NGIS (Nexgen) loses Unigine engine access -oops!

[flapper]

In case your weren't aware guys, Stephen Borick's nexgen flightsim project hit some major turbulence a few days ago which seems to have increased scepticism within the community even more, yet NGIS appear to be putting a brave face on.....

http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/forumdisplay.php?93-NGFS-Next-Generation-Flight-Sim

The doubts continue...

http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?296323-Proposed-new-flightsim-(Nexgen)-loses-Unigine-engine-access

An insider's view....

http://nexgenflightsim.com/discussions/#/discussion/323/lessons-learnt-lately

.
.

 

[WarpD]

No surprise here... I've always stated that engine isn't up to the task.

The change from an open discussion to a business entity with no discussion is also not surprising to me.

In short, I never bought the hype and never trusted the individual who started it all, too good at statements that say nothing and not very good at providing specifics yet always capable of avoiding questions by hiding behind claims like proprietary, NDA, etc. Not a single warm fuzzy ever felt from it all. Not one.

 

[n4gix]

I strongly suspect the real issue was that UNINGINE wasn't willing to invest the time, effort and money needed to create and support a round earth model...

 

[flapper]

In short, I never bought the hype and never trusted the individual who started it all, too good at statements that say nothing and not very good at providing specifics

My sentiments exactly, and if Bill's guess is correct regarding Unigine pulling out due to the lack of a round earth model then NGIS only have themselves to blame since loud voices on nearly every forum warned them from the start about this potential pitfall, including voices on the NGIS forum, Avsim and also here_____
http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/interesting-recent-developments.435727/page-2

 

[Stephen Borick]

A short response for those who are more interested in the facts... rather than speculation.

NGiS did not withdraw from discussions with UNIGINE due to the conjectural information found in this thread. It had more to do with long term stability for the future of consumer oriented flight simulation than anything else. An agreement could not be reached ensuring that stability in the long term... nothing more and nothing less (the details as to why such an agreement could not be reached are not available to the public due to a signed NDA by both parties).

As far as UNIGINE's capabilities... as well as it's future interests, such information can easily be substantiated by doing a bit of research. One only needs to visit UNIGINE's home page... look at the very first slide in the slider on the top of the page to gain a full understanding of what UNIGINE can and cannot do. If you want further evidence... click on INDUSTRIES/Simulation & Training/Aerospace to learn more for yourselves. This is not private information and is readily available to anyone who is willing to take the time to do the research.

The choice of what to believe and who to believe can always be made more simply as well as correctly by doing a bit of personal research.

As far as NGiS' future... we've been taking the necessary steps since November 2015 to ensure that future as well as our goals of creating realistic simulations with the NGFS being the catalyst. As soon as we're able to release information to the public... we will be happy to do so.

- Stephen Borick
Director / President
Next Generation iNTERACTiVE Software

 

[hairyspin]

Thanks Stephen, a previous poster had directed us all to the UNIGINE site and I for one had read all I wanted there. Best of luck with the new arrangements, whatever they are. You'll probably need it.

 

[flapper]

NGiS did not withdraw from discussions with UNIGINE due to the conjectural information found in this thread. It had more to do with long term stability for the future of consumer oriented flight simulation than anything else.

So your parting of the ways with Unigine had nothing at all to do with it's lack of a round earth model? -and Unigine fully supports such a model does it? Well that's good to know for future reference thank you.

As far as UNIGINE's capabilities... as well as it's future interests, such information can easily be substantiated by doing a bit of research.

Thanks Stephen, but we already know what research is. You are after all on a developers forum, and many of us have actually researched Unigine's capabilities, or the lack of, for various reasons. So there's no need to preach to the converted. ;-)

As soon as we're able to release information to the public... we will be happy to do so.

Like many members I dislike being labelled as "the public". We are the flightsim community to which you and we are members. The difference being that you have no actual experience in flightsim development -as you've said before yourself - other than installing and using FS98 and FSX etc. So I personally would appreciate if you'd refrain from talking down to us mere plebs from your new position of Director and President of the world's most advanced software flight simulator, or as you now term it, consumer oriented flight simulation.

