he’s just being deliberately obtuse in trying to convince himself nothing has been downgraded . fact is asobo has already released, and even releasing further fixes so his search for ‘proof’ is just asinine.
1 Like
What? I am supposed to trawl through thousands upon thousands of posts, across this entire forum, looking for an image you claim is on this here somewhere??
Why can’t you just repost both of the original, full size, uncompressed images here?
Looks like an ground elevation (geometry) issue where textures are put on top. I have seen these kind of things also before su5. But not in great numbers.
The Answer i had already give you yesterday. I see, you only write a lot, but not reading any thing… here is a Fish for you!
You posted a proven fallacy as if it was a fact - how is pointing that out either ‘deliberately obtuse’ or ‘asinine’.
I have been polite and reasonable throughout this thread.
I just don’t follow what you are saying. Some graphical settings were regressed in SU5 and Asobo admitted these because the issues were addressed in the hotfixes. Has this work been finished no, of course not but there’s also a major DX12U updating being worked on as well.
As for the two versions not being the same. Xbox hardware is using PC components anyway so physically it’s not that different. In fact, Xbox games are developed on the PC. As for the graphical settings and controllers, well there is nothing you can’t change in packaging, a toggle here, a switch there but these are just configuration differences. For usability MSFS is very accessible - that was a goal on the PC version from the beginning and fits well for the Xbox release.
In my view, I think your post is just a symptom of a lack of understanding of software development and MSFS capabilities. There is no reason why the PC version can’t fully utilize its hardware and maintain a strong focus for serious simmers but also share a code-base with consoles. If Aerofly and X-Plane products do this for mobile devices already then it’s a pretty clear conclusion.
3 Likes
I understand that English is not your first language, but you are not making any sense?
Please show me where you explained anything to me about this image.
You want me to search the entire forum these images but you can’t post them or even give me hint as to where they are?
And I don’t understand this bit at all:
I am not being unreasonable - if you want me to compare the images, you have to tell me where they are.
i posted based on my experience - i’ve never seen my gpumem utilization go above 8gb in SU5 (3080ti). fact. only reason i looked was the insane clipping/poppingi noticed on my first flight after the update. this was a definite downgrade for me.
but… if you can kindly show me how i can get the sim to use up all my vram to disprove my supposed fallacy that would be great?
people are taking the trouble posting you photos - your response? “its cropped” “where’s the original” = obtuse. continued claims of “there’s no downgrade” when its been acknowledged and a fix has been released and a further one is on the way = asinine. comprende?
1 Like
If I am going to compare 2 images, it is hardly unreasonable to want them AT LEAST uncompressed and in their original resolution.
Do you honestly think a cropped, compressed and hugely downsized image is if any use for meaningful comparison? Sorry, this is not being obtuse.
I have discussed, several times, the issues that have been acknowledged and slated for fixing, and the reasons they do not amount to a deliberate downgrade. This is not being asinine.
Please refrain from making unfounded allegations and insulting behaviour. It isn’t a flattering look and is contrary to forum rules.
1 Like
No problem. Simply set all details on maximum (Ultra + 2048 on shadows and 8x8 supersampling) render scale 200. Then go to an object heavy location (handcrafted airports are good).
Below is at Gatwick (EGKK from flightsim.to).
Edit: My card is a 3080 with only 10GB of VRAM. I have seen the sim use 9.4GB post SU5. This is without editing the config file.
And some are refusing to see what is before their eyes.
Indeed arent you the same guy that bounced onto the Edinburgh issue thread refusing to see the issue to the point that you even posted screen shots of your own that clearly showed the issue and stated that this was fine and looked exactly how it did before?
(I think in that thread you even eventually admitted you actually didn’t know how it was supposed to look?)
With such past performance how can you expect people to trust your judgement when it comes to discussing visual fidelity?
2 Likes
An interesting spin on a thread where you claimed Edinburgh looked completely broken and like a nuclear bomb site yet I and several others posted images of it looking fine. You then pivoted to say that it was the wrong type of buildings - one hell of a pivot!
If we are reminiscing, I seem to remember you were also one of those pushing the ‘downgraded to fit on Xbox’ conspiracy theories, where the sim had been crippled so it couldn’t use more resources than the Xbox has - how did that theory work out for you?
Yes, as I have stated many times before, there are data issues in Edinburgh. That is a bug not a downgrade.
You were unable to see the difference between generic autogen and UK world update autogen.
You posted a screen shot of your own with the issue visible and claimed it looked fine.
You don’t seem like a reliable judge of visual fidelity.
It did look fine - which was the whole point (certainly not the hellscape you originally claimed!
) It was only then that you pivoted to the building archetypes being incorrect in my perfectly fine looking image.
Which was the very point of the thread. (That autogen wasn’t populating and when it was it was the wrong building type making Edinburgh look extremely different and very far from fine in dozens of different users screen shots.)
And yet you failed to see any of this. For you it was “perfectly fine”
ok thanks. did a quick test with your settings and its used the most vram i’ve seen in su5. it was the render scaling. post SU5 i had to set it down to 100 as anything above 100 was causing tearing - even with vsync. so my alternative was using DSR in nvidia ctl panel (scaled to 1.5 resolution). but hopefully this gets fixed too - wasn’t happening before su5.
but seriously as someone above just said some settings were regressed for SU5 and yet this is no downgrade? whatever man, let’s not split hairs. as long as things get fixed eventually i’m happy.
1 Like
Your original post never mentioned building archetypes at all.
I have no idea why you were, and obviously still are, so bitter about this, but I am not going round and round with you again because you will inevitably resort to personal insults, just as before, and cause another headache for the mods.
Would you care to link to any post in that thread where I have made any such suggestion?
Fair enough, I think we agree on enough and can let the differences be sorted in the updates.
i actually wouldn’t say the shimmering is subtle in 4k. Not sure about lower resolutions, but its incredibly distracting in 4k