Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest TIYCS

Alpha Channel Transparency Issues Between Cirrus & Cumulus

Recommended Posts

Hi,I wanted to note something here just for the record, and to find out if it's something the HiFi team is working on or not:In all previous versions of ActiveSky for FS2004 there had been an issue with the rendering order of clouds based on their actual relative locations in the sim (i.e. darker clouds in the distance suddenly being rendered "in front of" lighter colored clouds which resided in the foreground, thus ruining the sense of depth and distance for the viewer). This seems to have been addressed in ASA to a large degree for the lower level clouds, as I am no longer experiencing this issue to such a large degree between non-cirrus cloud types.I am getting it 100% of the time, however, with cirrus vs non-cirrus. Every time I'm cruising above a cirrus layer, it gets rendered "behind" any other non-cirrus clouds that reside below it at a lower altitude. It is difficult to create a static photographic example that clearly illustrates this because it is far more apparent when in motion. But I'm including a full size HD screenshot here to try and illustrate it:KBLI%20to%20KLAS%20-%2010%38%30p%2048.jpgAlmost all of clouds in this image should be at least partially obscured by the white cirrus layer which resides at the higest altitude of all clouds in the shot. But instead the only layer that gets obscured is the cirrus layer itself. The clearest example of this is in the upper left corner of the shot, where the farthest clouds are visible on the horizon. The white cirrus are blotted out by the cumulus/stratus layers in the distance. If you look very carefully, you'll see the fine traces of the upper cirrus layer at it's most distant point, just above the farthest stratus clouds. If you can see that, it should help put things into perspective here as to which of these layers reside where.Any input on this by the team would be appreciated. I'd like to know if I'm forever stuck with this in FS9 or if the brilliant minds of HiFi can remedy it!Thanks,Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I see that Jim has been here multiple times to answer multiple posts since I posted this topic, but there has been no response made here. I hope this is because he is working on getting more information from the developers before he responds, and not because he's chosen to ignore it (??).(I have posted several things that haven't been responded to, so it's not like this is an isolated issue.)Thanks,Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,Once we send data to FS we don't have any control over how it is displayed. That is up to the FS graphics engine. Yes, textures we can modify before FS starts, but we can't modify how FS displays them.1. We are working on our next SP release and the cloud popping issue is one of the many things we are looking to fix.2. I thought the icing thread was taken care of.What other threads of yours have I missed? I'll be happy to re-visit them. Just give them a friendly bump.Thanks,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the response. That is helpful to know, as it's one of by biggest pet peaves with FS9 weather. Now I can discontinue hoping HiFi will (be able to) "fix it".

What other threads of yours have I missed? I'll be happy to re-visit them. Just give them a friendly bump.
I misspoke, I'm sorry. I should have said "a couple" not "several"...The next one was a request that you please pass along to the development team the questions we all have which you don't know the answers to... so that maybe we all can be enlightened. There are a lot of people wanting to know if there is progress being made with respect to their particular issues, but there's not a lot of info available. We realize the team is working on SP1, but it would be helpful for everyone involved if there was a little more inside info made available to users on a regular basis. Would it be possible to please do that?Thanks,Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chris,I updated the pinned SP1 thread yesterday afternoon!Thanks,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Chris,I updated the pinned SP1 thread yesterday afternoon!Thanks,
Well, I appreciate the reply, but your pin in the SP1 thread essentially states that HIFI has no intention of providing any further information to customers until they're ready. Quite frankly, that's just weak. I just don't get it - do you guys WANT to lose your customers? I'm befuddled.I have no doubts that this type of scenario is a major contributing force in the rampancy of software piracy. Nobody wants to pay for a product that doesn't work right, and people are even less interested in paying for a product when the quality of customer service is lacking. One would think software retailers would be more concerned in keeping their customers in the loop and at least pretending to be interested in letting them know their technical issues are being addressed, even if they're really not.I think you guys are extreme on both ends of the spectrum... on one extreme you have some products which are at the cutting edge of FS weather technology with some of the best cloud graphics and weather synthesis ever developed for FS, and on the other extreme you seem completely uninterested in keeping anxious customers informed when you have major bugs in retail releases of the latest software. I don't expect perfection or anything close to it, but come on man... the latter extreme is really bad. You need to raise the bar a bit in the way you deal with customers. It's not rocket science, it's just basic common sense and courtesy. Let people know what is being worked on, specifically. Let them know a, b, c, d, e, f, and g issues are being addressed, and let them know the progress on each of them. Most people here in this forum who've posted about their particular problem don't have the slightest clue whether they can expect their problem even addressed in SP1. That's just plain ridiculous.Anyway, I've said my piece. I'll shut up now and let the multitude of questions you're getting go unanswered without giving any further comment on the matter. Good luck keeping those refund requests at a minimum!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would you rather them do more of? Answer the same related questions over and over again, day in day out or actually work on getting the problems fixed or worked around? The team is small there are only so many hours in a day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What would you rather them do more of? Answer the same related questions over and over again, day in day out or actually work on getting the problems fixed or worked around? The team is small there are only so many hours in a day.
What do you mean? It's outlined in my numerous posts. It's simple: People #1 want to know if their particular issue or set of issues are being addressed and #2 if there's any progress being made on it (them) or not. They want to have a sense of connection with the developer, like they're important to them and are being kept in the loop on how things are progressing.Nobody seems to know though. It's been said many times here that most or all of the PMDG issues are being addressed, but that only accounts for a fraction of the customers with issues. Most people don't use expensive add-on aircraft like that and still have issues.Some of us are experiencing supposed FSX issues in FS9 and don't know whether their complaints are being addressed. For instance, it's been repeatedly said that the cloud popping, visibility graduation and wind shift issues are being addressed for FSX. But what about FS9? Visibility graduation issues (like sudden low visibility at high altitudes, then immediately back to perfect visibiility in an instant) have been reported for FS9 as well. What about cumulus clouds hang around at FL400? And tonnes of other issues. But there's no word on them, apparently because Jim hasn't been informed. Jim seems to be the "spokesperson" only and has no knowledge of the coding end. And the coders aren't telling him anything, other than that it's gonna be a while before SP1 is released... and that they're not going to let anyone in on anything until it comes out. ?? What in the world is up with that? As I said, I'm done. There are obviously people here in this forum who would disagree with me, but the refund requests and expressions of frustration amongst the rest of us pretty much speaks for themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What do you mean? It's outlined in my numerous posts. It's simple: People #1 want to know if their particular issue or set of issues are being addressed and #2 if there's any progress being made on it (them) or not. They want to have a sense of connection with the developer, like they're important to them and are being kept in the loop on how things are progressing.
Yes, but look at how small of team HiFi has, and look at the rate of posts in this forum. They are doing a great job considering. I would not expect any higher level of interaction given the small size of the team, and the high level of activity in the HiFi Support Forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would not expect any higher level of interaction given the small size of the team, and the high level of activity in the HiFi Support Forum.
And that's great, but I and many others would.It's certainly not too much to expect form even a 1 person team to answer questions wholely and completely and give some basic progress info on a regular basis. Granted, a 1 person team would probably not be able to do so more than once or twice a week at best, but we're talking about a 3 man team here - a very capable 3 man team at that - and they've made a public announcement that there will be no progress info given on SP1 until it is released in over a week. And to me and many others that's just gay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.