+ Responder Tema
Resultados 1 al 10 de 61
Tema: X-plane 10
- 19/03/2011, 22:21 #1
Hola a todos
Si no he entendido mal no habra XP-10 hasta final de año
Habrá que esperar entonces....
ps: X-Plane 10 is much, much, much slower in coming along than I planned.. but it is much, much better as well. It is slow because I have raised the bar ridiculously high for this release, simply because I CAN. SO, I am keeping v9 totally bug-free while v10 is developed, which I am hoping to have ready by the end of this year.
Es del foro de X-plane
Última edición por Juanra100; 19/03/2011 a las 22:23
- 19/03/2011, 22:43 #2
- 20/03/2011, 02:20 #3
Hacer una versión por hacerla sería... pan para hoy hambre para mañana. El cambio/evolución debe ser mas que significativo... no tipo FS9--->FSX que todos sabemos que casi no sirvió para nada.
- 20/03/2011, 08:39 #4
- 05 sep, 08
Pues parece que sí; nuevas posibilidades con respecto al proyecto original hacen que el tema se alargue.
De todos modos, sigo pensando que ya la versión 9 es muy digna de estar en el ordenador, y con ella sigo.
Ayer mismo, se anunció en el foro español la disponibilidad, a finales de año, de un A321 para ambas versiones. No hay muchos detalles (sólo unas capturas), pero el tema promete.
Saludos.Para que triunfe el mal, sólo es necesario que los buenos no hagan nada (Edmund Burke)
- 20/03/2011, 12:30 #5
- 30 jun, 07
- Roquetas de Mar (LEAM)
- 20/03/2011, 12:35 #6
- 20/03/2011, 17:12 #7
Además, tengamos en cuenta que Austin y todo su equipo desarrollan en ordenadores Mac, y Apple está este año toda convulsionada. Este va a ser un año complejo para desarrolladores bajo MAC OS, porque es un año lleno de incógnitas.
Ya tenemos los MBP con nuevo hardware, ya tenemos los nuevos iPad con nuevo hardware, sabemos que el Thunderbolt no puede quedar huérfano y que por lo tanto es casi obligado que debe ser incorporado en los equipos de gama alta de Apple (iMac / Mac Pro) y también en el Mini, y en el server por supuesto...
Sabemos que sobre mediados de año tendremos el MAC OS 10.7 "Lion"... y todo eso complica el panorama a la hora de lanzar nuevas aplicaciones nativas de Mac... que luego habrá que corresponder en las respectivas versiones de Windows y Linux... es un trabajo muy duro, y este año va a ser complicado para estos chicos.
Paciencia... es el don de los dioses... (o al menos eso dicen).
"Nadie está obligado a leer. Si no te interesa, no pierdas el tiempo.
Y si lees... pues allá tú, luego no digas que no te avisé."
Si no te gusta lo que escribo o cómo lo escribo:
(a) Acéptame, tal como soy. - (b) Añádeme a tu lista de ignorados, tal como soy.
Cualquiera de esas dos formas harán que deje de molestarte mi presencia.
- 20/03/2011, 17:32 #8
Para que triunfe el mal, sólo es necesario que los buenos no hagan nada (Edmund Burke)
- 05 sep, 08
- 20/03/2011, 21:39 #9
- 05/04/2011, 01:28 #10
- 16 ago, 08
Austin habla de su nueva criatura.
Es sacado de avsim, AVSIM Online - Flight Simulation's Number 1 Site!
AVSIM was offered the oportunity to submit questions to the development team about the upcoming release of X-Plane 10. Here is what they had to say about this highly anticipated release.
1. What's the status of the real "simulated" X-Plane "world". Is it more realistic than before? In other words is the X-Plane world reflecting the real world with all its ins and outs?
In a sentence, X-Plane 10 will have a plausible, scalable, dynamic world. Enter the plausible world for X-Plane 10. We will build every city in X-Plane from the first blades of grass upwards.
Here is how it works: We will start off with grass or field textures for the entire world, including the cities, and then build up from that. We will take each individual parking lot and place it on top of the grass. We will place each building on the parking lot, in 3-D. At no point will the painting of the roof of a building appear on the ground. This will never happen. Every building will be a real 3-D building, planted by an algorithm in a location that is at least physically possible.
Do we know where every building on earth is? Of course not. But, we do have incredibly detailed road databases, and we have the algorithms to place parking lots, sidewalks, buildings, and etc all alongside these countless roads. This means that our artificially-intelligent city-planning algorithm will build plausible cities. Cities where you would fly over them at 5 miles per hour, 10 feet above the ground, in a helicopter, and never see anything that looks 'impossible'.
