Outerra kicks FSX to the kerb - again...

[IslandBoy77]

I know what you're all gonna say - Outerra is at least 1 year away, maybe 2, maybe 3. And that is absolutely true. But take a look at this vid (I downloaded it using the Keep Tube add-on via Firefox in hi def) and see why I keep waiting for the next sim and find FSX so poxy & clunky...

http://www.outerra.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=183

Bear in mind that this is not even Alpha yet in it's lifecycle. If we could have that in FSX NOW, wouldn't we be happy campers? Hell, yes! So imagine what this will look like once it's polished up & released! Note that the ship is just a "placed" object: no physics or detailed interaction at all at this point.

[Lapun]

QUOTE (IslandBoy77 @ Dec 10 2010, 06:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know what you're all gonna say - Outerra is at least 1 year away, maybe 2, maybe 3. And that is absolutely true. But take a look at this vid (I downloaded it using the Keep Tube add-on via Firefox in hi def) and see why I keep waiting for the next sim and find FSX so poxy & clunky...

http://www.outerra.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=183

Bear in mind that this is not even Alpha yet in it's lifecycle. If we could have that in FSX NOW, wouldn't we be happy campers? Hell, yes! So imagine what this will look like once it's polished up & released! Note that the ship is just a "placed" object: no physics or detailed interaction at all at this point.

Thanks for the post IslandBoy77. Well, maybe I missed something, but to my eye my FSX with orbx scenery looks streets better than the outerra clip, and is at least as smooth. But then I use nVidia cards.

Cheers, Bill

[deaneb]

Well FSX is over 4 years old now and if Outerra was released in two years time that would make it 6 years apart. In the historical scheme of things thats about two generations of PC's and FS releases. so I fail to see how this makes any comparison with FSX except that we all know you don't like FSX!

[husker]

FSX + REX + some good scenary + ENBSeries looks a whole lot better than that...

[IslandBoy77]

QUOTE (deaneb @ Dec 23 2010, 09:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well FSX is over 4 years old now and if Outerra was released in two years time that would make it 6 years apart. In the historical scheme of things thats about two generations of PC's and FS releases. so I fail to see how this makes any comparison with FSX except that we all know you don't like FSX!

Yes, you're right, I don't like FSX - the point that you and everyone else keeps missing is that rather than ploughing massive amounts of dead-dosh into add-ons for a poorly-written obsolete bloat-fest like FSX, it is wise to have our eyes open to what's on the way. My point - that you clearly miss - is that even in Alpha stage, before it even close to being finished, the Outerra engine is massively ahead of FSX. This is a good thing, and should engender happiness and a sense of expectation, not "circling the wagons" and building "fortified positions" (something that many simmers here on NZFF have an extremely bad habit of doing). Those who tie themselves to obsolete, poorly-written software are welcome to do so - the rest get ready to move on...

QUOTE (husker @ Dec 23 2010, 09:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

FSX + REX + some good scenary + ENBSeries looks a whole lot better than that...

Ah yes - PLUS this and PLUS that for poor old FSX. Have a good look at Outerra in hi-def: mathematically-generated terrain that can be run on modest hardware, atmospherics that look real (without add-ons, BTW) - and in Alpha stage, no less. The point you and others keep missing is that the next gen of engines don't NEED a stack of expensive add-ons to look good (although there will be add-ons, they will actually BE add-ons, not "replace-ons" like with FSX).

QUOTE (Lapun @ Dec 23 2010, 08:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for the post IslandBoy77. Well, maybe I missed something, but to my eye my FSX with orbx scenery looks streets better than the outerra clip, and is at least as smooth. But then I use nVidia cards.

Cheers, Bill

Hey Bill. I use FSX and some add-ons myself. This post is to let people know where things are going outside of the blinkered world of FSX / FS9 - I've seen the Orbx scenery: it's certainly good by FSX standards, but as soon as you get closer than a couple of hundred feet, it looks JPEG-awful. Outerra doesn't use that type of terrain generation. If one looks at where Outerra is now, and then extrapolate forward, one can catch a glimpse of a finished product that is actually worthy of the label "Real-World Flight Simulator".

[toprob]

At the risk of this getting a bit 'flamey'...
There are a couple of thing which are obvious to me watching the Outerra videos -- first, it did strike me that FSX does a very, very good job of representing the world, with its landclass system, something which Outerra has not yet even begun to deal with. (I think I've only seen one type of tree, for instance...)

