And I look at those graphics and think to myself, if you can look at that and be happy with what you see, you have no concept of what great graphics look like. It’s all about perspective now isn’t it. From what I used to see to the picture you are showing, that looks awful. My graphics used to have so much more clarity and definition than the pic you are showing. Those buildings look horrible, TO ME. The trees are quite unrealistic now and everything look off.
I’m sorry you have not experienced what many of us have. I guess you can be happy knowing that we now have to suffer with what you think is amazing. So you are seeing the best there is now. That’s awesome for you and others…
What will appease me, and I am sure many others, is to get back what they took. I want what I paid for. What I had and have enjoyed. I want back what THEY PROMISED in all their ads and videos and pictures. Those are why I bought the Simulator and I had them. I was so blown away by the visuals I had. And now, I am simply ■■■■■■ off. They took something that I paid for and yes, I want it back. THEN and ONLY THEN will I be appeased!
I see it as part of loading the assets, as at least I see them only quickly “melted” while loading up. If the 360 area will be cached with the new slider and how it’s handled, I actually see a chance.
Caching the area in 360° won’t help, since this melting is part of how LOD works (it’s the same mechanics like in every other game). You have several invisible spheres around your camera spot, where each of them render objects in different levels of quality. The closest sphere directly surrounding you has the highest quality of polygons used and the bigger the radius the less complex the rendered scenery gets.
In the current case i assume that Asobo just drastically decreased the LOD radius of the spheres to lower the maximum amount of polygons being rendered on screen which eventually increases performance (on the cost of quality).
This is something that didn’t happen in this extend in preSU5 and it’s (together with the culling of invisible objects) one of the main reasons they were able to gain so much performance out of this engine now.
But yeah i guess it would be totally possible to restore the old LOD radius again, but ofc this might have a severe impact on low/mid end systems, like it already had been in the past.
That’s why i think these reverts should only be made available in ultra mode (or even higher as Asobo once stated in an interview)
Thanks, you’ve shown exactly what I was talking about, I was going to suggest people do the London demonstration flight for an easy way to see this.
Even in your closer up photos the buildings still aren’t drawn, and this is what I get, the HSBC building only gets it’s external textures as I’m literally right on top of it, as you say, incredibly distracting. And then if you fly on and look ahead, all around the city there are masses of formless polygons where smaller buildings should be. It’s awful.
One person showed a picture claiming there is no problem, which as has been pointed out actually demonstrates this problem exists even when you are low down right next to buildings, everything in the picture is at close range and there are still loads of textures missing.
I don’t expect it to be fixed today because it doesn’t relate to culling, this isn’t textures being wiped when you look round, it’s textures just not being loaded, it seems the LOD distance is ludicrously small or there is a very serious problem with data streaming. As it hasn’t been mentioned at all by Asobo, I fear they don’t yet know what it is or how to fix it. Despite what some have said it is not related to the recent photogrammetry problem as it was there before that and still there now.
And once again we see a real problem being dismissed by some here who claim not to have experienced it, who we then see by their own evidence are in fact suffering it like the rest of us. It’s very strange and so frustrating people actively determined to stop things being fixed by denying the issue, so many threads would be so much shorter if people hadn’t kept trying to prove real issues don’t exist, or insist it must be someone else’s set up because, as they like to rather arrogantly say, everything’s perfect on theirs. Nearly every now acknowledged bug after SU5 was denied by many here at first before it was proven to be true.
So what we’ve learned is that some people are not very observant and perhaps not as superior to the rest of us as they think, or either so emotionally/financially attached to this they can’t accept faults (maybe they’ve boasted about it too much to friends to admit it is heavily flawed?), or they are not really that interested in anything resembling a flight simulator.
Wow! You really got fired up there, didn’t you? Who’s demonstrating self-acclaimed superiority now?
Some of us are just too busy flying to care that much about, or even notice, a few imperfections in an otherwise fantastic rendition of the entire globe. And you think we are the ones not interested in a flight simulator?