Perhaps be a bit more humble and realise that you are a simmer among simmers, then talk to us on that level. Many of us in the community are also getting a little fed up with your "if we build it they will come" crusading zeal, and your 'us and them' business hype speak (examples enclosed).
Some of us are actually in business ourselves and don't take too kindly to all your dramatic 'pom pom waving' sales pitches, which often seem quite amateurish and strewn with grammatical errors, which doesn't look at all professional coming from the President.

But hey! lets lighten up and enjoy our hobby whatever we fly.

Happy flights

FP.


NGIS quote and hype-speak analyses example

"How NGiS goes about creating..stability... is truly the insight and property of NGiS and substantial information that will help to stable the concerns and the doubts of the public will be revealed in the appropriate manner and time.

"Stable the concerns and the doubts of the public"??? What??

More......
http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?296323-Proposed-new-flightsim-(Nexgen)-loses-Unigine-engine-access/page2

 

[Deleted member 1281]

Gotta say the NGis people have been treated very unkindly in these pages, including getting a whole thread banned. They have invested an extraordinary amount of time and energy in the project, and it is a marvel that they continue to keep as calm and polite as they do in the face of adversity.

I do not know whether UNIGINE does a round world or not, but may I say, just to state a personal priority, I do not much care. If I could fly the FSX planes in an environment such as what they demonstrated, I would pay a whole lot for it. I am very sorry that it didn't pan out.

Cheers,
Manfred Jahn

 

[dave hoeffgen]

A short response for those who are more interested in the facts... rather than speculation.

Hi Stephen,

I am very interested in facts so I was wondering if you were willing to actually state some.

What for example made you change your mind about using the Outerra engine and made you choose Unigine?

The choice of what to believe and who to believe can always be made more simply as well as correctly by doing a bit of personal research.

I've been follwing that recommendation for not more than five minutes and came to this result:

1. The Outerra engine semms perfect for achieving the goal. It comes with a round earth model, inbuilt GIS support and already most if not all of the physics features needed for flight simulation.
2. Unigine is at a high end standard regarding rendering, modern hardware and implementation workflow. But it is, after all just a game engine.

Simulators, especially flight simulators (at least if they shall be realistic) can't be just treated like any other game.

Feel free to prove me wrong but do it as you preach: Speak facts.

Best regards,
Dave

 

[flapper]

]Hi Stephen,
I am very interested in facts so I was wondering if you were willing to actually state some.
What for example made you change your mind about using the Outerra engine and made you choose Unigine?

Hi Dave,

Sorry to butt in on your question. But as Stephen said, "This is not private information and is readily available to anyone who is willing to take the time to do the research ;-) So here are some interesting facts and analyses of the situation...

1) Stephen posted this message to Outerra on the Avsim forum -7 July 2015 >

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Cameni,

I've been watching Outerra for several years now...I have a question for you...

If we as a community got behind Outerra, would you allow us to help move the Outerra Flight Simulation along? Yes I know there are many members of the Outerra fan base who are actively participating with the inclusion of flight models, buildings, etc. but would you allow us to work even closer to your development team to coordinate and perhaps even implement the feature sets that we as a community would like to see?

Would you be willing to allow us... to help drive things along towards a community driven flight simulator and perhaps get involved on a much more formal basis..."
- Stephen B.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

2) Outerra's reply appears to go to the heart of the flaw in Stephen's model for a 'community flightsim'. >

Stephen,

"I think it's obvious by now that if any new simulator platform should get a chance to survive and thrive, it must be an open one, creating a healthy ecosystem with third party developers who will trust the platform and be able to extend it considerably via addons.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "we as a community" though - users who would have supported the development of a next gen simulator via crowd funding, or the developers?
-Cameni (Outerra)
--------------------------------------------------------------------

The rest of that forum conversation is interesting, with Stephen getting tetchier with every question posed >

http://www.avsim.com/topic/469292-t...osium-is-now-available-for-your-input/page-26

3) And then there's this candid analysis of NGIS by Outerra from June 2015 >

"...to me these guys look to be just another bunch of dreamers that do not have any game development experience behind them, yet they are going to take on one of the most complex of things. I'm still reading their posts from time to time and sadly smiling at some constructs that are being warmly received, while they tend to suppress and ignore every sign of a real experience like bomber's ("we want your experience, just don't talk about things we do not want to hear").

