Upcoming Dev Q&A Wishlist

It is on ultra. I only see it on high alt flights. Its never that way on lower-level clouds.

I don’t disagree with you at all.

You asked above why people post here when they don’t have the issues. I actually think it is as important that they do as the people who are experiencing the problem post that they have problems. My thinking here is:

If the threads within the forum only show one perspective, the impression that this is how the sim is for everyone is likely to emerge. The devs (assuming they do read the forums - which they say they do) should be looking to see the balanced view though - so yes there is problem XYZ - but does this affect everyone? What common factors might there be? How prevalent is it? etc.

People who are having issues might find solutions from those who don’t have the problem (example - maybe my post above about the nvidia drivers will help CapHicks01 - or maybe not, but if I think I’d better not post because I don’t have the issue, I think it less likely that people will share solutions

Others (NOT saying you) have used threads similar to this as a way of peddling narratives about everything from constant degredation, misselling of the sim, xbox conspiracies, dumbing down for “gamers” not “simmers” etc etc. I’m, not going to comment on any of those, but if no-one posts counter views, these narratives could gain unwarranted or unmerited currency. You may well argue that maybe I’m peddling the opposite “Asobo is always right” narrative - that is not my intent - but balance is key I feel.

There will, of course, always be people who post the “well I don’t have the problem, so it doesn’t exist and it’s all your fault”. I try not to do that, and maybe don’t always get it right. But equally I do feel that I should, where warranted, share some balancing views.

2 Likes

It’s good to have some context, unless i missed it it was already mentioned

As example, high level clouds:
http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/cld/cldtyp/hgh/crs.rxml

It does not have the same fidelity, but if i’m correct it has always been like this (i’ve seen other variations in sim though currently)

It’s not hundreds of users, only a handful. Every update they are degrading the graphic quality according to some which doesn’t make any sense. If that were true a screenshot from a year ago should look very different from a screenshot taken today, which isn’t the case.

Why don’t people complain about all the missing cloud types that could improve the sim by a lot?
Or them adding fog? Or clear air turbulence?

Why are we still talking about trees? Why aren’t we asking for more tree types instead?

1 Like

Its not with each update as far as I’ve noticed. It mostly happened with the so-called “Performance Plus” update.

2 Likes

I would include the following:

Terrain morphing - still prevalent, possibly worse post WU6

Approach flyback bug

Missing/incomplete/misaligned scenery in areas with Worl Updates

Covered in many threads, including this one:

Plus a lot of the flight dynamics, wind, ATC etc that other have mentioned

2 Likes

Nobody in this post is talking about trees other than you, and comparing them to X-Plane.
My concern is 2 things that took a huge hit since SU5 on my high-end PC with a RTX 3080 graphics card:

  1. Clouds,
  2. Shimmering (especially in VR using my G2 Reverb).

The second being a logged bug with over 130 votes, 152 posts and over 3,000 views.

As for the clouds, I am not complaining about what they looked like before SU5, but since then, they don’t look the same, see my post here (and there are many other documented examples in this forum):

Other than the above, I am looking forward to all kinds of other improvements and updates, especially related to realism (as I am a pilot myself)

I hope this concludes our little side discussion.

I paid for more tree types. I recommend Bijan’s Seasons Pack. You can also pay for obstacles like cranes, transmission towers and smokestacks, but there’s a great freeware option for that as well. I think we’ll be waiting a long time for those things in the sim otherwise. But we’ll have air races!

I’m in full agreement with you on turbulence and other realistic aspects of flying.

Maybe you are right and i’m just not seeing it or caring about it enough. I get it everyone is different.

But it’s mind blowing to me how bad some aspects of this sim are while the graphics seem to be the only strong point of this sim, and people proceed to complain about the only good thing.

Seems a bit counter productive, it seems they can make very big steps on the other fronts but they’re busy investigating tree sizes and downgraded graphics.

2 Likes

absolutely agree

The thing is that graphics then and now are also almost incomparible because people update their systems software/driver wise at minimum.

If the graphics for one are awesome, as shown in screenshots, and bad for others (under equal sim settings which all should be working) screenshots compared. The remaining part is user environment, which is often taken out if the equation.

