Wow

"facw" (facw) 09/30/2019 at 13:25 • Filed to: Microsoft Flight Simulator, microsoft, flight simulator, Planelopnik, virtual planelopnik

1

8

I’ve complained before about how little graphical progress has been made, really since the release of Flight Simulator X 13 years ago . It’s looking like that will no longer be an issue when MS debuts their new Flight Simulator next year (though I might be shopping for a new video card).

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Article link: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

ttyymmnn > facw 09/30/2019 at 14:11

1

That top shot totally fooled me. 

facw > ttyymmnn 09/30/2019 at 14:14

1

The plane looks good, but also somehow a little wrong to me. But the scenery, clouds,  and lighting look astounding.

ttyymmnn > facw 09/30/2019 at 14:19

1

For a photo, it’s too sharp. Also, the lighting is just off somehow. And, there’s not enough prop blur, even for a fast prop. But, as I said, it fooled me at first glance. 

Aremmes > facw 09/30/2019 at 14:24

0

!!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > ttyymmnn 09/30/2019 at 16:15

0

Me, too. 

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > facw 09/30/2019 at 16:15

1

I love burly turboprop singles. Like the XLT Lariat pickup with the bigblock and an RV cam.

bhtooefr > facw 09/30/2019 at 21:19

1

...interesting that they’re actually using ye olde proven FSX code as a starting point for parts of it , too. Really  interesting that they’re talking about toggles to revert to FSX behavior - trying to think of why you’d want to do that, unless you need to support content built for FSX maybe?

(I mean, FSX feels clunky AF next to X-Plane 11, but part of that is just because it’s not been updated in ages.)

You can tell a Finn but you can't tell him much > facw 10/01/2019 at 16:14

1

It’s too clean. A real plane would have some staining around the exhaust, there would be paint chips and other assorted imperfections.