UNIGINE 2.3 and Round Earth

[WebSimConnect]

Looks like UNIGINE has finally added Round Earth support:

https://developer.unigine.com/en/devlog/20160805-unigine-2.3

a really nice platform for the sim world, hope one day somebody will make a use of it for desktop simmers. I like it more than Outerra.

 

[n4gix]

What can I say except "Wow!" <picking jaw up off of floor>

 

[Marc L]

Im falling in love

 

[Gliderfan]

a really nice platform for the sim world, hope one day somebody will make a use of it for desktop simmers.

I remember NGIS has such a goal in mind, but it didn't work out.
All those promises about how great it was going to be...

 

[hairyspin]

I remember NGIS...

Please don't revive that sterile old bunfight.

 

[dave hoeffgen]

I remember NGIS has such a goal in mind, but it didn't work out.
All those promises about how great it was going to be...

So much about this video is simply pointless for a flight simulator.

 

[HiFlyer]

Thanks for reminding me of unigine. I had tried the demo they released to ngis and found it slow as molassas, but now that I have a 1080 gtx, I should try again!

 

[Gliderfan]

Please don't revive that sterile old bunfight.

C,mon Tom. You know you want to

So much about this video is simply pointless for a flight simulator.

I totally agree, and the latest version of Unigine is even more so -with its highly detailed seas and oceans..with sunlight streaming down onto the seabed etc,. Nice if you happen to ditch in the sea though

The curved earth feature is a step forward
https://developer.unigine.com/en/devlog/20160805-unigine-2.3

 

[dave hoeffgen]

I totally agree, and the latest version of Unigine is even more so, what with its highly detailed seas and oceans..with sunlight streaming down onto the seabed. Nice if you happen to ditch in the sea though

https://developer.unigine.com/en/devlog/20160805-unigine-2.3

I'm a fan of visual details too. I was more referreing to what the video shows rather than the engine iself.

 

[Breezy Point]

It certainly looks impressive.

I watched this video recently for the tech demo of 'Reset' by Theory Interactive.

I was particularly impressed with the clouds/rain.

 

[Clutch Cargo]

Best looking water I have seen anywhere.

 

[lionheart]

That is one impressive game engine. Goodness...

How I would love to do my own simulator(s).

 

[rhumbaflappy]

CPUs have hit the wall as far as speed of execution goes. And GPUs are not going to get much faster either. Unless there is a stunning breakthrough in execution and memory speed, we're not going to see much more than we have right now for the foreseeable future, regarding eye-candy and simulation speed. It will be one or the other.

The new AeroFly 2 is remarkable with it's visuals during flight... not so great on the ground and very limited 3D detail of vegetation and buildings, or AI. You can only get so much out of the processors and memory at this point.

Just a few years ago, we were getting real increases in CPU speed of execution. Then we got multiple processors when the speed couldn't be increased. Then we got better GPUs with their own memory... and multiple video cards. I think we're at the wall. And now sims will rely on crafty programming and the specialization of the type of sim we'll use. Do we want low and slow? Do we want an airline simulator? Do we want pretty screenshots or accurate flight models? I don't think we can get it all in one sim anymore. We all want more, and the physical realities of PC's is our limitation.

Why would we not want the amazing Unigine graphics? But...

 

[HiFlyer]

CPUs have hit the wall as far as speed of execution goes. And GPUs are not going to get much faster either. Unless there is a stunning breakthrough in execution and memory speed, we're not going to see much more than we have right now for the foreseeable future, regarding eye-candy and simulation speed. It will be one or the other.

Oh, that sort of prediction is just asking for trouble.

The Nvidia Pascal architecture seen in the 1080gtx and its siblings have just hit the market, and already there are plans to go further and faster with the Volta architecture.

14 and 16 nanometer products will doubtless be around for a while as there's still a bit more efficiency to be pulled from the technology, but the 10 nanometer process is already in train, as is the eventual switch to HBM memory and beyond (HMC?) from the current GDDR5x in the Nvidia 10 line.

Then there are the new efficiency's from FinFet technology, and the new Api's like Vulkan that promise to allow better control of Gpu resources "Closer to the metal"

Beyond that is the fact that simulators with their comparatively small user base simply don't receive the technical/financial and other resources to compete with AAA gaming titles, which means that we're several generations behind the curve technically in what we see in this genre as opposed to whats actually possible.

Judging from that, I think, is going to be an increasingly larger mistake as time goes on and we fall further and further behind.

Unless something like Aerofly can manage to make simming profitable again to anything but third parties. (and many of them seem to be just hanging on)

 

[WebSimConnect]

think we're at the wall. .. We all want more, and the physical realities of PC's is our limitation.

We are far, far away from PC limitation. Moore's law still applies. Even though it is now 24 to 30 months instead of 18 to double chip performance, we have architecture advances as you pointed out. Seeing the progress in the last 30 years I would not worry about limitations, not in my lifetime.

 

[lionheart]

CPUs have hit the wall as far as speed of execution goes. And GPUs are not going to get much faster either. Unless there is a stunning breakthrough in execution and memory speed, we're not going to see much more than we have right now for the foreseeable future, regarding eye-candy and simulation speed. It will be one or the other.

The new AeroFly 2 is remarkable with it's visuals during flight... not so great on the ground and very limited 3D detail of vegetation and buildings, or AI. You can only get so much out of the processors and memory at this point.

Just a few years ago, we were getting real increases in CPU speed of execution. Then we got multiple processors when the speed couldn't be increased. Then we got better GPUs with their own memory... and multiple video cards. I think we're at the wall. And now sims will rely on crafty programming and the specialization of the type of sim we'll use. Do we want low and slow? Do we want an airline simulator? Do we want pretty screenshots or accurate flight models? I don't think we can get it all in one sim anymore. We all want more, and the physical realities of PC's is our limitation.

