Sign in to follow this  
marcus11

SkyMaxx Pro v4 coming tomorrow

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

5856f41a0b1a5_ScreenShot2016-12-18at22.2

 

 

 

 

This one is quite convincing. I love the way it replicates what can be seen in cloudscapes (passages and corridors leading from one formation to the next). Lovely.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not complaining, I don't have it, but seeing seeing through the layer of clouds is not a huge selling point. I imagine when 11 is out of beta they will work together in perfect peace and harmony, we shall see on the morrow.

 

This is only a problem in XP11. People use beta versions of software and then complain that add-ons aren't working. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I was waiting for a video like this which confirms all my concerns. Since they follow their own path and are not prone to change their concept, it leads to a huge nope for me. There is no way i keep supporting them, their product simply does not reflect what i'm looking for anymore. As the first weather addon SMP 3 that i bought for XP, It was acceptable for me, but i was expecting an evolution in version 4 that simply has not happened or at least not at a degree that i was expecting. Before XEnviro they could hide behind the "XP fault" excuses but XEnviro shows that it is possible to workaround most issues but again SMP are so tight to their vision that i don't see them accepting that huge revamps are needed since they see SMP 4 already as a new revamped version where others, like me, see it as just an improvement, more lik SMP 3.5. 

 

I will not even waste my time commenting SMP 4 anymore, although i will be glad to see the xenviro  vs smp 4 comparison video. I can just wish Cameron and Sundog the best and hope that in the future they will be able to delivery something that will make my jaw drop. 

 

PS: I have been disappointed by SMP 3 either, only Ventura Sky saved it and made it worth, however it is not acceptable for SMP 4 to rely on others addons to make it worth.

  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some more screenshots. Of course I am using XP10 because XP11 gives bad frame rates and colours at night time. The nighttime light reflections from the aircraft lights is not too bad in fact in XP10.

 

+/- 40 fps with Ortho +  FlyJSim 737-200 and cloud area slider to the max.

 

full.jpg

 

full.jpg

 

full.jpg

 

full.jpg

 

full.jpg

 

full.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some more screenshots. Of course I am using XP10 because XP11 gives bad frame rates and colours at night time. The nighttime light reflections from the aircraft lights is not too bad in fact in XP10.

 

+/- 40 fps with Ortho +  FlyJSim 737-200 and cloud area slider to the max.

 

full.jpg

 

full.jpg

 

full.jpg

 

full.jpg

 

full.jpg

 

full.jpg

Wow! Very nice thanks for sharing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The consensus seems to be that V4 is pretty much the same as V3 and you still get the small box of clouds around your aircraft. That killed it for me in V3, as it totally ruins the immersion factor. Unfortunate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22.jpg?dl=0

That screenshot perfectly shows one of the main problems of SMP. No clouds to the horizon. Unacceptable for airliner flying.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11.jpg?dl=012.jpg?dl=013.jpg?dl=014.jpg?dl=015.jpg?dl=016.jpg?dl=017.jpg?dl=018.jpg?dl=019.jpg?dl=020.jpg?dl=021.jpg?dl=022.jpg?dl=0

 

Right, this series of shots shows off both the best and worst of SkyMaxx. At lower levels and ducking around mountain passes, it looks good and has a great feeling of moving in and out of the clouds. It also does a nice solid overcast layer, flying above it (not shown here). I think the cloud outlines are a little too sharp in places, and show too much obvious transparency layering in places, but in motion through the clouds at lower altitudes, the overall feeling of moving through clouds is good (IMO). 

 

But then you get up to high altitude like those last shots, and unless it's solid overcast (which does look good), you get this layer of popcorn clouds that not only don't extend far enough, but they show an obvious grid pattern in the layout (like that last shot). There needs to be more variation in individual cloud puff size, better blending together, and they need to figure out a way to fake an extension to the horizon so it doesn't cut off suddenly like that.

 

Seeing discrete weather systems in the far distance would be a plus, but those are the immediate issues to work on, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The consensus seems to be that V4 is pretty much the same as V3 and you still get the small box of clouds around your aircraft. That killed it for me in V3, as it totally ruins the immersion factor. Unfortunate.

to be fair the box has gotten bigger again and atleast for me with a good system (6700k, 1080, etc) i got even more frames then before. so as a GA i am happy.

 

However it is still visible and their use of km² is a little bit missleading when they talk about doubling the km² of the clouds, people tend to think that it would double the visibility which is simply not true. from 10km to 20km visiblilty the km² quadrupe, doubling would only get you 15km visiblity.  And this gets worse the farther you move away. at 30km visibility a doubling of the km² would only get you 40km visibilty.  I am not saying Skymaxx did something wrong, just maybe some people are not really aware of that.

 

At the end of the day, i find it a nice evolutionary step but not the hoped "empire strikes back" move i would have loved.  Allthough i am no huge fan of x-enviro, i have to admit that it showed a different way to do things and some scenes shown are indeed spectecular and if you are a tubeliner it is even more convincing. I hope the future lies in the combination of both technologies and we finally get something compareable to ASN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That screenshot perfectly shows one of the main problems of SMP. No clouds to the horizon. Unacceptable for airliner flying.

