5 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

If I can't see a runway 10 miles away on final approach with the viz slider set to 10 miles, then something is amiss. 

Remember that X-Plane places the aircraft on final approach in nautical miles (3 nm or 10 nm), while the visibility slider is set in statute miles. However, even accounting for this, the effective visibility is still less than it should be (just tried). The fog is clearly overdone at every distance, Ben should revise it.

I agree with Paraffin, nobody pretends that XP11 haze is not true sometimes but NOT always. I use to ski often in winter and at 2000 metres horizon presents usually no haze at all. Maybe a thick fog in the valley below but no haze even at 50NM. Same when I fly at 30000 feet, sometimes I can clearly see all the Alps.

What we criticize is the choice of LR to put haze everywhere anytime with every weather condition. What we, well at least I, like in a simulation is the variability to be surprised by virtual rendition of this beatiful show that is nature.

52 minutes ago, Murmur said:

Remember that X-Plane places the aircraft on final approach in nautical miles (3 nm or 10 nm), while the visibility slider is set in statute miles. However, even accounting for this, the effective visibility is still less than it should be (just tried). The fog is clearly overdone at every distance, Ben should revise it.

Yeah, I didn't want to get into the weeds on nautical vs. statute miles because it's close enough to show the effect.

I filed a bug report on it back during the beta cycle. For anyone else bothered by this, please file one and maybe it will get Ben's attention. The question of whether the "look" of XP11 is too washed out or not may come down to personal preference, or maybe just Austin's whim. But this business of the visibility slider not causing the expected results, especially when used with real-world METAR input, is pretty serious, I think.

There is one other thing to consider, when talking of overdone fog / visibility:

One of my annoyances in XP10 was the shimmer present in the scenery at 5,000 to 10,000 feet. It somewhat depended on what type of textures where in use in a given region; some areas seemed to be worse than other areas. Even at max AA settings (which had to be compensated for by reducing other settings) I still found it troubling.

XP11 hasn't removed this shimmer, but the fog effect that is in currently place has effectively hidden it enough that it's not nearly so annoying, and doesn't require upping the AA to try and hide. So, personally, I'm not that eager for them to 'fix' the fog, if it means a return to glaringly obvious scenery shimmer.

Now obviously different people have different priorities, based on both personal preferences and computer hardware.

A good solution that might please everyone would be to have the fog system adjustable with a slider - off / low / mid / high - or some such. But, in keeping with the 'less is more' philosophy that LR has been leaning towards, it's unlikely we'll ever see that happen...

1 hour ago, Desaix said:

What we criticize is the choice of LR to put haze everywhere anytime with every weather condition. What we, well at least I, like in a simulation is the variability to be surprised by virtual rendition of this beatiful show that is nature.

Yes, the haze does seem all pervading, making it seem a bit washed-out, but I've mitigated it somewhat with Blu-FX by adding a little contrast, and a slight saturation boost. In this regard P3D does offer more control over the amount of haze, along with its HDR settings and especially with the addition of PTA.

What ever happened to Real Terra Haze? I really hope someone does something similar to this, or PTA for XP11; Blu FX is OK, but lacks the control I crave.

And going back to the OP I agree with the points the review made. We are very lucky to have two great, but quite different, platforms to enjoy.