Flight Simulator 2022: Ultra Realism on RTX 3090 with $100 Graphics Mods [video]
youtube.com
youtube.com
V1-Simulations is a real airline Captain who flies Airbus : https://www.youtube.com/user/acdelta57
flightdeck2sim is also a real airline captain who flies BOEING : https://www.youtube.com/c/flightdeck2sim
Both are fun to watch and both use as much real life procedures as is possible in a desktop simulator. I've learned a LOT from watching their livestreams and tutorial VODs.
The joint placements are wrong , with shoulder joints placed too low and too far out. Weighting is also badly applied with vertices on the opposite side being affected. A little bit of candy wrapping on forearms too.
The rest of the content is at a much higher quality, but they’re doing a disservice to themselves by showing those characters.
The one annoyance I have with Xbox Cloud is that fact that it won't pass through any controller that's not a standard one. Works with third party controllers just fine, but not a friggin' joystick, which has the exact same inputs, just mapped differently. I hate arbitrary limitations.
It's just a game... and the console controllers have analog sticks and throttles, along with gyros and a dpad that could double as a hat switch. They're fine for casual sims and some prefer them :)
Certainly a lot more couch friendly than a hotas on your lap
Is that true? The German page at least says PS controllers and others are also supported.
One can only wonder how it will be in the next decades.
Hard to NOT at least consider we are living in a simulation too ;).
And playable on an iPhone as well !
Thanks for sharing.
The website is fast because most of the code is written in plain C and compiled to WebAssembly. No libs or frameworks are involved, not even libc. The memory allocation code is three lines in total. The emulator runs also outside of the browser with libSDL.
The universe can well be a computation, but “simulation” is a whole another thing.
Why is also not really a requirement either; we already know that “for its own sake” and “because I could” has been sufficient justification for many of our concoctions. There could be a real reason… but it doesn’t really matter if there is or isn’t. Let’s say to compute the ultimate question to the universe.
And the Who, ultimately, exists outside of our universe, and thus presumably cannot be identified (just as your sims character does not know of you… he can only detect your impact on his world — if you impact it).
The main issue with the simulation argument is that it doesn’t matter if it were true; if the simulation is done correctly, it’s indistinguishable from not-simulation — and you presumably only exist within the simulation so there’s no matrix-style breakout. There’s nothing to do with this information
Msfs2020 was a clean room rewrite though so there aren't any there.
I can see my house complete with car in the driveway. I've navigated IRL on a discovery flight based on knowledge from the sim. My muscle memory messed me up a bit when flying IRL on a discovery flight due to how used I am to all my Virpil Mongoose throttle bindings since I fly in VR, but I still knew where just about everything was in the da40 cockpit and how it worked.
I was not prepared for the importance of physical sensations, or frankly the sensory overload due to the higher frame rates, "graphics", and physical sensations or flying IRL and it stuck with me the entire night.
At the risk of bad habits or missing important details or legal stuff, I'm now reasonably comfortable copying an ifr clearance on vatsim, basic ATC phraseology, airspace restrictions, reading various charts, and flying a pattern.
If any modders are reading this, I'd pay good money for a well done version of KSQL and KPAO. I'm frankly shocked nobody has done that yet even though the models exist from xplane.
I did however get the feeling when FS2020 came out that the line between map and territory is getting a lot fuzzier.
Like here's Miracle on the Hudson.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9givHxjTJ0
And this is the ultra realistic preflight to the cargo mission Hong Kong.
At the risk of sounding flippant though, the graphics are still not great. Now, I absolutely understand how computationally demanding flight simulators are, but I can't help but feel that Microsoft oversold the graphics capability of FSX. As someone noted in the thread, for me, this means there's still some suspension of belief required.
I just cannot wait until we have a flight simulator that has graphics comparable to non-simulator games. I think that might actually compel me to spend the $10k (or however much you need for the compute power and peripherals) and invest the time in such simulator. Maybe when I'm retired, I will get to experience the dream of flying planes in what feels like almost another reality.
I also liked the haze/heat waves from the engine exhaust, but I think it actually looks more blurry in real life.
The lighting on the interior views was unrealistic, but I think that’s a conscious decision to make the controls legible?
