I agree but: they deliberately changed the rendering engine (and more) for SU5, they didn’t deliberately degrade the graphics in a malevolent mindset. In turn, they have degraded the graphics in a way because the game is no longer capable of providing the same visual experience as before for many. It is not malevolent but it remains deliberate though, even if I’m certain they didn’t intend it would show this much.
The only goal in their optimizations was most likely to render faster, or more, without much visual differences. The end result is not always rendering more or faster in VR, somewhat more and/or faster in 3D, but there are unfortunately visual differences nonetheless, significant enough for having so many people saying so from their own experience between SU4 and SU5.
On the other hand it is capable of providing a better visual experience than before for many more, like myself, including the improved performance, both in 2D and VR. And I really don’t understand how exorbitantly good the visual quality could have been before, when it can deliver something like this now.
99% of people here dont care if it was “deliberate” , they care that a downgrade took place that they can see, and they want it fixed. You are just arguing semantics now because its the only way you can keep your little hobby argument going.
You’ve already lost it by the way. Similarly to how atheists cant disprove the existence of god, its simply a futile argument that defies all logic. (Same goes for christians trying to prove god’s existence, of course.)
A critical mass of people who are sensitive enough to notice these changes have noticed them. As long as Asobo can be made aware of the issues, we have no obligation to “prove it” to random trolls.
Sure I’m certain it is better for some people, which in itself shouldn’t preclude others from experiencing a less good outcome, and telling about this. It is like Gamers vs Simmers, Console vs PC, etc… Nothing is Manichean and it is not because someone is telling it is wrong to him, that it automatically deprives someone else from his own findings…
Naturally, but this discussion around graphics quality after SU5 has constantly had the underlying tone that the whole sim was degraded graphically for the vast majority. In the beginning it was somehow justified, as it revolved around the pop-ins and LODs, which actually everyone could at least see. Since they were acknowledged by the team, the discussion has evolved into quite extreme nitpicking on issues, bugs and glitches that are nearly impossible to notice, yet the underlying tone that these somehow justify the claims of “destroyed” graphics, as some put it here, has not changed.
Further I cannot fathom how anyone can make the overarching claim that the graphics quality is in any shape or form poor in this sim, as it is clearly capable of delivering something like the video in my previous post. Hence, I tend to think the reason for “poor” graphics does not lie in the sim itself (recent bing-data issues aside), but somewhere between the keyboard and the chair.
I believe that as long as we talk about these topics in terms of “poor”, “good”, “tone”, “barely see”, which are all related to our own personal feeling, there never will be a consensus and this is normal. However if you’re considering “the whole sim degraded graphically for the vast majority” this raises some questions: is the majority delusional or are there in fact an underlying truth to this that those who don’t see just can’t see?
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder so it’s said:
PS: I’m not saying FS2020 is poor and Unigine is glorious here, I’m just illustrating that “novelty” doesn’t necessarily mean “revolutionary”, even if the realization is really well done in the case of FS2020.
Apart from SU04 / 05.
How do you like this graphical experience?
Notice the left edge and top right.
That’s where immersion comes truely in, doesn’t it?
That is the problem, which besides the wrong viewports for mouse and cursor, has been annoying me since the beginning.
When Asobo/Microsoft were looking for beta testers they recommended 8GB of GPU and 16GB of system memory.
With update 5 call it what you wan’t it is now only using 4GB of my 8GB and 4.2GB of my 16GB system memory.
My GPU is running @ 100% we’re as before it was running at 60%.
The results are 50% reduction of graphics quality which is almost equal to the reduction of memory use.
I have changed nothing on my system. Asobo/Microsoft made the changes in update 5.
So give me back the flight simulator I beta tested and bought.
I am not taking sides. I feel like as if I took in my car for service and they changed the 8 cylinder motor for a 4 cylinder motor and called it an update?
NineMile,
I agree with you.
One thing that really bothers me is that when I am at a menu, any menu, I do not want my GPU running at 95-100%. What if I need to leave for a few hours, my GPU should not be processing anything.
It needs to be able to go IDLE ! Don’t BURN my GPU !!!
I’m with you on that. The only workaround I’ve found is to start load a flight plan, but don’t actually open it. Just leave the file menu on the screen.
It is the statements like this that are the issue. If your graphical quality has degraded by 50%, then there is something seriously wrong with your machine.
Aside from the acknowledged issues, the differences that are being discussed are subjective - so much so, that the vast majority cannot even see an issue. There are thousands upon thousands of people using the sim everyday (well over 2 million registered users) and yet it is always the same few that are on here complaining. Even if there is a problem (which I don’t personally see, beyond the issues acknowledged) those that claim to see it are a fraction of the user base. Admittedly, they make the most noise on here, but they are firmly in the minority.
You keep harping back to your system using less RAM, yet you have been shown MULTIPLE TIMES that the sim can, and does, use far more RAM when it is REQUIRED - it just doesn’t NEED to do so any more, which is a major plus point.
These images were taken yesterday. Are you seriously saying that the sim has EVER been capable of producing images 100% better than this?
Personally, I have never seen any images that are graphically better than these for this situation. However, maybe I am not a good judge, and someone could SUBJECTIVELY argue that there are points in this image that are not as good as before - but the fact that the difference is so small that the majority could not tell the difference, means the difference is not a ‘major downgrade’ and ‘50% reduction’ is completely ludicrous.
I completely agree with this. The sim is burning up way too much CPU and GPU power, at times when it shouldn’t need to - even while updates are downloading for hours! When not flying (and possibly in the hanger or market, to show of the item on display) there should be no need to use anything like this much power. The electricity cost, extra system pressure, and environmental impact, could be hugely reduced.
I use to set the Render scaling down to 30 and save. Dont forget to revert back before starting flight.
If you have Nvidia GPU
You can go to Nvidia Control panel / Manage 3D settings / Program settings / Microsoft Flight Sim / Max Frame Rate …and set that at 35 or whatever brings the Temp down to acceptable levels. ( that setting can be permenant for playing the sim as 35fps will be ok)