Everything will be completely 3-D. Every city built from the first blade of grass. There will be no discoloration, blurriness, satellite mis-alignment or 2-D Escher-illusions… all of the cities will be completely plausible. If you turn down your rendering options to zero, then New York will be empty green fields. If you turn them up to max, then it will be a sea of 3-D roads and buildings at a level of detail that you could drive in a driving sim, and Central Park will not be an overlay… it will simply be a part of the field that they have not put buildings on! This is the plausible world, and it is the first step towards a really detailed and convincing virtual reality.
As well, X-Plane 10 will be scalable. While you will be able to taxi right down the roads, with plausible intersections at every crossing and only 3-D buildings off of either wing, you will be able to zoom out all the way to space and see the landmass from orbit. You will see the reflections and lighting of the land and sea from space, with smooth transitions all the way from space to sitting in someone's front yard, never with any sudden switch-over to a different rendering technology. Everything is done with level of detail that delivers smooth transitions from street-view to orbit, all in 3-D.
The weather system will be detailed enough that you will see cloud wisps right around your plane as you fly through clouds, but will go hundreds of miles in every direction without any repetition. This will let you have fronts and thunderstorms, areas that are VFR and IFR, clear and cloudy, all at once, depending on your location. If you want to fly like you would in reality, you will work through/over/under/around those thunderstorms and fronts getting from one place to another, since the weather is not homogenous or repetitive. It scales from local detail around your plane clear out to region-wide fronts and storms visible from orbit. Totally scalable across a tremendous range.
As well, the X-Plane 10 engine is dynamic. I have now, for X-Plane 10, made it so that each flight model runs on its own CPU. Here is what that means: If you have 20 processors, then you can run 20 AI planes with basically zero frame-rate hit. Crank the number of planes up to 20 in X-Plane 10 and watch what happens to the frame-rate. Try it now: Set the number of planes to 1 and look at the frame-rate. Then set it to 20 and look again. See the hit? That is because all of those flight models are running on One CPU, one after the other, in order. With X-Plane 10, each flight model can run on its own CPU, all at the same time… if you have 20 CPU's, running 20 planes it is no slower than running 1.
Now, most of you don't have 20 CPU's, but if you have a quad-chip dual-core (per chip) Mac like I do, then that is EIGHT cores… and they can handle 20 flight models while hardly breaking a sweat… the frame-rate impact of 20 planes is small: We have eight cores splitting the work! As well, we have optimized the RAM-use of each airplane to be considerably lower. This means that there is less RAM impact to having 20 planes flying at once, making it much more
feasible to have 20 planes at one time. So, X-Plane 10 will use less RAM, and give more frame-rate, than version 9 when loaded up with planes (all other settings being equal, of course).
So why do I care about all these other planes so much? Well, we have hired a full-time programmer just for the new ATC code for X-Plane 10. This new ATC will control all the planes in the sky, including yours, to deliver incredible ATC realism. Using pre-recorded WAV files, you will hear the controller giving instructions to the other planes, and see them following those instructions on your TCAS and out the window. The other planes will all take-off, land, taxi, stop on the ramp, miss approaches and do touch-n-goes, all while taking commands from ATC, all of which are audible on your radio.
Of course, all of the other planes will use the same accuracy flight model as your plane, so you will see them move perfectly realistically across all phases of flight, from flying right down to taxiing. Put in a strong wind or turbulence and see how they handle it. It might not be pretty, but it will be realistic. Set enough wind and an icy runway, and they will all blow right across the ramp. Watch out.
So, this is the plausible, scalable, dynamic world that we are building for X-Plane 10, all of which sits on top of an object-oriented, RAM-optimized, CPU-optimized, multi-core-capable code-base. You will SEE these results as X-Plane 10 reveals incredible detail, motion, and accuracy at all scales … while the activity bars on ALL your CPU's run up into action.
Now, if you only have 1 CPU and a little bit of RAM, you will still be able to run version 10 just fine, in fact you may see it even run faster and with less RAM than Version 9! But, you will have only one airplane, and the cities will be simply grass fields, and the air traffic controller will have very few people to talk to. But, if you get the 4 gig of RAM to load up the rendering options, the 8 CPU cores to run 20 AI planes with full flight-model at once with minimal frame-rate hit, then you will start to see the whole world enrich and come alive. But there is no way that is happening with 2 GIG of RAM and one CPU. This type of world is all about parallel-processing: A lot of stuff happening at once. No surprise it will eat up all the CPU's and RAM (up to 4 Gig) that you can give it.
2. What about the simulation of small, medium and international airports (gates, buildings, aprons, cargo area, etc.)?
These will be generic, but there will be content there. In addition our scenery tools will allow 3rd party developers to build out custom airports, with gates, vehicles, and buildings.
