To be honest I’d prefer to be able to get the first version of the sim at the day it was released, and skip all these updates. I don’t get it why they force us to update every time. Why don’t they give you the option to rollback to some previous versions at least.
1 Like
Including reverting all the bugs that have been fixed since then? Why would you want that?
That’s actually a pretty easy answer. It’s because new game client versions have matching server-side code to go with them. If you were to run the launch version with the server-side code of today, you would be finding a lot more bugs and CTDs because the 2 aren’t compatible.
That’s the nature of client-server / cloud computing. If there are major changes, you can’t update one side without the other.
1 Like
I’ve been a dev building client-server applications for close to 30 years. I can tell you in no uncertain terms that’s exactly why we can’t roll back or opt out of updates.
6 Likes
@Crunchmeister71 @hobanagerik @LBPN @timmmie6969
I keep reading the same complaint. Over and over. “The quality of the sim is way worse than at release.”
Please note quality, not performance. There is no doubt that there has been a drop in performance.
As most of us do not have an old version running to make a quantitative assessment of the quality, we are being subjective. We are looking at what is on the screen and have nothing to compare it to except memory. How we felt about the sim at the time has an effect on what we remember.
There is one user that thru some sort of ‘black magic’ has been able to make that quantitative comparison for us. The results are startling. If you take the time to read through this post, you will find that not only has there been no degradation in visual quality, in some cases it has improved. For me, this falls in line with what I see on my screen. Only after one particular update which seemed to change some sharpening effects that caused the clouds to become very pixelated (fixed now) I would say my visuals are at least as good as anything previous.
Please take the time to view the comparisons. I think you will be surprised at how inaccurate our memory is.
1 Like
For me, it’s all about performance. I can anecdotally say that draw distances are shorter than they were, but really that’s the least of my concern.
I agree with the premise. I remember reading, not long ago, users reporting this “new” problem of those transparent strips in mountainous or hilly regions. I posted a link to a video shortly after release in August which had those same strips. I never saw them at the time, at least I don’t remember seeing them as anything untoward, possibly because I was still agog at what I was seeing.
The other new “issue” was the one of the mouse movement, and again I found a video from last year that showed that same jerky movement due to the negative mouse acceleration. It may or may not have gotten worse, but its still there. Video evidence is key for objective comparisons.
It most be something with your rig because mine is similar to yours and the sim does pretty good. In that case, enjoy going back to P3D or XP11.
Funny you would say that as you completely ignored my video comparison showing the difference in that mouse thread.
1 Like
You just waisted some precious minutes of your life reading this whole thread and tell us we should go back to p3d or xp11.
Completely agree Crunch.
I brought this up though as the old saw that they just keep turning things down is getting old.
I am still at a loss as to why some systems just seem to refuse to provide quality performance and others are more than just fine. After the patch, I saw a marked increase in performance. I was pretty happy with the performance before WU3/SU3 hit and would say that, for me, that performance was more than restored. I have spent some time in the past few days mucking about with settings, trying to see just how far I could push my i5-8400/2060S. I am now flying with very smooth visuals at 50-55 fps outside photogrammetry cities and bespoke airports. Inside those areas (SEA, YVR, YYZ, JFK) I am still solid at right around 40. I am still at 1080 but have bumped up to 4k with 50% downscaling. Didn’t see any improvement (my monitor just isn’t that good) so dialed it back to 1080. Only lost about 5fps during that experiment.
I have noticed that there is very little difference between low and ultra for most options given, except reflections, ultra slams about 15%. (I think it’s the drawing gauges again that does it) The most significant factor seems to be the LOD settings. At 300 object LOD I drop to about 1/2 fps from my base of 200. Terrain LOD is not as dramatic but everything is smoother at 200. Other than that I run a mix of high/ultra because I really don’t see any notable downside.
Why can I get that performance when systems like the OP has are struggling? No idea. There has to be something we are missing. There is no way those specs or even yours should be underperforming my modest rig.