Why would we not want the amazing Unigine graphics? But...

Well put, Dick. Interesting.

Oh, that sort of prediction is just asking for trouble.

The Nvidia Pascal architecture seen in the 1080gtx and its siblings have just hit the market, and already there are plans to go further and faster with the Volta architecture.

14 and 16 nanometer products will doubtless be around for a while as there's still a bit more efficiency to be pulled from the technology, but the 10 nanometer process is already in train, as is the eventual switch to HBM memory and beyond (HMC?) from the current GDDR5x in the Nvidia 10 line.

Then there are the new efficiency's from FinFet technology, and the new Api's like Vulkan that promise to allow better control of Gpu resources "Closer to the metal"

Beyond that is the fact that simulators with their comparatively small user base simply don't receive the technical/financial and other resources to compete with AAA gaming titles, which means that we're several generations behind the curve technically in what we see in this genre as opposed to whats actually possible.

Judging from that, I think, is going to be an increasingly larger mistake as time goes on and we fall further and further behind.

Unless something like Aerofly can manage to make simming profitable again to anything but third parties. (and many of them seem to be just hanging on)

Great input, Devin. It might be a while for people to catch up, 1 to 2 years, getting the new Nano tech hardware, etc. Good to hear about all the new tech that is surfacing and available. I had forgotten about some of the new advancements already.


Good input as well, WebSimConnect..


...................................................................

My thoughts...

Aerofly has;
1. Shown that you can have ULTRA high detail planes, inside and out, with extreme polygon modelling (far past what I thought was possible, and had imagined).
2. Shown that it is possible to have entire states, joined, in pure photo real scenery, and have it run smoothly.

This will be a huge ripple, I think, in the flight sim world. They have made a 'game changer' and have set new standards, new levels, in sim possibilities and qualities. True, they have no extreme detail 'on the ground' aside from very nicely done buildings and AI planes. (I also like how they make a airport look real with lots of dummy, nicely done, static planes, parked everywhere. That is how a REAL airport looks).

So the next move would be a sim like Aerofly that would have terrain that could become realistic when you land; grass and things, rocks, bushes. Probably these would be LOD in the range of about 10 to 30 feet, 3 to 10 meters. That would probably play havoc on already maxxed out computers at this time.

 

[rhumbaflappy]

Here's a great example of the fractional value of upgrading hardware:

http://www.avsim.com/topic/494933-intel-cpu-upgrade-from-3rd-to-6th-gen/#entry3481212

I don't mean to pick on anyone at AVSIM, but chasing a few FPS with cash and hardware just is not working. We aren't going to get 60 FPS and butter-smooth visuals in a sim with the current limitations of hardware.

FSX (and P3D) forums are still full of folks trying to get better FPS by throwing hundreds of dollars at their hardware. This has been going on since 2006, and I haven't seen a lot of improvement. People still are getting 17 FPS with their favorite addons. Using a new graphics engine isn't going to solve the problem. More than ever, sims will need to have careful crafting of what is included in the game. Autogen vs AI vs terrain detail vs exquisite texturing vs... , because the hardware can't keep up with the software's demands.

We've been needing a hardware breakthrough for many years, and though there has been some incremental improvements, we're not seeing 16Ghz CPUs, nor does it appear we will in the foreseeable future. Multiple cores and GPU improvements are also nudging their limitations, and folks are spending like crazy to get tiny improvements in sim fluidity. And that is the wall I'm thinking of.

 

[HiFlyer]

FSX (and P3D) forums are still full of folks trying to get better FPS by throwing hundreds of dollars at their hardware. This has been going on since 2006, and I haven't seen a lot of improvement. People still are getting 17 FPS with their favorite addons. Using a new graphics engine isn't going to solve the problem.

I don't know how up you are on current technology (beyond FSX/P3D) but I'm pretty much in the camp that technology has actually come very far, but the sim community isn't seeing it because we're still using what amounts to ancient software.

Right this moment, after the 2 most recent updates, Aerofly is routinely giving me upwards of 350 to 400 FPS on ultra settings. Outerra does about the same, with levels of detail that are flatly impossible with our current sims.

A well known developer (on another forum) was scoffing at the speed of Outerra seen in some movies I posted, and said that once clouds were added, frames would drop through the floor. Well, clouds were added, and frames are still routinely in the hundreds.

Not so fast, was the rejoinder from others, once autogen is applied, surely framerates will plummet......

Nope Outerra has demonstrated massively built up areas with FPS still in the hundreds. And that's with clouds, shadows and zillions of trees.

Well, came back a reply, once you add the ATC and other things, then certainly........

I then point out that a tiny tablet app called infinite flight (which runs on resources that wouldn't get a gnat moving on FSX) actually does a fairly credible ATC.

Technology is changing........ But the sim universe sometimes seems pretty much wedded at this point to FSX/ESP and appears to see the world largely from that perspective.

I sometimes fear that poor FSX/P3d will have to literally fall apart at the seams before we are ready (reluctantly) to finally move on and begin to build something completely new.

 

[WarpD]

What Outerra does for clouds isn't what Prepar3D does for clouds... not even close. I don't mind comparisons.. as long as they're not misleading.

 

[jtanabodee]

Those programs are impressive.
I was wondering if Flight Sim and other programs can use these World Simulators.
Since it would be nice if these programs can run on one core (or cores) of CPU and Flight Simulator runs on the other cores.
I don't know if it is possible but it would be nice that we can utilize all the resources of computer efficiently and the work load of developing the programs are separated to different developers.