 

As a new user of XP11 and trying to chose which package to buy, it seems that it boils down to whether you chose to be a lower altitude GA pilot or an airline pilot.  I am the former and can't imagine someone choosing flat 2-D clouds over 3-D, volumetric clouds.  On the other hand, if I flew airliners all the time, I would really be irritated with that "island" of clouds around me at altitude.  Sounds like they both need work to meet the different needs and ways of flying.  But, looks like SMP4 for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you set the cloud puffs to FAST they look more realistic and they are not as transparent. If you are flying above 30k, these clouds are not for you. 

 

I think SMP needs to fake the funk with some 2d clouds for the horizon for higher altitudes

 

Cessna_172SP_156.png

 

Cessna_172SP_152.png.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, this series of shots shows off both the best and worst of SkyMaxx. At lower levels and ducking around mountain passes, it looks good and has a great feeling of moving in and out of the clouds. It also does a nice solid overcast layer, flying above it (not shown here). I think the cloud outlines are a little too sharp in places, and show too much obvious transparency layering in places, but in motion through the clouds at lower altitudes, the overall feeling of moving through clouds is good (IMO). 

 

But then you get up to high altitude like those last shots, and unless it's solid overcast (which does look good), you get this layer of popcorn clouds that not only don't extend far enough, but they show an obvious grid pattern in the layout (like that last shot). There needs to be more variation in individual cloud puff size, better blending together, and they need to figure out a way to fake an extension to the horizon so it doesn't cut off suddenly like that.

 

Seeing discrete weather systems in the far distance would be a plus, but those are the immediate issues to work on, I think.

Let's goto 80k and pump the FOV to 150deg and post a screenshot......good try.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That screenshot perfectly shows one of the main problems of SMP. No clouds to the horizon. Unacceptable for airliner flying.

 

No fare ! How high were you flying !

b738_1.png

 

b738_2.png

 

These pics were taken at 30K and 40K !

That screenshot perfectly shows one of the main problems of SMP. No clouds to the horizon. Unacceptable for airliner flying.

 

It looks like you are flying in the mesophere !

11.jpg?dl=012.jpg?dl=013.jpg?dl=014.jpg?dl=015.jpg?dl=016.jpg?dl=018.jpg?dl=022.jpg?dl=0

 

Thats a little sneaky don't you think ? Flying 80K ?

 

Where is the moderator for this forum ?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm liking much of what I see in SMP4 so far, but there are some things they need to work on. There are too many repeating bitmaps used, for one thing. It's not actually that noticeable when you're in motion, but it tends to jump out in static screen shots.

 

For example, this looks pretty nice...

 

S-76C_5.png

 

Until you notice the repeating bitmaps. The one at the upper left even repeats twice, with another one right behind it:

 

S-76C_5%20cloud%20repeats.png

 

Again, it's not something that jumps out so much when you're flying, but once you see it, you can't un-see it. With the available memory we have now, I would think they could load more cloud shapes and not have to repeat so often. 

 

I'm going to do some more flying this evening in different conditions. I still like a lot of what I see, at least for low and slow flight in varying conditions. And as I've been harping on, I absolutely need what SkyMaxx + RWC allows for adjusting injected winds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


First of all it is not a 20$ addon, it's a 40$ addon. Second, RWC+SMP cost 60$

I was commenting on the upgrade price and that IS $20, since it was obvious from my post that I already have SMP 3.0. Also, I don't use RWC, but rather FSGRW, which I've had for years now, since it consists of one version for FSX, P3d and XP. PILOT'S! should be commended for making FSGRW compatible with all three sims for one price.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have seen so far, version should have been 3.5 and not 4.0.

I do not see anything new, v4 may be right for someone that doesn't have SMP and is willing to support further development by purchasing it.

 

I bought xEnviro and like it, not perfect but bought it because I want options and for that to happen we need to support it.

 

I lost count of the number of times I purchased software for FSX and eventually ended up in the recycle bin cause it wasn't worth it or perfect, but... by purchasing them was my way of contributing further development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


So, aside from all of the riff raff and some of the negative speak in here

 

What do you mean by "riff raff"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what video card is used for this demo?

I can ask if you're genuinely interested (or maybe he has it posted somewhere). My understanding is he feels his system is not so beefy these days, so I wouldn't expect him to respond back with a glorious video card. :)

 

But then you get up to high altitude like those last shots

Are you flying rockets? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have seen so far, version should have been 3.5 and not 4.0.

I do not see anything new, v4 may be right for someone that doesn't have SMP and is willing to support further development by purchasing it.

 

Bought and tried and I agree with the above. I don't know what goes into coding such an addon and as such have no appreciation for the amount of work that goes into it. All I know is I feel that there's just not enough in each iteration to make it worthwhile paying out everytime. Don't get me wrong, I'm a low level flyer and I like SMP but there's just not enough gained by the end user to convince me that the upgrade was worth it. Caveat; I'm using on XP11 only so I may yet have reason to change my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SMP but there's just not enough gained by the end user to convince me that the upgrade was worth it.

There's more to be implemented new in the v4 run (and is already in development). Unfortunately it didn't make it in for good reason (personal matters with someone involved and needing to take a leave), but I think there's some wow factors ahead for 4, and those updates will of course come free.

 

I'm using on XP11 only so I may yet have reason to change my opinion.

X-Plane 11 has a way to go yet before SMP is probably going to shine best. Laminar needs to iron out random draw glitches and visibility. I know it's on their list, and after such we'll probably all be some happy people. The good news is v4 is XP 11 ready and has the code to distinguish between being installed in 10 or 11. :)

 

Thanks for purchasing! Hang in there. While we haven't let everything out of the bag yet for v4, it will ultimately come!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this