Originally I thought that the SIM-Posium was going to be a gathering of those sim enthusiasts who actively want to support development of a new generation simulator, a sub-group of the flight sim base. What it wanted to achieve (and how) was unclear to me, but I thought ok, we'll see. However, over time it's appearing that they simply want to launch their own Kickstarter based on an idea of a next-gen sim, then use the money to hire and control real developers that will implement the ideas for them. Reminds me of countless number of guys who are regularly approaching us, no prior stuff done, no useful capabilities, but they want to direct and control creation of their dream MMO game, and see themselves in position of CEO and ideas provider. Can you imagine how that would work?"
-- Cameni (Outerra)

4) There are some quite revealing and prophetic follow-up comments, here. e.g. >

"....Honestly, I don't even think they will reach the kickstarter step. If they are not fools, they will realize quickly that it's a really hard task. I just hope that no scammer (dev) will be involved, convincing them that launching the project is possible and enjoying free cash for nothing. As you said, a SIM-posium was a good idea for a single place to present innovative projects for the future of simulations. But it's not a place to conduct a project".

(Note that the above comment was posted around June 2015, and quite a few Outerra forum members (including devs) subsequently joined NGIS, but nearly every single person left within a few months for whatever reasons.)
----------

"Why dont (NGIS) create content for Outerra? They dont need the OT sdk for importing planes and setting them up. Even auto piloting could work without using the sdk. Behaving like a big player is not smart for a small project team with no experience".
------------
etc >
http://forum.outerra.com/index.php?topic=3285.45


.

 

[Stephen Borick]

I'm including a post that I just wrote on another forum... as it's just as relevant here as it was there... if you happened to have read it before, my apologies for the duplication.

After reading through this thread, I'm not really sure how to respond other than what I just read are a lot of unfounded words based purely on speculation and conjecture with an attempt to come across as the wise and all knowing voices of the masses.

What's missing are the FACTS.

I hope those of you who only see darkness at the end of the tunnel are just as brazen in acknowledgment of the actual FACTS when the time comes.

To put it plainly as I possibly can, NGiS has only one goal and that is the development of a new consumer oriented flight simulator based upon up-to-date software and hardware for the near future and for many years into the future.

Creating a business... that is based upon a firm foundation to which to build a new flight simulator is a process and most certainly takes time... however, more importantly it takes the commitment to stick with it no matter the complications, struggles, snags, hitches, obstructions, etc.

In less than a years time, NGiS has grown from a simple gathering of interested enthusiasts to determine the need or want of a new simulator to a dedicated team of over 30 highly qualified individuals who love flight simulation and want to continue to see it flourish.

In that same time NGiS has also become a voice, an advocate of consumer flight simulation... a voice which has caught the attention of some of the most influential entities within the simulation industry, all who are very much interested in working with NGiS which will lend itself to being enabled to press forward with the creation of a Next Generation Flight Simulator.

My question to anyone who is interested in prolonging the life of consumer oriented flight simulation for years to come is this; what would happen if all community members put aside the dismissive viewpoints and picked up the banner and rallied around the one movement, the one company that favors the continuation of flight simulation for the masses? No one is asking for your money or your time... just some patience and a bit of moral support.

Now imagine for a moment how much more we could accomplish if all of us pulled together to achieve something that not one big business is willing to do!

A fail-safe against extinction isn't really a bad thing.

(...if you would take the time to consider the state of flight simulation as it exists today, it truly isn't difficult to see the writing on the wall. The longevity of flight simulation is based upon platforms that have reached their limits and are straining at the seams in order to prolong existence. Newcomers of this genre are in short supply, simply because what they see in currently available flight simulations don't stack up visually to the software that are being delivered in this day and age... so newcomers fall away as fast as they come to see. The flight simulation community, is literally dying off and if new blood is not brought into the community soon, it'll take a miracle for consumer flight simulation to rise from the ashes).

Fortunately, there are those within the community who do see the efforts of a handful of flight simulator community members and the light at the end of the tunnel... and we are grateful for the support we do receive.