The second thing is just how beautiful the atmospheric effects are compared to FSX -- this is the one area where FSX really falls short, it uses very simple techniques to render atmospherics and lighting, I suspect that even with all the addons in the world it'll never be able to truly represent atmospheric filtering and real lighting. And that's a major issue for me -- whoever cracks that first gets my vote.

[dbcunnz]

QUOTE (IslandBoy77 @ Dec 23 2010, 09:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, you're right, I don't like FSX -

Well I agree with Dean but will go a little bit further to say if you don't like FSX you can always uninstall it and go play other PC games if you can find something that interests you more than adding well made NZ scenery and aircraft to FSX and doing an armchair tour of our great country.

Doug

[deaneb]

QUOTE (IslandBoy77 @ Dec 23 2010, 09:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Those who tie themselves to obsolete, poorly-written software are welcome to do so - the rest get ready to move on...

I'm more than ready to move on to whatever comes next. But for now FSX is all we have, so its less a matter of being tied to something obsolete, than the fact there is presently no other viable option for the majority of flightsim users.

[toprob]

QUOTE (deaneb @ Dec 23 2010, 10:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But for now FSX is all we have, so its less a matter of being tied to something obsolete, than the fact there is presently no other viable option for the majority of flightsim users.

And more than that, I still think that FSX is the most brilliant flightsim I've ever used, and it continues to astound me almost daily. That's not to say that I don't think it has faults -- it has plenty of them, in that way it reminds me of me... fabulous, but deeply flawed!

[deaneb]

QUOTE (toprob @ Dec 23 2010, 10:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

fabulous, but deeply flawed!

LOL - a good description for most of us !!

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE (IslandBoy77 @ Dec 23 2010, 09:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, you're right, I don't like FSX - the point that you and everyone else keeps missing is that rather than ploughing massive amounts of dead-dosh into add-ons for a poorly-written obsolete bloat-fest like FSX, it is wise to have our eyes open to what's on the way. My point - that you clearly miss - is that even in Alpha stage, before it even close to being finished, the Outerra engine is massively ahead of FSX.

Hold on - did you LOOK at those videos? They're not running "in engine" - thats clear...the best you could say is that they are running in the equivalent of FSX's "slew" mode. The first one is simply a programmed camera fly-by. Thats indicative of the lack of physics in the engine perhaps, but at the end of the day, with simulation software, thats actually where a large proportion of the processing power goes to, much more so than in, say, an FPS.

QUOTE

This is a good thing, and should engender happiness and a sense of expectation, not "circling the wagons" and building "fortified positions" (something that many simmers here on NZFF have an extremely bad habit of doing). Those who tie themselves to obsolete, poorly-written software are welcome to do so - the rest get ready to move on...[/quote]

Wow - you sure got the knives out there buddy... let me ask you this: When was the last time YOU wrote a piece of software of ANY sort, let alone a piece of software so multi-faceted, so complex, that it took literally years to bring it together? Years that spanned perhaps 3 generations of video card technology, and at least two versions of the Windows OS it was supposed to run on? Maybe once you've written a top class, well written piece of simulation software yourself, you can start throwing stones.

<shrug> Just my 2c worth

[Ian Warren]

Its all the FSX for me , the scenery, i d,out if anything will kick X for quite a few many years

[coltis]

just checked out the video looks a lot like a swiss cheese add , but will support any developers who will get us away from a bug ridden fsx . if it wasnt for all the skilled thirdparty developers this sim would have crashed and burned some time ago.

[IslandBoy77]

QUOTE (markll @ Dec 23 2010, 10:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hold on - did you LOOK at those videos? They're not running "in engine" - thats clear...the best you could say is that they are running in the equivalent of FSX's "slew" mode. The first one is simply a programmed camera fly-by. Thats indicative of the lack of physics in the engine perhaps, but at the end of the day, with simulation software, thats actually where a large proportion of the processing power goes to, much more so than in, say, an FPS.



Wow - you sure got the knives out there buddy... let me ask you this: When was the last time YOU wrote a piece of software of ANY sort, let alone a piece of software so multi-faceted, so complex, that it took literally years to bring it together? Years that spanned perhaps 3 generations of video card technology, and at least two versions of the Windows OS it was supposed to run on? Maybe once you've written a top class, well written piece of simulation software yourself, you can start throwing stones.

