To me an overhaul is much more needed now after the overhaul.
9 Likes
This is perhaps the only case in video games history when a step backwards is more than necessaryā¦
8 Likes
The whole package is worse than it was at release.
I make no apology in admitting I am absolutely addicted to flight simming. It is my main hobby and spend pretty much my entire time doing it when not working. So I have spent hours and hours everyday with this sim since release.
It is without doubt worse than when it released in most aspects. The weather is not a patch on what it was, the clouds have been downgraded in quality so much, and the scenery draw distance is a shadow of its former self. The lighting is so dead and flat compared to how it used to be.
It is a such a painful experience using the sim now, and knowing how much pleasure it used to bring, every single flight you were just taken aback with amazement at the sense of immersion and how great it looked. Now, I honestly spend most flights thinking how ugly it looks compared to previous builds. There are also so many bugs, it is just incredibly frustrating. For sure, it is has had the most disappointing development of any game I have ever seen.
It really galls me, because I used to adore this sim so much, and now it simply disappoints me.
15 Likes
To be honest, Iām now kinda regretting I wanted to have the METAR in the sim, lol.
I wanted to have proper visibilities and cloud bases and instead got this mess.
8 Likes
Thats the problem - we donāt need METAR in the sim, we need METAR from the sim instead.
Model the weather then take the METAR from the model not real life.
8 Likes
I saw so many instant weather changes itās actually frustrating.
going from few clouds to suddenly high winds yanking my plane with big overcasts.
Itās 1. immersion breaking 2. not a fun experience in flight.
Also yesterday when i was parked in EDDN it was raining, suddenly clear weather, metar changed instantly again to rain.
I almost ALT F4ād as it felt like someone was playing a prank on me.
4 Likes
Well the problem is that Meteoblue isnāt particulary good at forecasting low IFR weather, this has been discussed many many times.
At some places it can be very precise, modelling shallow fog or a major stratus layer with low visibilities.
Some places get fogs very often at autumn and winter and I havenāt experienced any in the sim.
Other thing is that Meteoblue can at least forecast the cloud layers, but it canāt forecast the actual visibility.
It doesnāt know if it will be 1000 or 100 metres.
Thatās what METARās good for. But it seems that it ends there.
Even local weather prediction models have troubles with forecasting foggy weather reliably.
By the way - thatās why I think that being able to choose between Meteoblue and METAR weather implementation is key.
If I know there will be low IFR weather, Iāll switch to METAR.
If I know Iāll be flying through weather systems and want the weather to be more ābelievableā Iāll switch to Meteoblue.
4 Likes
Are we actually expecting too much from a sim - is weather modelling even actually possible with a sim??
Or how about this - use METAR data only from many airports and then average the results en-route to build the overall weather??
Thatās very possible. Or maybe Iām expecting too much haha.
That would look even worse that it is now. Some METARs are sent once an hour, not every 30 minutes.
Not all METARs report all of the weather. Some report cloud layers above 5000 feet only if itās TCu (towering cumulus) or Cb (Cumulonimbus).
2 Likes
Then i really have no idea, maybe its best to drop real weather completely and focus on building a fully controllable AI system instead ?
The thing is that they focused on integrating METAR more than actually fix Meteoblue inject correct data. They started to implement METAR right after release 2020 instead of fixing the issues with the servers that injected same winds all over the world. Iām 100% sure Meteoblue not predicting same winds all over the world at the same time.
I know low visibility is hard to predict. But itās even more hard to get it correct in the sim when we were missing 12 hours of data. Only 12 hours of data were correct. With different timezones some never had Meteoblue correct and some always had it correct.
When both of those data issues were fixed they announced the visuall overhaul we have now. 
I like the idea of generate in sim METARS. But the thing is we should already had that thing with ATIS. But that have not told correct things. How should they manage a generated METAR system if they canāt get ATIS correct?
I think we all could see much potential in the system at release. And we was amazed how good the weather were back then. And the thing we could complain about were the accuracy. Now when the accuracy is a bit better we start to complain about things that is caused from that improved accuracy. We wanted the weather to be the same but more accurate. Yes, we expected too much at release. Now we expecting them to get it back how it was instead because now we know 100% accurate is not always better.
