I. am. speechless.

[HiFlyer 9,343]

 If only LR would invest in more "full time" development resources ... I keep hoping.

 

Join the club. But there's one thing I think we all know by now is that LR does what LR does, and what they do is whatever the heck they feel like doing at any given moment. I hope they might move forward on certain things in the same way that I hope a passing helium balloon might possibly blow randomly in my direction.  :lol:

[Murmur 3,941]

Visually still a ways to go before it's on par with P3DV2

 

It depends, visually there are some things that X-Plane does better, and some things that P3DV2 does better. For example, I don't think these screenshots are inferior to P3DV2 in anything, quite the contrary:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/431305-a-little-variety-from-x-plane-10/

 

However, I agree that there are some specific things where X-Plane visuals are inferior, namely: hi-altitude distant visibility, environmental effects (rain, snow, ice, fog) and some weather visuals. Fortunately, X-Plane developers have announced that all of these features are being worked on and we should get significant improvements with the very next releases. :smile:

 

However, P3DV2 volumetric fog is really incredible, nothing comes close today.

[scotchegg 4,169]

I agree, the fog in P3D2 looks great, and the fact you have things which really should be standard in XP too like seasons and full visibility at altitude is a plus, as well as regional textures and autogen.

 

Otoh going from the shots I've seen XP knocks P3D2 out d the park in terms of lighting, shadows (particularly fidelity of shadow edges and contrast between shadowed and light areas), water reflections, and importantly texture resolution. I know P3D2 is capable of showing 4096 textures but from what I'm reading nobody can use them without OOMs so most screenshots I've seen are in 1024 and look like stock FSX with shadows.

 

But I'm glad the competition is there and P3D can show XP devs where they should be aiming and vice versa.

[Guest]

 

 

I don't think these screenshots are inferior to P3DV2 in anything, quite the contrary:

 

The lighting just seems a little off to me and there is no sense of "distance" - missing a light haze.  But to each his/her own ... I wasn't trying to suggest "inferior", just I prefer the lighting environment in P3DV2.

 

As always, I keep an eye on new developments for XP ... and they have consistently improved even if it's taken a LONG LONG time.  I look forward to what they come up with this year.

 

Off topic, does anyone know if Multi-GPU utilization (not just support) is coming for XP?  I've heard conflicting information.