Traffic and other moving objects

  • Hi All,


    Question for the devs really... Do you have any idea if and when we are going to see other traffic and moving objects in FS2?


    Following on from that, one of the things that I like about FS2, as a VFR simmer is the quality of scenery and the performance. I spent many years tweaking FSX and P3D trying to get that one extra frame over cities - I remember FSX peaking at 3.1 FPS over London at one time....


    Assuming IPACS does intend to develop the same functionality as those currently more 'serious' sims, can we expect framerates to drop correspondingly? Or does the FS2 engine have some design features which will maintain frame rates even with the extra processing required by traffic, ATC, real world weather etc etc?

  • We are always very mindful of performance so whatever we do it will be as optimized as we can make it.

    IPACS Development Team Member

    I'm just a cook, I don't own the restaurant.
    On behalf of Torsten, Marc, and the rest of the IPACS team, we would all like to thank you for your continued support.


    Regards,


    Jeff

  • Thanks very much for your response Jeff.


    Do you have any idea if and when we are going to see other traffic and moving objects in FS2?


    I'm asking this question particularly because over the last few weeks, I haven't seen much discussed other than enhancements to aircraft. I know that many users will welcome this and that it's impossible to please all the people all the time with real world flight sims.


    Traffic, ATC and real world weather would seem to be key areas for a VFR flying experience, which FS2 does not deliver on at all, and I haven't seen these discussed by the development team in quite a while. (if I have missed some discussion please let me know)

  • 1.


    I recommend that you try aerofly fs2 in VR and you will realize that this sim is the best by far because it has the best scenarios and is totally smooth in movements even in dense areas like Miami or Amsterdam. Of course it would improve in everything that is requested IA traffic, ATC ,water 3d and real world weather but that It would have an impact on the fps. Maybe when the technology allows it (future graphic cards) we will surely see it in AFS2.

  • Assuming IPACS does intend to develop the same functionality as those currently more 'serious' sims, can we expect framerates to drop correspondingly? Or does the FS2 engine have some design features which will maintain frame rates even with the extra processing required by traffic, ATC, real world weather etc etc?

    Remember that these features are CPU intensive, not GPU intensive, maybe excluding weather.


    Performance problems with these features in other sims is largely down to lack of multi-threading and concurrency.

    In terms of GPU resources, flight sims aren't as taxing as AAA game titles. CPU is often the bottleneck that pushed down frame rates.


    Without 15 years of legacy cruft in the codebase I'm hopeful IPACS will do a great job at keeping performance where it needs to be at 90fps+

  • Hi Rivajes,


    I've been using FS2 with the Oculus Rift for several months. The sim does indeed perform very well and looks good but that doesn't make it the best by any means.


    If you took traffic, weather, 3d water and ATC out of FSX and P3D I'm sure they would look very good and run very smoothly. Yes FS2 runs very well, but it's not doing very much, is it? Thats really why I'm asking the question.


    I'm keen to know if IPACS intends to make this product a complete simulator, or keep it as a 'light' simulation product. One particular area which works against all the plus points of FS2 right now is the empty airports with no other aviation activity except static aircraft, hence my original question about traffic.

  • That's the point here. So far AFS2 is lacking too much depth in aircraft development, apart from the lack of AI Traffic, ATC, real Weather implementation. So far AFS2 it's a very good scenery simulator, but to be a real sim, it's well behind the other two.

    Just my opinion and not trying to bring and endless discussion and to offend anyone.

    Cheers, Ed

    Windows 7 Ultimate x64 | i7-5820k | 32GB RAM | 3xSSD Samsung 1TB | MSI GTX 1080Ti Gaming X 11GB | LG 29UC97C UW Curved | Oculus Rift VR | TM FCS HOTAS // Gaming Laptop ASUS ROG Strix Scar II GL704GW | Windows 10 Home | i7-8750H | 32GB RAM | 2TB SSD + 2TB HDD | Nvidia RTX 2070 | TM FCS HOTAS

  • Hi Nickhod,


    Yes I hope you are right about the performance with better GPU utilisation and multi threafing. However, do we know if IPACS is even planning traffic, RW weather etc?

    but to be a real sim, it's well behind the other two.

    Just my opinion and not trying to bring and endless discussion and to offend anyone.

    Cheers, Ed

    Hi Ed,


    I agree entirely. Just to be clear, I'm not trying to be contentious, and if IPACS were to say it will remain a scenery sim with nione of the bells and whistles of the old established sims I would probably still prefer flying it.


    I was really just trying to understand what IPACS plan is for this sim and get a handle on how other enhancements would impact it.

  • I was really just trying to understand what IPACS plan is for this sim and get a handle on how other enhancements would impact it.

