I completely agree with your statements, though i wouldn’t call BOSE soundsystems the top level of HiFi quality, but i got your point
What i actually want to add is that the “optimizations” that Asobo performed in order to make it run on XBOX are made in the sloppyiest way possible. Instead of rewriting the code to fully support multicore CPUs to their limits, they decided to just trade graphical fidelity for performance gains in all possible ways as we all discussed in these forums already too many times.
E.g. my 8 core CPU i7 10700K almost “idles” on ultra settings since the release of MSFS2020 with about 20-35% max. CPU usage even when flying over big cities. This just shows how poorly the engine is optimized in regards of using the existing hardware underneath.
I guess even the Xbox CPU cores are not used to their fully extend, since it’s basically the same code.
Imo Asobo should have dealt with this at the very early beginning of the engines conception, instead of what they are doing now by cutting down quality until it fits their needs.
Edit: It was the same “mess” btw in the early beginnings of FSX. If you had a dual core AMD CPU, the game ran only on a single core. But the reason/excuse back then was that multicore support in 2006 was a brand new thing and game developers had to get used to split threads to more cores and make effective use of it. Nowadays i would assume that this is an industry standard.
For Sims (and most other games) its hard to do multicore, because even if you have a nice multicore system, one thread has to wait for information from the other thread cause most stuff happens in a time line in sims and not exactly parallel…
What could help is turning the cpu overhead from gpu down, thats will require dx12. With dx12 you should see less cpu limitations with the cost of some more gpu use.
That’s because, imagine this… weather changes! And with those changes come changes in the way the clouds look. Someone, I don’t think it was you, posted two pics allegedly demonstrating the same “degredations” you seem somewhat obsessed with.
The pics were a supposed “THIS is what my clouds looked like before su5…, and THIS other pic is what they look like after”. My response back to him was that I see BOTH kinds of clouds because of what I just said to you… weather changes.
I don’t pretend to understand how MSFS builds a weather model based on METARs. Things like how many layers and what the thickness is are not reported in METARs, at least not above the ceiling of a broken or overcast layer. It’s probably part art and part science, because they somehow come up with weather above what can be measured by a METAR that at least hypothetically could be what’s up there, but it’s also likely an educated guess of some sort because there is no actual data about it. In other words, it’s just a reasonable estimate about what it might look like above what our actual data stations are capable of seeing and reporting.
My guess is you’re just experiencing different types of weather, and because you have a single image in your mind of what clouds are “supposed to” look like at all times, you’re stuck on that without allowing for, at the risk of repeating myself, knowing that weather, and cloud types, change over time.
Sorry, you misunderstood my question.
Because the screenshot you provided has depth of field turned on and the lens distortion also on, it is impossible to assess the clarity of objects in the background. The clouds are out of focus and because they are toward to outer perimeter of the screen they are also distorted.
I am not questioning that you are unhappy with the clouds. I was more interested in what it is about the clouds that you don’t like? Is it the cloud modelling? The definition? Grainy? They are unrealistic? I simply cannot tell from the image posted.
Sure I know this is not important for a flight simulator, but we had much better visual fidelity and should never have been stripped of the option to keep it that way.
My issue with the clouds is that they now mostly look cartoonish. My FSX clouds look way better than these. Of course, I was using REX textures then. The clouds before SU5 simply looked better. I have been a flying since I was 4 years old with my dad. I learned to fly when I was 8 years old. Did my first solo cross country when I was 15. I went to aviation college in New Hampshire to continue my aviation education. I have been flying, thus, for 50 years. I have 1000’s of hours and KNOW weather. I know clouds. I know types of clouds, when they show up, why they show up, and what they look like. I was Sooooooooooooooo happy with the cloud textures when FS2020 came out. I posted on forums often about how amazing they were and that if they kept up that pace and made things that nice that within a year or two the sim would simply be insane!!! Then came SU5 and I am sorry, but things changed. Speed and such got faster…and whether people want to admit it or not, some things like textures got worse. Period! I have seen the pics people post showing GREAT clouds…and if I say I see issues with them and nice as they appear they are not as nice as before SU5 then I am an idiot who is stuck in his own head. And when I post pics or others do, showing absolutely proof that graphic textures have been lessened in quality thoughtout the sim we are told either to suck it up and get over it or that we are nuts and we don’t know what we are talking about.
See the pics of the signs and text that now you can’t read but before SU5 you could?? Those pics simply say it all. Textures have been dumbed down. And we all know why.
I didn’t realize I do not use the lens distortion. Never have. It’s turned off. So if you are saying you see that it’s on based on the pic then either A) it’s a bug in the software or B) the pic is correct and the clouds look like cartoon clouds. Depth of field turned on… um…I may be blind when it comes to seeing a setting but I see nothing called that. And I don’t have anything that I would consider a DOF option turned on. I will, however, absolutely go check again soon as I am flying in a bit and will post again if I am wrong. Which happens occasionally. Rare, but does happen.
Greg
Of course you know, we post proof like this and those that think we don’t know what we are talking about make the fun excuses that these items don’t NEED to be clear and crisp and look real. LMAO!!! Imagine if they had ■■■■ like this in any of the GTA games… People would explode!!! BTW, the clouds and weather are sooooo much nicer in the GTA games!!! Just sayin…
As I stated in part of another reply to another user:
I have been flying, thus, for 50 years. I have 1000’s of hours and KNOW weather. I know clouds. I know types of clouds, when they show up, why they show up, and what they look like. I was Sooooooooooooooo happy with the cloud textures when FS2020 came out. I posted on forums often about how amazing they were and that if they kept up that pace and made things that nice that within a year or two the sim would simply be insane!!! Then came SU5 and I am sorry, but things changed. Speed and such got faster…and whether people want to admit it or not, some things like textures got worse. Period!
Pretty sure if I really wanted to, with all the training and keeping up on things as I have done in my life…I could go get a meteorological degree fairly quickly. Most experienced pilots probably could if they keep up and study conditions often enough.
I’m not sure what the Depth of Field really does in FS2020. I don’t know if you know more than I do.
In photography, it defines the range of distance (measured from the camera) which will be in focus once you have focused on the main object of interest. As this option is in the Graphics menu (rather than the Camera one), it presumably does something even in the cockpit, so what is it focusing on in this situation? I can’t see that focusing on either the cockpit interior or the horizon would be of any use.
Outside the cockpit, it would presumably focus on the aircraft, so I did a comparison, using the central area of a view at EGLC. The image on the left is with the Depth of Field off, and the right with it set to Ultra.
@talgmar@MetalPlains3097
So this photo is where this whole DOF/Lens distortion discussion began. If the aircraft is in clear focus, (actually, the asphalt in front is the best focus), but the background is blurry, what would be your deduction?
the photo is taken with a drone cam and DOF is turned on
DOF is active on the external cam and the picture was taken with that
no depth of field adjustment is visible in this photo
Depth of field turned on… um…I may be blind when it comes to seeing a setting but I see nothing called that. And I don’t have anything that I would consider a DOF option turned on. I will, however, absolutely go check again soon as I am flying in a bit and will post again if I am wrong. Which happens occasionally. Rare, but does happen. 
