Another big patch. LOD still terrible compared with pre Alpha 1.6.x, which looked perfect

i have lod at 200 and i get 56 fps on japan (1080p all high - ultra exept shadows)
Before with lod at 200 i got 25 fps barely… somenting changed, but honestly, to me the graphic fell amazing.
The bugs are in the plane systems…

2 Likes

It’s a real shame. So much promise in this sim, and so much was delivered in alpha, yet now the quality continues to fall away, and the devs just don’t seem to be getting the message.

They seem to continue to lower quality setting separately from the controls which are exposed to the users. I notice a drop in antialiasing quality in thyis latest patch, and others are reporting poorer reflections too.

3 Likes

i have to say, the stuttering is a loooooooot less, also with lod at 200

1 Like

Sorry, I wasn’t meaning to refer to you directly, it was a general appeal to everyone to please raise these important issues with the Zendesk (the more the better) as it’s the best way to get their attention.

Some people might think that it’s enough to just discuss it on this forum, but there are no guarantees that it will get to Asobo with enough emphasis.

Perhaps I could have worded it better.

No problem. I’ll see if I can set up a vote for this.

OK we have a problem.

There are already two separate LOD vote threads in the Bugs forum, and they each have just 77 and 81 votes, which isn’t going to get the devs attention when other bugs have 600 votes.

I have already voted in both threads. I can only suggest that everyone else does the same and also reports this to Zen. The more the better…

I find myself flying at night and in poor vis more and more as the LOD is so useless in good vis at lower levels.

Surely someone is listening at Asobo?

But Why on earth they are allowing this situation to continue month on month is beyond me. It looks nothing like their trailers or Alphas.

Vote here

and here

6 Likes

Can you create another detailed report in Bug & Issues or Wishlist regarding the LOD issues, so we can vote?

edit. Nevermind, just saw your message above mine haha Will vote!

Done! Hopefully the mods will group the votes per subject.

Yeah, didn’t want to start another vote thread as it just dilutes the count.

I agree with the sliders not being there just for the looks. They might as well remove the options then. Besides that, this should have been fixed in alpha/beta. And not hardcode graphics on release builds.

I’d like to screen shots of real life and what you’re talking about in sim.

So many posts complain about graphics changes that make the sim more like real life. Which is not a strange thing for a “sim” to do.

I used to like trying to make FSX look crisp and clear all the way to the horizon until I started flying and saw that isn’t anything like realistic, at least in most parts of the world where there is atmosphere present. Pretty yes, realistic no. So unless you provide screen comparisons about these “faults” most people including the devs will take the posts with a grain of salt. Maybe you gave such info for the devs seeing you say it was “detailed” but we can’t tell.

If what you want is something that looks more pretty than realistic, that’s OK, it is personal preference, but you should say so because as it stands people are talking about some of this stuff as if they are bugs.

I find it hard to believe it was so much prettier before and realistic. Asobo aren’t going to change it just to annoy people. But they are making a simulator so realism is a goal.

1 Like

I thought they know about this issue
" Under investigation"

1 Like

Take a look through the links I provided above. There a numerous screen shots of what is wrong with the sim in those links.

And no, we are not looking for crisp and clear to the horizon, but tell me, when you flew your real plane, did you see no trees just 2 miles away from you and did those trees POP UP very obviously as you got closer.

And were you in the alpha test of this sim, to even know what was possible only 3 months ago in this very sim?

And other thing, talking about horizons - this sim fails to provide realistic reduced visability in dry conditions, which means you can always see to the horizon in the dry. How unrealistic is that.

I have numerous screen shots of how great this sim looked in alpha, but I am not allowed to post them here due to the NDA, but you can bet your bottom dollar I continue to send them to Zendesk after every single patch which fails to fix this problem.

If you don’t believe me, just look at Asobo’s own trailers of the product - a good example is their video of flying over LA, and compare that with what you see in your own sim. No comparison.

POP up scenery just wasn’t an issue at all in the Alphas until the last 4 weeks before release, then something critical changed, and it’s been bad ever since.

The LOD scenery to the ‘apparent’ horizon worked very well - so well that it was something you never thought about. Now it is the most obvious deficiency in the sim.

And lastly, I don’t understand why people who have not experienced this in the alpha make such an effort to tell those who have experienced it that they don’t knw what they are talking about, and that we should stop campaigning for the quality we know is posible.

Why would anyone do that?

Asobo/Microsoft don’t need defending. They need a kick up the a***. They are rich companies, and I am only asking for what they delivered in alpha, and what they show in their very own trailers and adverts. Nothing more.

13 Likes

I would like to understand this issue. Before and after images are essential here.

Also, is LOD the right term? Level of Detail? Or are we talking draw distance or some combination of LOD and draw distance.

Also agree with the person that says atmospheric conditions play a huge role in what kinds of details you can see at distance.

As far as I’m concerned, flying mostly over rural areas, the biggest eyesore is flat patches of poor quality textures on mountain faces, or where bushes or even trees should be. That’s an immersion killer for me. In urban areas, melted buildings are another eye sore.

This issue needs to be put into perspective with all the other rendering issues. It’s not necessarily the biggest issue, if it even is an issue.

1 Like

LOD is fine here… I think…

1 Like

That is fine visually, but it’s hard to judge the real quality as it is a murky day.

Shot’s like this show the real extent of the problem. (copied from one of the vote threads linked above)

1 Like

sliders and even the .ini hack has no effect on this issue.

1 Like

I tried a LOD 6 edit, and it made a small difference with a notable FPS drop. In Alpha I had much better trees and buildings draw distance without the FPS problem. It was really good.

What made you lose faith in the zen? The fact they didn’t listen to any of us during the alpha and beta or the fact that now everyone gets to feel that frustration?

3 Likes

Here’s a theory.

The alphas were plagued with trees and bushes which were far too big. Everyone complained about that.

Finally they reduced the size of the trees to what we see now, and at the same time we got the reduced draw distance.

I suggest that after that change, because the trees and bushes were much smaller, they had to draw many more of them to obtain the same cover, resulting in many more objects which need to be drawn and more load on the system.

Hence they reduced the draw distance/LOD setttings to compensate and keep the frame rates up.

And no one at Asobo has yet done the work to draw many more smaller trees and bushes to give the required visible ground cover and draw distance while maintaining the frame rates…

1 Like