3. Will not only developers but also customers, be able to use there 9.6x aircraft models in version 10?
4. Related to the previous question; is this also applicable for previous 9.6x airports, scenery and other enhancement add-on software?
Yes, those will still work
5. What many users missed in version 9.6x is the realistic look of the external model? It seems every model from GA to Jumbo's had clean skins without any dents, rivets, scratches etc. Does version 10.x offer developers tools to create a more realistic external model?
Yes and the screenshots from our development team on X-Plane 10 gives you an idea of the detail now possible.
6. With what kind of scenery does X-Plane 10 come with? Is it a photo-real scenery or, as with FSX, based on ground texture tiles and if the latter is the case, how realistic is it compared to the real world?
See my explanation in question 1.
7. What I personally missed with version 9.6x as writer, is a comprehensive tutorial! The manual in version 9.x offers lots of pages with a bunch of information, but it misses in my opinion a complete tutorial that helps you to understand X-Plane and how to fly with it. The tutorial will take a lot of time to make, but when version 10.x is really so much different, it could be a potential market for MSFS users to swap.
Yes this is true. this has always been a weak point. Someone should write a good manual and sell it!
8. What about the weather generator?Is it based on real data and/or is there a cooperation with REX?
My theory is that a modern personal computer is fast enough to draw clouds that are made of puffy little bits that are each 1 meter across. Not a bad start to drawing clouds, eh? To make it of puffy little bits that is each 1 meter across? Where each puffy bit is 1 polygon? If a cloud is made of puffs, and each puff is a meter across, and each puff is 1 polygon on the video card, then that seems a decent way to build clouds in a flight sim, right? Seems reasonable?
Of course, the max visibility in x-plane 10 is 100 miles. So, the scenery region is 100 miles north/south, 100 miles east/west, and goes from the surface to 45,000 ft. There are 2000 meters in a mile. There are 15,000 meters in 45,000 ft. So, that is 100 x 2000 x 100 x 2000 x 15000, which is 600,000,000,000,000 cubic meters (do the math). So, to render solid clouds in your flying area for x-plane 10, that is only 600,000,000,000,000 puffs of cloud for your video card to draw.
Now, we want to draw these puffs at about 60 frames per second (so we leave some power to draw the stuff on the ground, too!), so that is only about 36,000,000,000,000,000 polygons per second of cloud puffs that your video card needs to handle to do a basic cloud rendering of 1-meter puffs across the sky. As well, if there is one polygon every meter, and you can see for 100 miles up high, then you will clearly be looking thru 200,000 meters, and with one puff per meter, you will be looking thru 200,000 cloud puffs. That does not sound so bad.
Of course, when you are flying through these clouds, then that means that each pixel on your screen will be filled 200,000 times (once per puff of cloud, of course), and if you are running in the very low resolution of 1024x768, at 60 frames per second, then that means your video card will obviously be putting out 1024 x 768 x 60 = 50,000,000 pixels per second. Of course, each pixel is being filled 200,000 times. (once per puff by having one puff every meter for 100 miles) So, any video card drawing this scenery would be filling 50,000,000 pixels per second 200,000 times, which is actually filling 50,000,000 x 200,000 = 10,000,000,000,000 pixels per second.
So, to do the rather basic job of filling the sky with clouds whose puffs, each of which are a polygon, are one meter across (a reasonable size to see up close), your video card for x-plane 10 will simply need the following specs:
36,000,000,000,000,000 polygons per second
10,000,000,000,000 pixels per second
OK, a current video card, say the nVidia GTS-450, can handle:
700,000,000 polygons per second
11,200,000,000 pixels per second
So, with this video card, you would need:
36,000,000,000,000,000 / 700,000,000 = 51 million of them to do the polygons, and
10,000,000,000,000 / 11,200,000,000 = 892 of them to do the pixels.
so, the current video cards are one 51 million times too slow to do the job.
How will we render these clouds in x-plane 10, since I do not want each person to have to buy and install 51 million video cards, since that is a slightly problematic system requirement? The answer is a display of resolutions of buckets.
Imagine this: we have a HIGH resolution of cloud geometry. each puff is 1 meter across. BUT, those puffs only go out, say, 10 meters. In other words, sure, you can see cloud puffs that are 1 meter across. but you can only see them up to 10 meters away. You see the small, detailed puffs up close only. That isn’t many puffs. just 10x10x10, or 1,000 puffs. We can handle that.