<shrug> Just my 2c worth

I might ask the same of you - did YOU look at the videos? I most certainly did - and they are excellent. It doesn't matter if they are in "slew" mode - the point that you and many others are completely missing is to LOOK at where Outerra is NOW. And be excited, rather than bringing out YOUR knives of "no dissenting opinions allowed here mate". So get off my case and put YOUR knives away: I'm allowed to call FSX what it is - a poorly-written, buggy piece of bloatware, and I'm allowed to point out that the emperor has no clothes and lots of people here can't see it and won't admit to it. You know, it's not heresy to admit that FSX isn't a great sim... And I get to throw as many stones as I like at people like MS who rush projects like FSX out the door, unfinished with a half-baked preview version of DX10 in it, just to meet the holiday selling season.

QUOTE (dbcunnz @ Dec 23 2010, 10:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well I agree with Dean but will go a little bit further to say if you don't like FSX you can always uninstall it and go play other PC games if you can find something that interests you more than adding well made NZ scenery and aircraft to FSX and doing an armchair tour of our great country.

Doug

So, Doug, you're saying that no mentioning of how bad FSX is allowed? That to say anything against FSX is heresy? I still use FSX because I have to - there is no viable alternative. Why is it that you and others are so defensive of FSX? It is provably a badly-written bloated sim (4 years later and we still need a $5k PC to run it at full noise in 1920 x 1080? Give me a break!), and yet you lot bring out the tar and oil when I call it such. What's up with that? It's ok to enjoy one's sim, it's quite another to defend it to the death... You don't see me telling people here to stop using FSX, do you?

[connor]

I'll buy it, but first I'll just nip down to NASA and borrow one of there Super-Computer's to run it .

[dart15]

People, people...its Christmas... a time supposedly of peace and goodwill. Tolerence and respect for diverging - and sometimes strongly held - views is what makes for a great (and interesting) forum.


Lets just be grateful for what we have ... and look forward to what is to come .


Merry Christmas to every member and I for one look forward to continueing to learning more about our common interest from ALL the great people here...

Stay safe everyone.


"All out"

Dart

[toprob]

QUOTE (IslandBoy77 @ Dec 24 2010, 08:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So, Doug, you're saying that no mentioning of how bad FSX is allowed? That to say anything against FSX is heresy? I still use FSX because I have to - there is no viable alternative. Why is it that you and others are so defensive of FSX? It is provably a badly-written bloated sim (4 years later and we still need a $5k PC to run it at full noise in 1920 x 1080? Give me a break!), and yet you lot bring out the tar and oil when I call it such. What's up with that? It's ok to enjoy one's sim, it's quite another to defend it to the death... You don't see me telling people here to stop using FSX, do you?

Well, actually this depends on how you say these things. Yes, you can say anything you like against FSX (subject to the rules -- you have read the rules, haven't you?) , but you need to always bear in mind that not everyone is the same. There is a flip side to everything, and another way of looking at everything. One person says 'I still use FSX because I have to - there is no viable alternative' and another might say 'FSX is the only alternative, which makes it the best.' Two very different ways of saying the same thing.

You may have all the proof you need that FSX is badly written, but I have just as much proof that it is brilliant. People are only going to defend it to the death if they think that someone is beating it to death. The implication I get is that somehow I am deranged or brain-washed because I refuse to see the truth. However I'm going to happily continue thinking my way, and you are going to happily continue thinking your way. Which is pretty cool.

The extra bits -- the bits which get people inflamed -- generally all breach the forum rules, which is the way its meant to be. You can't make people think your way, but you can regulate them into getting on together... Did you know we had a specific rule which states that you cannot denigrate Microsoft?

[creator2003]

Lol i hate that rule ,Im very open to new games /simulators and will go on to the next popular version whatever suits my needs first (primo go with the flow) ,i like the look of Outerra due to the different vehicle physic , one day they will load like other games,this reminds me of a game ARMA2 though thats just a Island scenery block to display not the whole world like FSX or Outerra, space looks cool i havent looked up there much in FSX but im sure there is lots of free real-state just waiting for eyecandy ,anyone made the moon yet to land on in FSX ?

[toprob]

QUOTE (creator2003 @ Dec 24 2010, 12:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

,anyone made the moon yet to land on in FSX ?

No, we're still stuck with the FS2004 version...

[AndrewJamez]

Am I right in thinking that the Outerra development team will not be the final publisher in that they are developing the sim engine for would be flight/train/road/space/whatever developers to buy rights to. Hell, Boeing could come along and snap it up and we would never see it again. Merry Xmas everyone.