In a matter of time, NGiS will be able to announce the extraordinary accomplishments in securing the future of consumer flight simulation. We have been in discussion with some exceptional companies and are nearing agreements. When that day comes, and it will, many of you will sit and ponder, wondering how in the world is a relatively unknown company, such as NGiS, capable of pulling it off.

At that time, some may chose to forsake the path they currently travel, spouting their proposed prescient utterances... then again... once a doomsday prophet uttering the evils of NGiS and its inevitable demise, the allure of having a following most probably will be too great to ever see that light at the end of the tunnel.

Stephen Borick

In addition I'd like to add that yes, NGiS is indeed made up of a bunch of amateurs, with the tenacity, persistence, determination, patience, and resolve to do something that needs to be done. No one in NGiS comes to the table with any airs that we are anything but flight simulator community members who are gathered together in an effort to sustain flight simulation as we know it, nor do we place ourselves in a position to supersede the community to which we are most loyal to. None of us here at NGiS are scholars, masters of the written word, polished at forming proper sentences that can disprove such pettiness beyond doubt that we're professionals.

But... Just because there are smudges on the aircraft windows, doesn't mean that the airplane can't fly.

Outerra is a fascinating engine that has been in development since 2008 and founded in 2010. I think the answers to why we did not chose Outerra to work with has been answered by the pious and unfounded statements made by one of the developers... there was absolutely no extended offer from the Outerra organization to work together towards achieving the ultimate goal of a new flight simulator for the community.

My personal opinion regarding Outerra is that it has potential, potential that has been faithfully worked on for over 8 years and as of to date is still a platform that does not meet or exceed the visuals that one would expect from a modern up-to-date engine. If you have Outerra Anteworld on your computer, I invite you to center your attention on areas of detail such as the Grand Canyon, Yosemite National Park, Mt Rainier... are these areas true to their real life counterparts... isn't this something that you would desire in a modern up-to-date engine. Fly across the Pacific Northwest, Southern California, Nevada, the UK, Africa, Australia... notice any significant difference in the climate, terrain, vegetation, do you feel that you've moved from one part of the world to another? If one of the features most desired by enthusiast is for an accurate representation of the world we fly over, then Outerra is not the answer, at least in it's current state.

To go beyond the current offerings of flight simulation on a world scale, both in fidelity as well as dynamics, an engine capable of achieving such a goal must be the core of the development. NGiS has found such engines and are working daily to obtain access and have made great strides in doing so. Soon, the talents and skills, the ones that truly matter, the ones that TEAM NGiS does possess will be used to take those tools and craft a new flight simulator that will be worthy of being a successor to that which has come before.

No amount of words, for or against the efforts of NGiS will matter in the long run... it will be the results and the results can be nothing short of a new flight simulator that provides a sense of familiarity, that caters to 3rd party developers, exceeds expectations in realism and continues to develop along with new technologies in both software and hardware.

It would be wonderful to have the full support of the flight simulator community on a level where we here at NGiS can hear the desires of the community above the bombast of the few who tout judgment based upon nothing but hearsay, rumors, speculation and whispers. As a community, all of us together most certainly can achieve what appears to be unbelievable and do so with the resolve to strengthen consumer flight simulation in an extensive effort to avoid an untimely demise.

For those who would like to have all the facts all the time... it's just not possible. Non Disclosure Agreements prevent such capabilities. I would love to share what I know, when I know it as I am well aware that the haze of Non Disclosure leaves doubt, speculation and suspicion. But to reveal what we've been asked not to reveal until such time that it's appropriate would be equally grounds for doubt, speculation, suspicion and non-trust from those to whom we depend upon for the very tools necessary for the development of a new simulator.

- Stephen Borick

 

[Hughes-MDflyer4]

2. Unigine is at a high end standard regarding rendering, modern hardware and implementation workflow. But it is, after all just a game engine.
Simulators, especially flight simulators (at least if they shall be realistic) can't be just treated like any other game.

A "game" engine isn't a bad thing. You could even consider FSX's core a game engine. It does just as any other engine does: provides a foundation for the rest of the game.