Then, for puffs that are 10 meters away to 100 meters away, we draw puffs that are 10 meters across! How many puffs to fill that space? Well, we have 1 puff every 10 meters, we go out 100 meters in visibility for a moment, so that is 10 puffs north/south x 10 east/west x 10 up/down, for 1,000 puffs.
hhmmm...we just covered 10x the space, but without using the exact SAME number of puffs as we did for the smaller area, by making each puff bigger. Sure, the bigger puffs are less detailed, but since they are farther away, you could not see the 1-meter-diameter puffs anyway... they are too far away to see when they are that small.
Then, from 100 meters to 1,000 meters, we draw puffs that are 100 meters across. We have 1 puff every 100 meters for 1,000-meter range. That is 10 puffs north/south x 10 east/west x 10 up/down, for 1,000 puffs. Again, only 1,000 puffs. But, we are covering a full kilometre! the better part of a mile!
How about we go out 100 kilometres??? Each puff is, say, 10 kilometres across if drawn so far away. That is 1 puff every 10 kilometres for 100 kilometres. So that is 10 puffs north/south x 10 east/west x 10 up/down, for 1,000 puffs.
Again! No matter how big the sky, each level of detail only costs us 1,000 puffs.
7 levels of detail is plenty of detail. We call each level of detail a 'resolution'. So 7 resolutions gives 1-meter wide puffs of close, and huge puffs very far away, as seen from orbit and we wind up with: 7,000 puffs. Diddly-squat for a modern video card.
So this is the trick to the cloud-rendering in x-plane 10: we draw a LOT of SMALL puffs up close, and a FEW HUGE puffs out far away. This gives the detail you want up close, with the general cloud layout visible from 100 mile away. There is no need to draw tiny 1-meter-wide puffs 100 miles away, you could never even see them from that far away!
Our display of the weather uses about 7 RESOLUTIONS of cloud-puffs, with maybe a handful of thousands puffs at each resolution... a total result of maybe a small handful of tens of thousands of puffs.
You don't need 51 million video cards to draw that at all! In fact, you could even use just ONE video card! The perfect amount to fit inside your computer!
But, we are not done yet.
Each resolution contains all the cloud puffs around you... including the ones behind you! We certainly don't want to tell the video card to draw the puffs of cloud that are behind you as that would slow you down for nothing. So we break each resolution down into 27 buckets (a grid, in 3D, measuring 3x3x3... exactly like a rubics cube). But this is a rubics cube that you fly around inside of, with each cube being a bucket.
Of course, we only draw the buckets that are in front of you where can see them! This doubles the frame-rate again, since maybe half of the buckets are in front of you, and half behind... we simply draw only the ones that are in front of you.
So the weather display in x-plane 10 contains about 7 resolutions, with each resolution distributing its several thousand puffs into 27 buckets. This way, we only draw the cloud puffs that are in front of you, at a level of detail that you can see at that distance. This is what makes it possible to run at 100 fps in my Mac with 1 video card with clouds visible. This gives is the detail we want, with the long-range visibility we want, at the frame-rate we need.
9. Is multi-Crew coordination integrated or, when not standard available, does it offer developers the opportunity to create it?
This can easily be done by a 3rd party developer with a plug-in.
10. Apart from Carenado, famous from GA MSFS airplanes, are there other airplane developers interested or involved in creating highly advanced X-Plane 10.x models?
Aerosoft, plus various other developers & publishers are right now getting involved in X-Plane development.
11. I read that a Dual Core 2.0 is one of the minimum requirements
No, it does not require a dual core. It is scalable according to the cores you have, so the more the better. It will even take advantage of 20 cores if you have that many in your machine.
12. Will X-Plane 10 benefit from a 64bit OS?
No, not version 10.0 BUT SOME time in the v10 run, we MAY switch to 64-bit, so we can up the limits on the number of custom scenery files and airplane that can be installed at once.
13. I have seen some of the newer aircraft and what I am most interested in knowing; will X-Plane 10 move away from the 2d cockpit and put more emphasis on the virtual cockpit and its functionality?
YES to SOME airplanes but not all.
14. How many disks will it come on?
We're unsure at this point, but probably more than version 9.
15. Will it be possible to purchase online as a download through a vendor like Steam?
That is NOT planned at this point.
Austin - X-Plane Development Team
- Por diiego2 en el foro SimulaciónRespuestas: 11Último Mensaje: 12/02/2011, 07:14
- Por F14tomcat en el foro SimulaciónRespuestas: 11Último Mensaje: 19/01/2011, 13:59
- Por Tulón en el foro SimulaciónRespuestas: 33Último Mensaje: 25/02/2010, 00:21
- Por AEREO en el foro SimulaciónRespuestas: 10Último Mensaje: 01/08/2009, 13:54
- Por boquinauer en el foro SimulaciónRespuestas: 1Último Mensaje: 22/07/2008, 03:50