I think I may have misinterpreted/-remembered the description of the slider a bit, here’s the post by @Jummivana. I think it’s better to wait for the official release notes in a bit and then see how it works in-game.
I think the big difference in the viewpoints is based on what we had before. If you never were able to fly smoothly over cities like London, like I, you don’t really care that much about the texture loadings here and there. You just enjoy the smooth flight with graphics settings you never before could.
On the other hand if the performance was never really an issue, for those with high-end rigs, it is understandable that those long-standing texture pop-ins and morphings are now an annoyance, even more so than before since the SU5 really did not bring any improvements, rather only downgrades from their perspective.
I don’t know if today’s slider will fix this issue or not, we will see in a bit. But(!), if it’s not fixed, you can be sure that I will be supporting the effort to get it fixed, even though it really doesn’t bother myself that much at the moment.
Just remember It has not been mentioned in any comms, so if it doesn’t get fixed it should be no reason to trash the update. It should be evaluated only based on what it promises to fix and how well it succeeds in doing that.
Well this is the point I’ve made in other posts, if only it were just the graphics that have become problematic I wouldn’t be so bothered, but it’s throughout every element of the game, weather physics and wind/turbulence so storms and cross-wind landings hold no interest and weather radar is irrelevant, infuriating ATC, flight planning, flight models, seeing constant lightning in bright daylight when I’m not near a storm, constant thunder rumbling (whose idea was this, have they ever been in a plane?!), world map functionality etc. etc. Getting to the end of a long flight and entering the cleared approach into the computer for some reason causing ATC to cancel my flight plan and send me back up to 14,000 feet, it really makes me wonder what kind of mess the code is in and whether they even know what effect a change in one branch might have elsewhere.
I’m impressed if you say you’re ‘too busy flying’ and none of that bothers you! Yes I can go for a quick buzz somewhere pretty every now and again and enjoy the view, but that’s all it’s good for. But hey, I’m glad you’re enjoying it, and I hope when it all these things (hopefully) are fixed you will be grateful to those who were reporting problems to make the product better for everyone. It’s those who come on the forum purely to argue with people describing problems I don’t understand. What is being achieved? Yes some people go over the top with criticism, but at least there’s still a purpose which is raising awareness of problems, and after a year of many of those problems not being fixed, despite claims they had been, it’s hardly surprising people get angrier and want to keep repeating them.
I agree with this, I think it’s only natural that if you buy any product, and the manufacturer comes along and damages it without you having any say in the matter, you’re going to be upset. Imagine if this happened with physical products, you buy a car and then 6 months later Ford visit your house in the night, remove the hubcaps and put a dent in it because it ‘improves aerodynamics’, and it’s perfectly legal and there’s nothing you can do. It’d be madness of course. That’s what’s happened to people, hey bought something and it’s been forcibly degraded.
On your last point though, I think people are expected to include in their evaluation anything that was degraded with the last update. I don’t think that just because it isn’t mentioned in comms doesn’t mean people should have no complaints. It’s a significant degrading and they’re entitled to ask questions, they paid for a product.
Well, this isn’t a 20k car, but a 120 bucks entertainment product, so I don’t quite see the analogy. But I do get the sentiment behind it. I just think the only thing where they have degraded this for some of us was the culling, where they went overboard. And that should get fixed today.
Yes, of course, whatever new bugs are introduced should be included, so they can get fixed, my intention was not to exclude those. A good example of that is the ATC bug, again which should be corrected today.
Oh, Tidal… really? Just when some of your statements and arguments were making some sense to me. LOL Dude, If I bought a $1.00 pen and the company came to my house the next day and removed 20% of the ink I’d be so ■■■■■■ off you would hear me 2 states away!!! Cost has nothing to do with it. You buy a product based on what you KNOW it has and can do. For any company to come and then reduce that after you have paid for it should actually be illegal. IMO. The amount doesn’t matter. It’s not done in any other business POST SALE because it’s just wrong. Period. No 2 ways about it.
I’ve been experiencing exactly that from day 1 up until now. There are quite a few big reports and analysis available on this topic in this forum if you do a search.