Last week’s patch definitely made it playable for me again. But I’m still on average 5 fps shy of pre-SU3 numbers. And I can feel it, particularly when landing in busier areas and frame rates dip into the teens. Prior to SU3, I could expect lows in the low 20s. Not great, but still better than what I’m seeing now.
Opposite for me. Object LOD at 0 or 200 has no measurable impact. Terrain LOD murders my fps if I go over 100. 80 is the sweet spot to make the game playable. Lower as little noticeable effect. As soon as I go over 80, I see a decrease in numbers. Over 125 and I’m back to single digits.
See, I just don’t get that. Even with your pop outs, etc. there is no way your system doesn’t out perform mine. I don’t know what settings could be causing the rates to fall off that much.
What res are you running? Scaling? LOD settings?
Pop outs have negligible impact. 2-3 fps loss on average when all my instruments are undocked.
And you’re absolutely correct. I don’t exactly have a beast grade machine, but I have a faster CPU and GPU than yours. I’ve seen others with the same CPU and GPU as me reporting the same performance levels I had at launch.
I’ve currently got a mix of medium, high and ultra (windshield and cloud only) settings. Running 3440 x 1440, 100 res scaling. Object LOD at 200, terrain LOD at 80. None of the settings seem to make much of a difference between medium and ultra to be honest. The only settings that seem to make any real tangible difference is resolution scaling and terrain LOD. Other settings may be a different of 1-2 fps at most between medium and ultra.
I’m just scaling stuff back to try to claw a few extra fps out if possible to try to hit that magic 30 and try to keep my lows from dipping below 20.
I didn’t ignore it, I don’t agree with what you are showing. Unless I can show you a video of my own from last August which shows the stuttering of the mouse movement.
Just digging the video out now.
It’s shown pretty much any time I ma viewing the aircraft from outside, and back then I didn’t know you could turn off the instruments. This is not the drone view, and I am using the mouse to move the camera around. I have no ailments with my hands, and you will see the jumpiness of the camera, as the small movements are ignored until they are larger ones, and then the view suddenly lurches around. And I am not referring to those very obvious hat switch views, where I instantly flip from the cardinal positions.
This video was uploaded August 21st, three days after release.
I have another video from August 28th showing the transparent strips in the mountains as well, proving this is also not a new issue.
Really suggest dropping that windshield down to high. Only worth a couple ticks, but a couple is a couple and I really can’t say I am missing anything. I am used to cleaning my windscreen and so losing a few scratches and smudges just seems right. 
1 Like
To the OP, I feel your pain. With nvidia dropping support for the 20 series cards, VR and MSFS have not seen any improvement from nvidia since the 457.30 drivers. A forum member here with considerable more time at this put it rather well. To follow this: will be to follow into a dark deep hole and expensive as it in all likely hood it will never work correctly. Many folks are fed up as I am. I made it half way around the world on my trip around the world we great expectations. I don’t think I’ll fly again, after all no support from nvidia, can’t opt out of mandatory updates, patches once a month if were lucky, break things, WTF am I doing here.
2080ti
Stay safe,
PACO572
Some evenings the sim runs well. Some nights (last night) I spent 90 mins tweaking before even clicking the batteries on. I lower everything the frames don’t change. It’s tiresome. I’m know if my a320 c&d at lax is 29fps and the ms times are 50+ that going into vr isn’t even worth it.
Hags, drivers, motion, hz, render, around and around we go chasing our tails. Its like playing a different game one night to the next.
I’ve tried it at different levels. I don’t see a difference between medium or ultra on the glass. Ultra just looks better in the rain too.
Clouds on ultra only costs about 1-2 frames over medium, so I leave them where they look best.
The real issue is that I’m having to penny pinch a frame or two like this with different settings in order to reach 30 fps with my hardware.
Let’s keep it civil. This has been a solid discussion with very little name calling. Lets keep it that way.
1 Like