Overall, I would say it was a somewhat lackluster Dev Stream. It was GREAT to see them back, and hopefully this is the start of a trend that sees these streams happening every couple of months. But the content of this particular stream didn’t give us much to be excited about:
Pros:
Fixed helicopter ground effect - cool
Improvements to CFD visualization - cool
Some vague improvements to in-cloud turbulence - hopefully cool(?)
In my honest opinion, using the same clouds structures and textures from Preset Mode along with some legit humidity, haze outside the METAR zone and an RVR slider will do wonders to the existing Live Weather system. And there shoudln’t be any performance loss. Sure, it won’t be quite what everyone is comfortable with or looking for, but we all agree at this point something needs to be done. And it is clear that whatever Live WX is using, it is not the same technique as Preset Mode.
If the options are no weather update for 4 years or a basic update to just make the sky look more believable, I’ll choose the latter. I may just come to regret that decision, though…
But Seb’s comment on the weather really reveals how out of touch the higher-ups are when it comes to user feedback.
Appreciate you listening in on the Dev Stream today. I know there is some disappointment around the weather section answers, so we’ll make sure to share this thread with the team today so they can read through all your feedback here.
What an amazing stream as always I cant wait for the Emberer, someone made an oopsie in the WU screenshot tho at least we arent the only ones who do it
thank you for hearing us, i worked at a weather station for 4 years and I can tell there is space for improvement in the shape of the clouds , not more clouds but the change of existing clouds with more accurate shape like mid-layers altocumulus which now looks like vapors in the real life the sky is just grey so nothing complex in my opinion . another aspect . Cumulonimbus clouds do not have anvil at all in the sim “ Anvil = the trophosphere cumulonimbus limit which cannot lift higher . etc. lower clouds also , there are sometimes in cold and rain season when the sky is filled with stratocumulus but the sim render the lower dark cumulus .
Thanks for the update. I hope they’re aware that unusable airports constitute a big block of the “existing issues.” Especially with regard to career mode.
Excited for the aircraft updates and new planes announced. CAC Boomerang! And FSReborn doing a Piper M600!
Appreciated Jorg’s answer on the updates for the Aviator Edition. I 100% understand why the initial focus would be on getting the most popular planes up to speed.
I would encourage them, though, to triage the planes and also prioritize the ones that either don’t work, or have major issues.
The Shorts SC.7 Skyvan, for instance, flat out doesn’t work at all under FS2024. Even though it’s a niche plane, “completely broken” feels like it should get it a level of priority.
There are also planes like the 707, which may not be popular because of all of the issues but would likely get flown a lot more if they didn’t have so many problems. When I have to download a third-party add-on just to make the wing slat animation that’s there on the model actually work, it’s not a plane I’m going to spend time with. But if it was brought up to “working spec,” I’d love to fly it more.
It should be their own interest to get the community to work on the airport and runway Taxi layout. airports would improve a lot in long-term without Asobo having to do much.
I don’t get it why this has such a low priority
Just finished watching the stream (VOD), could not make it in real time.
Turbulence came up – but unfortunately, Asobo are still not addressing the High Frequency component of their digitally modeled Turbulence value updates ( ie their chosen rate), so a High Frequency component gets introduced into the Flight Modeling, that is totally unrealistic, and destroys its response & modeling.
Turbulence, as digitally sampled and calculated, will need to be passed through a Suitable LOW PASS filter, before it is applied to the aircraft. Until that is done, it will continue to make planes appear to be “TWITCHIE” and totally unrealistic.
Example: Real Time Turbulence plot + some low pass filtering, to show the issue.
(Not 100% optimum filter, but the concept is shown)
It was a good stream this time, with less focus on ‘selling’ new stuff and more focus on questions and answers.
They’ve discussed weather many times in past Q&As. The whole world model from Meteoblue is their current approach so I think there is no quick solution to change it. Not to say they shouldn’t evolve it but it may be a complete rework to give people what they want, so out of scope for now. Priorities obviously come into it then - and no two people here have the same priorities!
The aggressive texture LOD drop on ground aerials is my biggest issue with 2024, making it regularly look worse than 2020 (I fly mainly GA, so lowish and slowish). I don’t think it got much attention despite being #2 on the bug list, but I found I was distracted by chat a lot today (sometimes I just hide it as it’s 60% repeat / badly-timed questions - SeedyL must feel like he’s trying to herd cats for 2 hours).
@N6722C I agree on the turbulence aspect to some extent, but I wonder if the turbulence itself is the issue or if it’s due to the aircraft and flight models themselves. I’ve often found default aircraft too ‘twitchy’, but it could be that the moments of inertia are too low, or too easily overcome by the wing/tailplane/fin surfaces (and/or control surfaces), which are too effective in rotating the aircraft in response to airflow changes. I’m sure their modelling must be pretty well researched, so it may just be the effects of a simplified computer simulation model (to run in real time, it has to be simplified a little) and as such it just needs more tweaking. I have no data to go off, just thinking out loud!
Anyway, one thing is for sure: They’ll never please everyone with every dev stream, but this was welcome after a long hiatus. Thanks to all involved for organising it!
I am extremely concerned by Jorg’s statement near the end of the livestream that they only have 2 or 3 bugs left to fix in SU5… there are several “bug logged” regressions that have not been fixed.
For me personally, FSR3 Frame Generation on multiple monitors was broken from the first day of SU5 testing, reported, reproduced, acknowledged, and still not fixed.
Maybe a lot of Unanswered (un-asked/un-submitted) question will get answered by a Asobo SDK Devs team , IF there is ever another TECH Stream, like the one Martine host a few years back, as opposed to a sales & marketing stream.
It must be. Every other flight sim, driving sim, and so on supports multiple monitors - there is no re-inventing the wheel necessary. The functionality has been there for years. And the experience is next level when it works.
What broke in SU5 was how the Setting is applied (I believe)
Also, Boeing announced it was using MSFS for training (I believe with PMDG) and I have to believe Boeing wants more than a 60 degree front view for training. I could be wrong.
I will be extremely disappointed if they are trying to kill triple monitor support.
at least we arent the only ones who do it
