@Crunchmeister71 @AndyXPO i’d say and very clearly that there is no such thing as “happens to some and not otheres”, the drawdistance got changed quite a bit and until you actually investigate it, it is a very subjectiv thing to experience, hence the different statements, this subjecttivity comes down to where you fly on the globe, if it is eihter mountainous or flat areas, if dense as a forrest like in canada or just some shrubbery arund a french town.
It was at it’s worst with 1.14 but still changeable with a mod that again changed with 1.15 since when the user was not able to change it until a specific range, all what could be changed then was the thining/density in the distance, while with 1.16 change aint possible anymore.
1 Like
Well, evidence seems to dictate the contrary. You can see some people posting screen shots that still have trees way off in the distance. Seb’s demo during the Q&A shows the same. And prior to WU4, I saw the same - rich tree coverage as far as I could see. Then once WU4 hit, I’m now seeing it as you are and there’s nothing settings-wise I can do that will fix it.
That said, I think draw distance may have been reduced overall, but some of us are experiencing a bug that makes it far worse than others. And it seems like this bug’s been around for some time, as people were reporting this as far back as I can remember. It’s now just becoming more widespread.
My friend, takeoff from EFOP, climb to 3000ft and tell me, do you see trees as far as you can see? Would like to have a screenshot from 3000ft if possible.
Will do, standby.
1 Like
Very interesting experiment. I do concur - the trees do definitely not go “as far as I can see” at this location.
Not too bad, not as bad as some of the images I’ve seen here, but yes, definitely the trees stop drawing at a closer distance here than in other areas I fly around. How can this be!? Location based tree distance rendering? Well it makes no sense to me. All the best, Andy.
2 Likes
And it’s not only the fact the distance has been reduced, it also looks terrible that you have to watch the trees being continually drawn as you fly.
3 Likes
it shows exactly that, the distance is the same for everyone besides changing dependent of latitude, the only thing that differs and may give the impression of the tree-draw-dinstance beeing different is the hight, focal length of the camera, region, and if above mountainous or flat areas.
Yeah, tell me about it. The pop-in is terrible. I’m also getting that on buildings now. I never saw that prior to WU4.
can’t make out anything since the compression aswell as the resolution plus your scribbles mask what ever there might be to see? any chance to do a hi-res upload?
any chance to explain what do you mean?
“especially noticeable on the trees […] It seem like their are problems with the AA of the trees…”
FSX syndrome in MSFS is something else and invades the whole planet here and there, directly related to Bing’s lack of adequate imagery. I’ve recently made a mistake of flying out in Malaysia and it was terrible there, though for a moment it was FSX.
Altitude could be a contributor to the tree limitation also. I just flew across south Florida from Naples KAPF to Boca KBCT and at 3000ft, the tree distance appeared to go as far as you can see, but when I climbed to 5500ft, after a few miles, the trees cut off. If you zoom in looking out the window, the ground textures look low res and there are no trees more than a few miles from the aircraft. You can see the trees slowly loading in as you fly forward.
Asobo just need to fix the tree’s how they where during alpha. When alpha went beta it was allready downgraded and it got even worse with release.
Asobo denying this is ofcourse hilarious. Just open the ms store and look @ the ingame screenshots at the msfs2020 page. These are very old screenshots (even pre alpha i believe) and this is how the tree’s where.
Alpha was superior in almost every way (graphically) and performance wise it wasn’t much worse then it is now.
Btw the ingame loading screenshot also show the old tree’s. This is the worst part about it. Aaobo changes things to the game. Then they deny those things are changed, but somehow they don’t bother to get rid of those screenshots where the changes made are obviously present.
4 Likes
I noticed the same thing on the in-game splash screens. The trees look great on those. I also wish they would admit they made a change, not that they NEED to admit it though, we can all see with our eyes they did.
As I said before, reverting the change that allowed the tree mod from flightsim.to to work would be great, since they don’t see the issue and don’t appear to want to investigate it or fix it, let 3rd party mods fix it for those of us with an issue. That mod was fantastic, now its useless.
Oh you mean the sim I purchased in Aug 2020?
Agreed that sim was gorgeous looking
Nice screens. But i meant even before august release. Tree’s and buildings were drawn way further in earlier alpha versions.
Wow so it was ruined more and more with every update since alpha?
That sucks!
You might not have an issue but many of us do, in VR when I flew from Detroit yesterday I could easily see the Trees being rendered in a certain NM Diameter from the plane. It looks hideous and incredibly poor and thats with Trees on Ultra, regardless Asobo changed something a patch or two ago that also broke 3rd party mods that “fixed” this issue. Now it’s on them to fix it…again, it may be “nothing” to a lot of people/you, but for those of us that want proper immersion we need these little details ironed out properly.
For me, it may be a mistake just focusing on the trees. The tree line is just the obvious point of reference as those 3d objects are built “on top of” the ground textures.
FOR ME, it is the LOD distance and the constant morphing of textures as I’m flying that is a pain. Maybe it is bandwidth related although I do have a 500 mbps connection?
View out my window in France. You can see the tree line and very low res textures beyond. As I fly and get nearer to these areas, clearer (higher resolution) images “pop in” and are a bit disconcerting to look at.
2 Likes