Water in V2

[Noel 4,486]

 

 

he water looks flat and more like an acrylic painting than a real body of water

Boy, that sums it up nicely.  Truly it really does--complete w/ coarse brush strokes. 

 

 

What happened to that gorgeous water (I thought it looked absolutely real...) I saw in youtube videos released by LM and naughty beta testers?!!?!?!?

I'm hoping like heck it's a driver issue and that maybe the latest might help?  I'm one back, but I think one other person mentioned they had the same card and latest drivers but to no avail.

[Noel 4,486]

 

 

This is absolutely (lurking here...reading there..) bumming me out to read this from many posters.

 

It is what it is though--which is, bugs aside, pretty blithering amazing in many ways and makes it a keeper.  I'm having a hard time starting FSX since playing w/ this, in fact I've only been up once since installing V2.  Once the water and a few other details are fixed we should be good to go, and by that I mean this will be worth the trouble even though we will need to do it all again when P3D-64 debuts, but that, I'm thinking will be another VERY nice upgrade to flight simulation, or so my sources tell me (those would be the ones between my ears...).  My main issue is I don't think $199 is reasonable for something with this many kind of low level problems, like black screens, not having clickspots if you don't save and make a flight plan default, or bizarre water textures, and the startup screen I"m still perplexed by as they took away access to settings until you get into a flight and have access to the top menu bar--hopefully I'm missing something basic on this.  My position is that if these issues aren't resolved within the refund period I will uninstall it and either wait til they solve these issues at a minimum, or purchase a new license commensurate with the product's readiness level that is at a lower price point.

[peppy197 165]

lucky for me I prefer airport approaches to water observations

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

It is what it is though--which is, bugs aside, pretty blithering amazing in many ways and makes it a keeper.  I'm having a hard time starting FSX since playing w/ this, in fact I've only been up once since installing V2.  Once the water and a few other details are fixed we should be good to go, and by that I mean this will be worth the trouble even though we will need to do it all again when P3D-64 debuts, but that, I'm thinking will be another VERY nice upgrade to flight simulation, or so my sources tell me (those would be the ones between my ears...).  My main issue is I don't think $199 is reasonable for something with this many kind of low level problems, like black screens, not having clickspots if you don't save and make a flight plan default, or bizarre water textures, and the startup screen I"m still perplexed by as they took away access to settings until you get into a flight and have access to the top menu bar--hopefully I'm missing something basic on this.  My position is that if these issues aren't resolved within the refund period I will uninstall it and either wait til they solve these issues at a minimum, or purchase a new license commensurate with the product's readiness level that is at a lower price point.

I thought of trying it out when it first was released, but then sat in the bush.  I will be very much interested in this simulator, after they have worked out most of what has been reported here. I do very much hope that they finally bring this platform into the 64 bit world.  I run XPX 64 bit, and don't even give a thought to whatever is being loaded into the sim before first flight. I have flown for hours upon hours trans continental without an OOM or CTD of any kind.  I'm waiting for that, frankly. I think P3D certainly will be a new interest and avenue, but perhaps for myself, within around the 18-24 month mark.  I can't imagine how many smiles would have been in this forum from day one, had this been released as 64 bit. People want performance and ultimate system stability I think, over truly backward compatible/present software transferable concerns.  I could be wrong, but don't really thing in the long analysis that I am....  Had this sim blown everybody's socks off with max settings and smooth flight performance....whether they had to pony up once more for their favorite add-on('s), would have taken a back-seat. IMO, releasing in the decades-old 32 bit strength was a trailing 'gimp foot' holding its potential back.  My 7 cents.

[Noel 4,486]

 

 

People want performance and ultimate system stability I think, over truly backward compatible/present software transferable concerns.

 

I think this way as well but I know when I posed this thought here it seemed most were concerned w/ having to buy new add ons which makes me think whatever side you fall on, backwards compatibility or longer term performance/stability solution, is largely based on budget concerns.   I just did a quick trip in the Duke from KMRY > KSFO w/ both sims set up as similarly as possible, which meant enabling light bloom in FSX.  Autogen density about the same, but clearly not as visible in the distance in FSX set w/ the same LOD of 6.5.   I was seeing around 25 frames as I was approaching the SF Bay Area and when mouse pointer was visible this would drop to 18.  In the same areas in V2 w/ very high settings, though same LOD, same autogen density, I was seeing around 42.  OTOH, if I disabled light bloom in FSX I was seeing 48 or so.    Performance is smoother in V2.  I never ran V2 in this flight w/o HDR/tessellation enabled, but I'm imagining it would be above FSX's bloom-off setting.

 

BTW, the driver upgrade helped immensely w/ the water issues.  I also installed the REX ocean texture which looked even better still.

 

XP 64bit does sound very compelling.  The lack of seasons, airport buildings, ATC are pretty big deficits.  One of these days maybe we'll have all of these in one package.  I'm guessing maybe we'll have two of them, XP64 11.0 and P3D V3.

[Christopher Low 5,332]

 

lucky for me I prefer airport approaches to water observations

 

Some of us do actually like the entire environment to look good. I fly "low and slow" all of the time, so the quality of the terrain and water textures is very important to me.

[blueshark747 1,843]

I like the V2 water it looks nice and glassy at times.

[DarkstarF16 72]

Simply my opinion, having travelled a few too many times around this planet than I care to remember and spending the majority of it looking out the window, this is the closest I've ever come to that déjà vu feeling. The colour of the water included.

 

Graphically, the FSX world is extremely bland. It needed to be enhanced. Some of the enhancements were just over the top and because the blandness needed spicing up it was poured on In bucket loads.

[GHarrall 494]

 

 

I can't imagine how many smiles would have been in this forum from day one, had this been released as 64 bit.

 

There wouldnt be many smiles as people realize that zero of the FSX addons would work.

[FlyIce 354]

I for one feel P3D2 water is not bad at all, at least as good as FSX at the highest setting. The big deal to me is that water on max in FSX is absolutely a slideshow, while in P3D2 I can turn water to max/ultra and suffer near zero loss of performances.

[Manny 1,293]

Just need the animated white crest of the waves appearing and disappearing effect. I hear LM is working on this... so not a big deal. 

[blueshark747 1,843]

P3dv2 water looks nice depending on the weather scenery and time of day.

Dont go expecting eye candy on mediocore settings using mediocore hardware.

 

Go fly around St Marteen on max settings then come back and talk.

[Noel 4,486]

 

 

Graphically, the FSX world is extremely bland. It needed to be enhanced.

 

Well put.  I think perhaps I was getting bored w/ that dullness and this is why I'm having trouble tearing away from V2.

[Brian Doney 127]

 

Well put.  I think perhaps I was getting bored w/ that dullness and this is why I'm having trouble tearing away from V2.

 

 

Because of the way terrain is rendered, this is the first version of this engine where I haven't artificially limited upper altitude visibility to hide distant terrain issues.

 

That makes a huge difference, to me at least, to how the two sims "feel" in comparison. I can't go back, and I'm not necessarily happy about that  :lol:

[ErichB 3,638]

It will be pretty awesome once sorted