge pile of data via satellite, airplane and street imagery.

Oh, did you know that you can import Google Maps scenery even photogrammetry into MSFS..? You can actually do it by yourself by using the built-in SDK. I haven't tried it yet, don't even know if I'll bother anytime soon, but the option is there.
 
Last edited:

FunkMiller

Member
So I must admit, have been intrigued by what’s been shown and have been YouTubing a few vids. But all too often almost a ‘bait and switch’ reality strikes….

Generic buildings everywhere, stadiums turned into Gulag style apartment blocks, etc….

Are people merrily visiting locales just accepting gross inaccuracies because they don’t know any better…..thoughts?



Oh my god, the Sydney clip was hilarious. I understand you can't get anything like 100% reproductions of locations, but to not even have the harbour bridge? :messenger_tears_of_joy:

I'm downloading the game now, and am looking forward to seeing more epically inaccurate places! Flying straight to Cairns. Expecting three buildings, four hundred creeks and one fat croc.
 
Last edited:

MilkyJoe

Member
So I must admit, have been intrigued by what’s been shown and have been YouTubing a few vids. But all too often almost a ‘bait and switch’ reality strikes….

Generic buildings everywhere, stadiums turned into Gulag style apartment blocks, etc….

Are people merrily visiting locales just accepting gross inaccuracies because they don’t know any better…..thoughts?



My house is a block of flats :messenger_weary:
 

nemiroff

Member
Oh my god, the Sydney clip was hilarious. I understand you can't get anything like 100% reproductions of locations, but to not even have the harbour bridge? :messenger_tears_of_joy:

I'm downloading the game now, and am looking forward to seeing more epically inaccurate places!

You can import the bridge from Google if you're missing it badly - Or buy the Sydney third party DLC - Or wait for a World Update.

You can see in the thumbnail below how it looks in ORBX's version:

 
Last edited:

nemiroff

Member
The DLC for this game is comically expensive. I guess there is appeal if you are an absolute simulator fanatic and nuts about your home airport or a specific plane, but I guess its an easy no for everybody else!

Yeah I guess.. But at the same time quality aircraft and airports in the marketplace are often intricate and big projects. A single study level DLC aircraft can in some instances be even more complex to make than an entire game, and take as much time to develop. The amount of customized code and aircraft, avionics and physics knowledge .. It takes people and money to make this stuff..

any tips for getting started in VR?

I fly VR, but your question is a bit too general, what do you want to know?
 
Last edited:

Hendrick's

If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
Had a lot of issues last night. Game was laggy and texture weren’t seeming to stream in. Think it’s all network related, but hope it was just an issue that will be resolved.
 
Last edited:

SirTerry-T

Member
You can import the bridge from Google if you're missing it badly - Or buy the Sydney third party DLC - Or wait for a World Update.

You can see in the thumbnail below how it looks in ORBX's version:


I suppose there's a chance all this added detail, geometry, textures etc will have an effect on frame rate too?
Basically both MS and the end user need to pick their battles wisely when adding all this extra data to the base game.
 
Top Bottom