67 replies to this topic

[CaptainG37]

So far, this thread has covered Hawx 2, Crysis, FSX and Flight.  
Not bad for an x plane forum.

[Daube]

We're comparing the flight games/sims technologies and features, and Xplane is included in the discussions.
It's not off-topic.

162db, on Sep 13 2011, 09:02 PM, said:

So far from what I'm seeing, I have been disappointed with Flight compared to what they have done with XP-10. Given the fact that both have to render an entire planet, I'm wondering what excuse MS will come up with this time.

Compared to what they have done with XP10 ? What points are you comparing exactely ? We've seen amlost nothing about the XP10 world.So far it appears XP10 and Flight will have the same shadowing system, but we don't know yet if the lighting Flight will be as good as the lights in XP10. For the rest, I hope for XP10 that they get a better landclass system and a better way of drawing the mountains from a mesh.

[CaptainG37]

When you say better landclass, what exactly are you referring to?
Did you know that X Plane 9 has 74GB worth of terrain data?

[Daube]

Landclass is the type of terrain. From desert to cultivated fields, city, suburbs, village, forest, empty fields, rivers etc.... all the different "clothes" that you can use for terrain tiles. It's not about the shape of the terrain, which is defined by the mesh, it's about what kind of terrain it is, and how much variations exist for each type (to prevent repetitive textures - chess effect).

"Better Landclass" is in fact quite vague. I should have said better landclass system or better landclass definitions, because usually when we say that a terrain has a good landclass, we refer to how it uses the various terrain types. Here, I was trying to say that I hope XP10 will have a greater diversity of terrain types/variations, so that the generic covering of the terrain gets more pleasant to the eye.

It's linked to what I said earlier in this topic, the fact that only one of two textures were used for the whole terrain, which means very poor landclass diversity or definition (either they don't have enough terrain types to use, or they don't use correctly the various terrain types that are available).

Edited by Daube, 14 September 2011 - 05:48 AM.

[CaptainG37]

Daube, on Sep 14 2011, 08:47 PM, said:

Landclass is the type of terrain. From desert to cultivated fields, city, suburbs, village, forest, empty fields, rivers etc.... all the different "clothes" that you can use for terrain tiles. It's not about the shape of the terrain, which is defined by the mesh, it's about what kind of terrain it is, and how much variations exist for each type (to prevent repetitive textures - chess effect).

"Better Landclass" is in fact quite vague. I should have said better landclass system or better landclass definitions, because usually when we say that a terrain has a good landclass, we refer to how it uses the various terrain types. Here, I was trying to say that I hope XP10 will have a greater diversity of terrain types/variations, so that the generic covering of the terrain gets more pleasant to the eye.

It's linked to what I said earlier in this topic, the fact that only one of two textures were used for the whole terrain, which means very poor landclass diversity or definition (either they don't have enough terrain types to use, or they don't use correctly the various terrain types that are available).

In that case, all areas are covered, even in X Plane 9.  I can only imagine that in x plane 10, landclass diversity will be better detailed with more accurate autogen (as has already been seen).

[162db]

Daube, on Sep 14 2011, 02:47 AM, said:

Landclass is the type of terrain. From desert to cultivated fields, city, suburbs, village, forest, empty fields, rivers etc.... all the different "clothes" that you can use for terrain tiles. It's not about the shape of the terrain, which is defined by the mesh, it's about what kind of terrain it is, and how much variations exist for each type (to prevent repetitive textures - chess effect).

"Better Landclass" is in fact quite vague. I should have said better landclass system or better landclass definitions, because usually when we say that a terrain has a good landclass, we refer to how it uses the various terrain types. Here, I was trying to say that I hope XP10 will have a greater diversity of terrain types/variations, so that the generic covering of the terrain gets more pleasant to the eye.

It's linked to what I said earlier in this topic, the fact that only one of two textures were used for the whole terrain, which means very poor landclass diversity or definition (either they don't have enough terrain types to use, or they don't use correctly the various terrain types that are available).

I take it you haven't been following the XP blog? You say you have seen almost nothing about the XP world yet you can say you hope there's better landclass? I don't understand how you already know what all the different landclasses they are using if you haven't seen much of the XP world. Anyway, just look at the XP blog. Look at the detail and features that have gone into airports. Look at how they are doing actual roads with encasements. There is plenty to look at in the blog. There is even a video out there somewhere that shows the effect of global illumination. From what I've seen from XP-10 so far, Flight is going to need a miracle IMO.

[Daube]

Yes I've been to the blog, and I'm well aware of the work that is being done in building the cities coverage (with a smart structure) etc...

[alpilotx]

About Landclass: yes, there will be quite some changes from XP9 to XP10.

• First: the used landclass data has completely changed. Depending on the region, it is either 100m res (USA/Europe), or 300m res data (from quite some different sources, and the resolution depends on what was available). XP9 and before used 1km res raw data.
  
• Second: the rule system and code that transforms the data (and there are other raw data sources, like climate, that are improved) int scenery has received a major overhaul too.
  
• Third: with XP10 there are quite a few new technologies introduced (mostly via shaders) in the render engine (I think Ben has written or hinted about some of them in his Blog), which will lead to even more "interesting" texturing.

So indeed, you should see quite some differences when comparing the same place in XP9 to XP10.

Edited by alpilotx, 16 September 2011 - 08:12 AM.