Many textures shown here were bit low-res so that pixelation/blurriness is visible in closeups, in cockpit, plane exterior, and ground. Small thing but the tires looked very bad, sticking out like sore thumb. In cockpit you can also see (because the low-res textures) how some of the fasteners are just textures and not geometry, making them look bit off.
> The lighting on the interior views was unrealistic, but I think that’s a conscious decision to make the controls legible?
Maybe, but on the other hand DCS has fully shaded cockpits and I haven't heard much complaints about legibility there.
The problem is that it's a global simulator: this is a major part of its appeal and marketing. If you only ever plan to fly airliners between handcrafted payware cities, it will look pretty great. As soon as you start flying VFR outside those points, the generated terrain shows its limits. I don't fly it often, but when last I flew:
* The generator couldn't handle windmills. You would see them as flat, projected images on the landscape with no 3d asset.
* It can't handle boats. Again, they're rendered as flat images on the water. Marinas in particular look bad, because they fade out as they get away from shore.
* It can't handle washes. You'll fly over the desert and see a glossy sheen of reflective water where the sim thinks there should be a waterway, but it's quite obvious that no water was present when photos were taken.
* It can't handle meandering streams. You'll see that same glossy sheen cutting a straight line over the terrain, while the photographed stream meanders back and forth.
* It can't handle bridges: you'll see cars drive right through the bridge and along the terrain underneath it.
By contrast though, I mostly fly VFR in the Bay Area in the sim. I can see my house, complete with our car in the driveway (although I'm annoyed it has older imagery from before landscaping).
When I went on a discovery flight IRL, I was stunned by how easily I could navigate from the air and locate my home. It was eerily familiar. Same when I went on a flight in Kauai. I was able to plan out photos in advance. I was equally stunned with how familiar the airport felt.
This has all aided visual familiarity with the traffic patterns at these places, especially KSQL where you have to watch out for the bravo.
Given recent improvements and where it's heading,I have nothing but high hopes and faith it will improve. Hell, we have an addon that adds more bird traffic. My only gripe is how expensive or subscription based some addons are that shouldn't be.
Of course, that was not on an RTX 3090.
[1] https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/learn/find-data/near-real-tim...
BTW, I'm pleasantly surprised that this game hasn't been canceled at some point after the 9/11.
As for actual PC hardware; any current-gen GPU you can get your hands on will do, the faster the better. Preferably with an Intel processor for the highest performance possible.
i.e. Instead of sticking them straight into a proper simulator, you loan them 15k worth of consumer tech for home. Not as a replacement, but as intermediate step
It's a great question though to wonder whether it wouldn't be cheaper for companies to build the simulators on top of something like FSX. Create something like the upstream training where you can train, until you get to the "production" simulator from the manufacturer, where you simply prove you have the required knowledge as a pilot.
1. Simulators which have a 1:1 copy of the cockpit and use the https://www.prepar3d.com/ software from Lockheed Martin (based on a very old MS Flight Simulator software, I think originally 2006). These simulators however are not a perfect simulation of the physics and are only used to practice communication between tower and pilot and between pilot and co-pilot. Hours spent in this simulation do not count as flight hours. A simulator like that costs around 250.000 euros and can be tried out by everybody in Berlin for example:
https://www.mydays.de/geschenkidee/airbus-320-berlin
2. A simulator also with a 1:1 copy of the cockpit with very basic graphics, but very accurate simulated physics model. These kind of simulator moves and behaved almost exactly like the real plane would do. Such a simulator costs, if I remember correctly, about 15 million euros. Hours spent in this simulator count as flight hours during pilot training – at least in Germany.
https://simulators.redbirdflight.com/products/topic/simulato...
Set visibility to 1/2 statute mile, ceiling at 300ft and practice full approaches to your heart's content. I recommend shutting off the ATC that ships with MSFS and using VATSIM or one of the other 3rd party human ATC systems available. Use Airnav.com for free US charts.
At $200/flight hour, spending $1000-2000 on a high end PC, rudder pedals and decent joystick and throttle will save students money. MSFS doesn't replace training, but helps in handling the mental load of instrument flight.
But. For instrument training, multi tasking, navigation and radio, fly simulators give you the real thing, it's a really nice tool for that. You can have replica of the whole instruments with very realistic rendering and this helps a lot. For radio, there are a lot of pro air nav controllers that hang around VATSIM and you can have the real thing from your PC.
U got iRacing for racing drivers.