I don’t know where the night sky looks like this but on my earth I have never seen it like this!
I am not talking about the constellations and accuracy itself but about the visible amount and size of the stars and planets. I changed the resolution to 1920x1080 (instead of 5760x1080) to avoid stretching like with night lighting.
As a “planetarium” sky to show optimally no question but as an after-sky in the simulator unfortunately too exaggerated, I know that this year Mars is quite close to earth but, I don’t need a telescope anymore:
Atmospherically the night sky looks fantastic. To be honest if making the planets slightly bigger makes them more clearer than they should be, it gives folks like me a chance to figure out what I’m seeing!
Your picture also has a little zoom I think. I’m happy either way, but to me it looks fine.
I run the sim for interesting travel images. Because of the way monitors work, there needs to be some exaggeration and improved contrast. The night sky and city lighting works fine for me. A full moon on show also works great. Don’t take the high contrast night lighting away or make it available through sliders in the weather control pulldown… if you have to dull the night skies down for real world pilots.
:-), well, I accept everything, it’s ok - but I wasn’t talking about use and taste but about realistic rendering !
after all we are talking about flight simulator and not about planetarium or travel guide !
Thank you, I’m afraid, depending on which VR glasses are used, that it will be so, also because of the brightness ! BTW no zoom used, that’s what I see, therefore the request, maybe it’s because of my system !
Cheers !
I don’t know if this has an effect in MSFS but I set the entry “WideViewAspect” in the CFG file to 0 (false), seems to be a bit better now. can also be a placebo, but I don’t think so. anyway, thanks to @sneaky74 who gave me this idea with his screenshot, it could be that it is again a problem with multi monitor solutions, i.e. zoom / resolution ratio (similar to the error with the night lights)!
BR !
Nice one @arniex78 if you did see an improvement then I would still raise this as a Zendesk ticket and put all the details in there - they can figure out whats going on and put in the necessary fixes.
I’ve spent a lot of hours playing Elite Dangerous, a space combat and trading game. When it initially released it had… I’m not sure what the effect’s called in optics terms - exposure, I guess? Essentially when you were close to a star or a brightly lit planet the stars in the background would be faded out: stars are blotted out a lot more quickly than we tend to think when surrounding light levels go up a little. (This is why the “you can’t see stars in the sky” claim for the Moon landings being a hoax is nonsense; and it’s also why you shouldn’t have been able to see stars through the Enterprise’s windows in a brightly lit room.) Sometimes it’s difficult to make out stars next to a bright Moon seen from Earth.
At some point a while ago Elite Dangerous was patched and the starfields were made significantly brighter and they don’t fade nearly as much, resulting in being able to see them through the glare of a star you’re sitting right next to. It doesn’t look as good, I don’t think. And yes I know this isn’t ED, but I think the same principle applies here: I think it does look better if starfield visibility can be made properly sensitive to light, whether ambient or artificial lights of airports or whatever. I’ve seen people saying they think the exposure effects in daylight are overcooked, though I quite like them, but I do find it a little jarring how bright the stars are sometimes. Yes, making them dimmer in some circumstances would make the sky less interesting - but (speaking as a low-altitude GA pilot for the most part) it would make flights out into wild, sparsely inhabited places much more wondrous.