Actually, a future flight sim should be treated as nothing but a game. Look at what platforms we have available to us now. No matter how many updates come out, they still feel and operate like they were made 10 years ago. Many modern games are designed and developed with consistency and reliability in mind. We need a flight simulator that follows that mindset. Something that is easy to use, but expandable. It's not impossible to make a simulator with the functionality/realism of FSX, but the user experience of a triple-A game. Microsoft Flight, for example, was a major step in the right direction in regards to that. It fell short in content and functionality. Had it been continued and expanded to what FSX has to offer, Flight would have been a solid modern flight simulator. As Dovetail's announcement is only a few weeks away, here's hoping that we get exactly that.

 

[flapper]

.
Hi Stephen.

That if I may so was the most lazy template response to a post, ever. You simply posted a previous speil of yours from another forum: which said: "After reading through this thread, I'm not really sure how to respond other than what I just read are a lot of unfounded words based purely on speculation and conjecture with an attempt to come across as the wise and all knowing voices of the masses... What's missing are the FACTS".

Fact 1: Those "words" I posted are your very own words. I simply quoted you from other forums.

Fact 2: Those 'all knowing voices of the masses' that you mention in such derogatory terms are actually experienced simmers and developers expressing their opinion, and in the process providing you with valuable feedback on where you might be going right or wrong.

Fact 3: So here you are yet again, gung-ho at the prospect of finding a successor to the Unigine engine. The trouble is that you dont have the active members you had last summer, since almost everyone moved away for whatever reason (myself being one of them). But lets suppose that you do manage to build up trust again, and that you have an active enough team and support structure (with no hidden scammers); and you have your new engine to work and play with. There's no guarantee that you wont hit similar landslides to the Unigine fiasco.
As an example, lets say you were still with Unigine, and you were a year or more into development before you realised the limitations of Unigine for flight simulation purposes. e.g...

"So. Of those of you who joined the nexgen forum....... and the only one I know of is Bomber...... did anyone try the Unigine tech demo being exclusively offered there? Any thoughts?"

Answer....

Unigine

Pros:

- The overall image is beautiful.
- 3d trees.

Cons:

- Very hard transition between forest and other used textures.
- There are not actual clouds: try to fly at its level or over them.
- The mountains looks nice... from far. When you are getting close to them, you realize that can't compete with Outerra's detail (talking about the terrain itself). Unigine just have normal maps and unnoticeable parallax.
- The ocean looks way better in Outerra.
- The lakes... that solution is as sad as the temporal one I made for OT, but with animated texture. Try to be under the lakes, and you'll see what I mean.
- At ground level, the grass popping is terrible.

http://forum.outerra.com/index.php?topic=3285.30
-------------------------

 

[hairyspin]

Oh boy. Please can we drop this? It used to be the F word provoked a wearisome round-the-houses: is it now to be the N word? I'm out of here.

 

[N2056]

Agreed. The thread strikes me as more of a desire by the OP to rip into this group. It is way beyond useful at this point.

 

[flapper]

Oh boy. Please can we drop this? It used to be the F word provoked a wearisome round-the-houses: is it now to be the N word? I'm out of here.

!!!

You wont believe this, but this morning I had a thought that N*** is a four letter word.
Then I saw your comment tonight. Synchronisity rules.

Ok. I guess we've all expressed our points of view and cleared the air. Good nicht.

 

[flapper]

The thread strikes me as more of a desire by the OP to rip into this group.

"What's missing are the FACTS"

 

[N2056]

Sorry, but I'm not biting on that. The fact is that from where I sit it's all talk, talk is cheap, and I have better things to spend my time getting worked up over.

 

[flapper]

The fact is that from where I sit it's all talk, talk is cheap..

Once you factor in the cost of broadband, winter heating bills, and PC equipment etc., online talk is indeed quite cheap compared to say phoning long distance. But just because talk is cheap doesn't mean its worthless. We are on a general chat forum after all, where opinions, info and chat is the fuel that keeps the forum stove burning these dark winter nights... and that's a fact ;-)

G,night.

 

[hairyspin]

You wont believe this, but this morning I had a thought that N*** is a four letter word

Flight has 6 letters. You're new here and are unlikely to have got that.