If we want a 100% accurate weather report itās easy to observe the weather in the sim even easier than IRL. And that observation is always accurate. Thats how it work IRL.
I wish they included an online ATC integrated in the sim. Then had a simulated TOWER on all of the major airports that could see the airport and report own ATIS.
5 Likes
These upper wind shifts and change in pressure and temps are just ridiculous. How this has been going on for so long with no fix is just beyond me. Wake up Asobo. Stop implementing all your additional stuff like Topgun and just fix the core issues. Itās embarassing.
5 Likes
It feels like METAR also disturbs airports without METAR. I mostly get clear skies above airports without METAR available. Why is the weather changed around airports without METAR? Can somebody explain that to me? Why not use a variable like this (IF No metar available = Meteoblue only)
2 Likes
Another evidence that in its actual state METAR integration does not work and should not have been implemented without more testing. The ideal would have been to have an option like for DX12, activate it or not so that testers can report all those bugs and the ones that wanted to keep flying with a stable and realistic weather like in pre SU7 had that choice.
Also on you 1st screenshot, we can see that clouds outside of the METAR bubble that should come from Meteoblue are the uggly ones that we see everywhere, so even something is going wrong with Meteoblue clouds. They not only changed METAR integration but also the way Meteoblue clouds and weather system is rendered. Looks like they are building a new weather system from scratch, why not improving the original one that was giving very good results ?. Really hope SU10 will fix most of the issues reported many times and with many evidences in that Weather bug forum.
2 Likes
Well, lets see what su10 brings. I hope itās really an improvement this time. Couldnāt see a single improvement in su7 only issues and that was meant to be an improvement.
1 Like
I hope that the SU10 Cloud Layer Improvements will really improve clouds depiction and will add more clouds diversity. Those clouds I am seeing over spain this afternoon do not look like for me to any existing cloud type IRL (I am in ultra for clouds settings). I agree transparency is important but please donāt forget also cloud shapes and bottom/top to render correctly all types of clouds. Clouds were looking as real clouds at release, why have they been broken over the sim updates and it takes so long to fix them ?
1 Like
Yep Iām really hoping this too. Though Iām be nervous about it. Maybe it wonāt be too long until the beta release.
2 Likes
The things i want with the new cloud layer/logic system is.
-
more variety. Like it was pre su 7 with different forms of clouds all the time. Didnāt feel generic at all.
-
really thick cloudlayers as we had. Could go through an overcast layer from ground to almost cruise level. Felt so nice braking through that really thick layer. Now i can mostly see 2 layers only. One broken lower layer and one higher overcast layer. Between those itās nothing.
-
Less broken clouds. More formed togeher
-
No transitions, pre su7 it was none. Adding transitions is the worst thing. Never seen a hard transition in weather IRL.
-
No Metar bubbles, especially around airports that doesnāt report METAR IRL. Those feels like fiction to me.
-
Much more natural/organic METAR fog layer if those really is important or maybe make them optional. Because they also feels like this to me.
- Much more density in clouds especially the lower clouds. That we never experienced since release. We almost always see the sun through the clouds. Lower clouds should be more density in than higher clouds both types has much too less density though. That could impact fps but let us choose the density we want. I would preffer lower fps if i had higher density in clouds but some would maybe preffer higher fps.
7 Likes
I hope Devs will read your post and take in account all those points.
Regarding:
It looks like it will be the opposite:
- Cloud Layer Improvements (Bugs LT #2, #17) | SU 10
- We are fine-tuning the cloud layer system to be more precise and incremental. The layer will be much thinner at the sea level and thicker as we go to higher altitudes. The updated system will help better depict a realistic cloud coverage at low altitude.
1 Like
Yeah, that part i donāt understand actually. If they mean how high the layer can go then isnāt Meteoblue deciding how thick/ high the layer should be in the sim anymore? What decide the thickness? Asobo? Seems like it. A METAR has not thicknes stated, needs to come from Meteoblue. If they mean the density then it should be the opposite. Higher density at low altitudes.
1 Like