totally agree
UK Thames Estuary
1 Like
Absolutely not, the graphics have been downgraded since SU5 to give unnecessary performance gains, effectively forcing everybody onto lower settings whether they wanted it or not. It is unacceptable and the graphics need restoring to what they were pre-SU5. A lot of people have spent a lot of their hard-earned cash on top PCâs to be able to run and ULTRA, and now they are forced on to MEDIUM. maybe HIGH at best. It is scandalous.
4 Likes
Those donât really sound like performance improving changes.
How can you claim the gains were unnecessary? The one huge longstanding item on the list since the launch was performance. They donât only develop the software for those, who manged to get their hands on high-end 30-series cards during the pandemic when the supply was so limited that scalping was rampant and prices went through the roof.
5 Likes
Never understood this argument, let me see if Iâm understanding you correctly.
You spent a bunch of money to upgrade your PC, so everything should be tailored to only those with high spec PCâs even though the majority of PC users donât have high end PCâs?
As TidalPopcorn mentioned above, performance optimizations were the top issue on the Feedback Snapshot for nearly a full year. The community wanted it. They added extra options for those who did not like the object culling. They are making further improvements by adjusting LOD settings.
Listening to the community feedback and implementing long requested changes and improvements is âscandalousâ now? 
9 Likes
I agree that visuals have changed yes itâs a possible trade off as performance is much better. The stutters have gone! But we do need the visuals addressing as this does impact the game. Everything is more cartoon like and over exposed. The night lighting has got better recently so here is hoping the daytime visuals follow suit.
1 Like
Even if thats true, and Iâve never seen any evidence that the current ultra became what the old medium or high settings were after SU5 despite some people claiming so, its only true for another week. SU6 is going to introduce much higher LOD values for those that want them.
2 Likes
I donât see this âcartoonyâ and overexposure. Check the pics above.
1 Like
You have to be trolling.
Itâs called sarcasm. When people claim nobody gained anything from the performance optimizations and they destroyed the graphics, specifically the coulds as claimed in this thread, I have to side with them with examples.
3 Likes
Itâs scandalous since they expected these magical âoptimisationsâ to deliver significant performance gains without affecting anything visually⊠Asobo did fairly well concealing their optimisations but there will always be a tradeoff.
2 Likes
Flying into dark clouds the plane is illuminated by light from a sun that is able to penetrate clouds and illuminate just the aircraft. I have been flying since day 1 and I can definitely see a change since update 5 (Xbox update). The sim is still beautiful and the best sim I have had the pleasure of using. To get the performance like others have said we have had to trade some graphical pleasure. Which is a shame. Not going to argue with you about it. I have pondered on this on and off for a couple of months but my conclusion⊠graphically it is poorer than before the update. But still a great sim but not as great graphically as it once was. And thatâs a shame.
1 Like
First - why do you need to run a flight sim with 60 fps??? Itâs perfectly fine on 30.
Besides, if you wanted 60 fps pre-SU5 you could set it to medium/high(which is now post-SU5 called Ultra).
For those of us able to run it just fine pre-SU5 is now getting medium quality visuals on Ultra, just because some of you thought you could run Ultra on mediocre hardware.
Name on thing post-SU5 that you couldnât achieve pre-SU5? If you wanted performance you could just have lowered graphics to the level we have today. The sim now looks like a cartoon. And in VR itâs really badâŠ
2 Likes
Are you saying the current ULTRA is the same as the previous Medium? I used to play with slightly down tuned high settings pre-SU5 to have decent performance, now I get much better visuals when I can turn everything to ULTRA and even gain fps.
To me it sounds like there used to be an exclusive club of those who were able to play the unoptimized sim with the ULTRA settings and the members of that club are now angry with SU5 because it made it possible for so many others to join the club.
But, donât fret, I will not be able to utliize the new LOD slider much, my 2070s cannot handle the new max setting of 4. At least if it works the same as the usercfg parameter change.
3 Likes
I have learned always to have patience and appreciate. For the first time a professional gaming company created a new modern Flight Sim platform which has great potentials. I have a good pc ( 11900K - 3090 Asus rog strix extreme OC - 64g ram gskill ) and i enjoy every sec in ultra settings. And if they decreased some visual stuff, they will fix it later. Right now i am enjoying aircraft like 787.747,320fbw on 60fps ( cap) with out a single stutter.
2 Likes
Yes, this I can confirm and there is a case to demand improvements on it. The rest, I cannot agree on. The sim is not graphically poorer than before. Yes, the overly aggressive culling was an issue and they have fixed that. But other that that, there hardly is any large scale graphical degradation. At least I have not seen any pre-SU5 videos that are visually better than what the sim can produce today.
4 Likes
Not only that, and I may be wrong, but I felt like I saw a bit of jealousy and/or resentment that the performance that was once only available for those willing to drop $2,500-$3,000 on a scalped 30-Series GPU was now also available to those of us running such potato systems as my i6-10600K paired with a 2070 Super.
I donât remember from whom I got that vibe, and I wouldnât call them out in public if I did, but it wasnât just one or two people.
2 Likes
I am sorry but this post need some clarificationâŠ
If I had a high end system âpre SU5â and was running everything on Ultra, then âpost SU5â the only thing I would notice would be my fans donât run as much.
My midgrade system is running at a locked 60fps at 1920x1080p with most settings on Ultra, now. âPre SU5â I was locked at 30fps and could not get better than 40fps with V-Sync off.
The clarification I am looking for here is, why would someone, with a faster system than mine, be forced to run at lower settings after SU5 if Asobo âdowngraded the graphicsâ to improve performance?
If the SU5 âdowngrade crowdâ is to be believed then the reduced graphics should have provided a spike in performance for the high end end user, NOT forced them to turn down their settings.
Sorry but you lost me.
1 Like
Thatâs what I was seeing when I changed my nVidia settings to âAntialiasing - Gamma Correction: OFFâ
Someone posted the other day that they saw better clouds with it turned off. When I tried it, that is exactly what I was seeing. Turned it back on and it went away.
Maybe check what you have set, and if its off, try turning on and see if it improves?
2 Likes