Why saying this ? The LOD downgrade is universal, and very easy to notice. I mean, if you have not flown in “favorite” areas before the patch, looking around, to enjoy the scenery, than yes, you might not gonna see any difference… And i don`t want to pick a fight here, again. But at this point, this issue (LOD) is all confirmed , and not just for "some’… If it does not bother you, all is good. Enjoy the flying !
Film grain is only visible in the hangar, same as chromatic aberration. Disabling in the cfg affects only hangar view.
That ghost line goes way back beyond release.
Take a close look at the loading screen with the C172. You can see it in the far away mountains.
Exactly no need to lower quality for everyone and make the sim look like fsx if the the sim stutters then play it at low settings until u get a better pc before the patch the only prob i had was the weather stock at 225 .Or do like other sims make a beta let us try it and if we dont like it we go back to the old patch
Please confirm if any of you reported to zendesk issues confirmed in this thread :
- Tree LOD
- Water LOD
Ticket # 56552 with link to this post
So did Asobo acknowledge any of the downgrades or broken bushflights at all since the update?
The lack of communication starts to annoy me more than the actual bugs.
Submitted a Zendesk report, I do not like to have my visuals downgraded just because some had bad performance…
My fear is different: they downgraded this stuff because the traffic on their servers is to much. But this would basically mean that they could downgrade the visuals at any time they want and we can do nothing about it. Except complaining. But come on, if they already start downgrading stuff a month after release, how will it be in the future, if maybe sales are not that great anymore and user numbers dropping? Will the remaining simmers the suddenly have a downgraded sim not looking any better than FSX just because they want to safe some money by reducing the amount of their servers?
An absolute joke is when they show those world tour heavily edited videos from unfinished version.
Its marketing off course, but sadly many people will fall for that or dont notice that its not from current state
IMO its bad practice to advertise something that only MIGHT look like that in future, especially now if the trend is the opposite (degradation of visuals)
To be fair, this kind of scheme is employed in other sims, and most games. The difference though, is there is a lot done in order to mask this.
Take x-plane for example. It has a bubble as well, but it is far from obvious. It also extends out a lot further. But at high altitudes, you can see the edge of where the bubbles ends. In their case, I think it is actually a rectangle though.
Actually, at high atls you can’t really see it in x-plane. Because the cloud layers, haze, and other atmospheric phenomenon are used to conceal it. Even if you set weather to absolutely clear, the atmospheric distortion of light particles and haze still cover the area where dense scenery stops.
But when x-plane users run mods that remove these effects, then what they usually do next is go to the forums to complain about what they see. LOL.
Back to MSFS2020… what we are talking about here fundamentally gets back to the difficult balancing act that must be done to balance visuals with hardware compute power. By making the high detail bubble so small, they are trying to offer high graphic detail (at least within that bubble) and make it work for lower end hardware – and ultimately xbox hardware.
The problem is, people who bought current gen high end PC hardware for this, should not be held back to the same visuals that aged or lower end hardware (or consoles) can do.
I am sure they were hoping that users will be so amazed at how things look inside that bubble, that they won’t notice the rest. Clearly, that isn’t the case.
Getting to this patch, one of the things it was to address was “increase performance”. There are only two ways to do that:
- Find a more efficient way of doing the rendering work
- Lighten the workload
I think we all hope that what has happened is more efficiency has been implemented, but perhaps instead what has happened is the workload lightened by decreasing the bubble size and/or lowering the graphics quality.
There are great efficiencies to be gained by moving to a more modern graphics API, but they chose to stay on DX11. That is a design decision that I am sure is going to be a thorn in their side for quite some time to come.
it has been there since alpha 1
Yeah doesn’t look as good as before and I haven’t noticed my fps going up at all really. Somehow made it look worse AND get no performance gains
I went into “Global Rendering Quality” and changed it through all of the different settings, saving it each time. Then, I went though and manually adjusted the individual settings to tailor it to my video card’s capability (currently a 980Ti while my RTX2060 Super is away at RMA).
After doing this, the patchy trees issue went away, and the full forests are back.
There has only been a fairly short timeframe between the initial release and the release of the current patch. Looking at the number of other significant issues that have not yet been fixed, where many of these would seem to be relatively straightforward to address by a well resourced development team.
Given these observations, it may be seen as doubtful that any significant or major breakthroughs would have been made in the direction of Point 1 in this short time period.
Unfortunately this leaves the uncomfortable possibility that the ‘improvements’ may only be related to Point 2.
I’m beginning to wonder if reliance on having streamed data is such a good idea. I realize there are multiple petabytes, but perhaps there is a better way.
Streaming is prove reliable (Netflix, etc.) the question here is how they implemented in the game and what kind of infrastructure they have in the backend.
Well. Based on the quality of fixes that were developed by the dev team, I actually don’t believe they got the most efficient product so there might still be room. They just need to put everything else on hold and do week or two of heavy perf optimizations…
Netflix has hundreds of millions of paid subscribers, and can afford the fast streaming infrastructure and bandwidth. Although MS can do it, I can’t see it being economically viable for a few hundred thousand users.
The waves were a nice touch, but at the cost of everything else. They don’t look very realistic, and they move far too fast. At altitude, due to their size, they would appear to be moving very slowly. But they moved like the waves you might see at your feet while standing on the coast.
It’s the same disconnect you see while watching those old 50’s war movies, where the very well modelled battleship that is about three feet long has very unrealistic moving waves, even when they slow the footage down.