With then and now, as it is with user systems. All should be 100% equal (including chip lottery) before proper comparison can be made.

If on a system it looks better then another system, is it running a different mfs? Nope. Is it a different system? Yep. Does it run different software? Highly probable.

So, in short i’m agreeing with you (tree/cloud types etc.)

Sorry to be pedantic but it’s “lighting”, what you’re talking about is nothing to do with thunderstorm “Lightning”. Being English i know exactly what you mean, but others whose first language isn’t English may get confused slightly :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like

I have a PC built and dedicated to MSFS. It runs nothing but MSFS (and a few tools used for MSFS like Navigraph).

I have been running MSFS on Ultra settings (unchanged) since day one. No issues.
After SU5 (+hot fixes) with settings still on Ultra, no changes, no driver updates etc. the quality of the items mentioned in this thread dramatically deteriorated (namely clouds, and shimmering). This issue has been confirmed and documented by many others.

If this issue is somehow not visible to you, good for you - focus on upcoming improvements and other things. It still needs to be addressed, as it is a documented, logged, and proven issue that was not there before, but is there now and severely affects the experience that was very consistent for months leading up to SU5.

3 Likes

How you build a pc does not guarantee anything, every second a pc runs, it’s downgrading which could expose issues when a piece if software changes. Also my system has been build for mfs (up to the point highly inflated prices needs to be payed). I’m running a second hand rtx2060 for a reasonable second hand price which also has been used for mining.

That my machine also has numerous development tools and multiple virtual machines, local vlans and idiotic amount of working and failing development usb devices is just a bonus. Allthough carefully crafted in how it has been set up, like you also have carefully crafted.

I think i’m fortunate not having these issues, which tells me, the sim is able to run with that quality. The bug can be logged which then also tells me people have these issues. The question is, is there a bug, or do some systems need workarounds developed?

Also, that a bug is logged, does not proof it’s a bug. It means there will be investigation. Outcome will be 50/50

Cheers

To add a differing opinion here.

To the devs: Please don’t waste more than 3 minutes in the Q&A on the (perceived or not) graphics downgrade in SU5. The sim is visually stunning and I couldn’t care less if it was 3% more stunning before SU5.

There are so many more important issues that need to be tackled and some where other sims are still ahead:

  • Viability of the platform (marketplace updates and API issues)
  • Quality assurance improvements (sim update cadence, open betas)
  • Improvements to the atmospheric simulation (turbulence, weather, …)
  • Ground physics
  • Completely broken ATC

Thank you!

1 Like

Thanks for clarifying, i always confuse this when trying to explain and its not my mothertongue :slight_smile:

1 Like

Great list! I agree with everything, especially the AA/Shimmering issues. I am not using VR, it is also clearly visible in 2D. Since I haven’t had this issue prior to SU5, I hope this will get resolved soon.

I also hope that this issue gets addressed as well.

4 Likes

Based on what is said during the Q&A will decide if I even put it back on my pc. No trust anymore in Asobo…not just a little…none. It is no longer something I’m interested in using since I would always start it up and the first thing I’d think of is, “How long 'til this crashes.”

2 Likes

Of the 4 points outlined, I’d say the first 3 are unnecessary, but yes it will be good to know what the plans are for SU6 and 7.

The ‘demand’ for explanations bemuses me, because it would be impossible to explain all the ins and out in a sensible way to everyone’s satisfaction, other than ‘the issues weren’t planned and are on the fix list’.

I understand the frustration for those who have been affected, but does anyone really expect that a public shaming and wringing of hands will take place? Anyone? I really don’t think so.

This entitlement to having hurt feelings acknowledged seems to me to be of zero value (5 minutes looking at these forums tells you how many people felt). Let MS/A focus on the future development of the sim. :thinking:

1 Like

You are missing the point. A confirmation that the items are “on the fix list” would be satisfactory to many incl. myself, provided that an estimated fix date is included. “Breaking” things without explanation and not providing a fix for weeks is what annoys people, as they suddenly lose the experience they had before an “update”. If you are not affected by the issues, good for you. Would you be affected by them the same way many other are, you would think differently.

4 Likes