    From what I recall of previous posts by Admin here, IPACS intention is to add all the features that you mention.


    I've never read anything that makes me think that they want to make it as a "lite" flight sim for casual use.


    What brought me to Aerofly was that, as an industrial simulation software engineer myself, i got sick of reading posts about how we can't expect too high performance from AFS's main competitor because of flight dynamics, ATC, etc. How 30fps is great with my £2ks worth of PC kit. People buying £600 CPUs to get up to 45 fps yet only one thread being used.


    The physical flight model (including weather) will be the most computationally expensive thing. ATC, other air traffic, other ground traffic, is not hugely taxing if it's properly optimised and threaded.

  • Hi Majick


    I said the best in virtual reallity.Thats what I think This doesnt mean other people agree with me .About your question I think IPACs are working in implementation of the ATC for the future.

  • Flight simulator is about flight, and flying aircraft in AFS2 cannot be compared with other sims. AFS2 is leaps and bounds ahead of its competitors.

    Now, as for the eye candy, that takes time to build. We all need a little patience and let the developers do their thing.

    I suggest flying AFS2 in VR, it's an amazing experience.

    Windows 10 64bit | iCore7-7770K| ASUS STRIX Z270E |KHX2400C15D4 - 32GB | Gigabyte Ge-Force GTX 1080Ti| SSD Intel 520 Series | 40" Philips BDM4065UC/75 4K - Oculus Rift

  • Flight simulator is about flight, and flying aircraft in AFS2 cannot be compared with other sims. AFS2 is leaps and bounds ahead of its competitors.

    Now, as for the eye candy, that takes time to build. We all need a little patience and let the developers do their thing.

    I suggest flying AFS2 in VR, it's an amazing experience.

    and to really blow you away, try flying AFS2 in VR with the new Orbx Palm Springs scenery.


    Regards,

    Ray

    When Pigs Fly. A steely-eyed Sierra Hotel record setting F-15E Strike Eagle simulator pilot. 8o

    ready for some voices in the sky? now available . . . Aerofly FS2 RC ATC https://afs2rcatc.com/


  • Yes FS2 runs very well, but it's not doing very much, is it?

    That gave me a laugh this morning! I can hear the grinding of teeth in the IPACS developers' mouths from all the way over here in New Zealand! I'm pretty sure FS2 is actually doing "quite a lot", simulating airflow and complex aircraft systems, all while chucking around the most densely cultivated scenery... and, if you're in VR, doing it all twice!


    All that being said, I, like everyone else, am keen to see it do even more. Realism is the goal and short of pretending you're flying around just after a zombie apocalypse, the world is a little quiet at the moment and the weather is somewhat static. I suppose at least that's one positive - it might be the end of the world, but I've still got my Cessna, a full tank of AVGAS and the sun is shining! 8)

  • That gave me a laugh this morning! I can hear the grinding of teeth in the IPACS developers' mouths from all the way over here in New Zealand!

    Haha yes :) well it was meant tongue in cheek to an extent. I suppose I should have said not doing very much compared to it's competitors (to the detriment of their performance)

  • Flight simulator is about flight, and flying aircraft in AFS2 cannot be compared with other sims. AFS2 is leaps and bounds ahead of its competitors.

    Now, as for the eye candy, that takes time to build. We all need a little patience and let the developers do their thing.

    I suggest flying AFS2 in VR, it's an amazing experience.

    Why can't we compare it to other simulators?


    Although I like AFS2 very much I would question that it is leaps and bounds ahead of others when it lacks so many features that they have.


    I think AFS2 already has it's eye candy. The features we would like added will give it depth.


    I don't think it is impatient to ask what the roadmap is, especially if the last communication was in April.


    Like the rest of the community I expect, I've bought every scenery add-on so far for AFS2. I'm keen to get some indication of whether my investment will give long term benefit or just be a short blast sightseeing the scenery and wondering if indeed there has been a zombie apocalypse :)

  • I'm only going to say this once more since I've said it many times before already. Enjoy Aerofly for what it is now. Because if you do then once we release updates your experience it will only get better from here. You just need to be patient while we work, and make no mistake we are all working hard every day.


    We all feel here that many just don't know what goes into programming, even a very small feature that most users take for granted takes a long time. The add into this the optimization aspects of that feature, testing, and integration. Also since what we are doing also is built from the ground up it takes even longer.


    This is why we don't like comparing us with other flight simulators out there that had many years head start and have triple the development team.


    And yes, i'm working on road traffic separately but it will be some time before you see this feature. There are many obstacles involved with this feature.

    IPACS Development Team Member

    I'm just a cook, I don't own the restaurant.
    On behalf of Torsten, Marc, and the rest of the IPACS team, we would all like to thank you for your continued support.


    Regards,


    Jeff