Quick feedback:

• No noticeable frame rate hit on the PBR and the PBR is fabulous!!!
• Clouds looked stable to me, but then again, I'm old and on medicines
• This release broke the start-up checkliists
• The trim wheel in the Mirage works backwards
• The Flight Planning seems better, but it doesn't add in Navaids like VORs and NDBs, but it does recognize them and allows you to save the points as part of the flight plan.  In the GPS FPL, it adds the navaid waypoint as WP1

My quick take on release 13.

 

2 hours ago, flyforever said:

I'd give DTG some slack on True Sky.

But Cryss did ask what users thought about the update in which changes to TrueSky were a significant part.

Wow, you DTG guys have a ways to go, sky colors looks completely unrealistic, clouds ok, jaggies and lots of shimmering on aircraft and buildings, frame rate not so good, no matter how high the settings are, and yes I have a modern video card

9 minutes ago, jymp said:

Wow, you DTG guys have a ways to go, sky colors looks completely unrealistic, clouds ok, jaggies and lots of shimmering on aircraft and buildings, frame rate not so good, no matter how high the settings are, and yes I have a modern video card

The poor AA is making me hold off too. Seriously needs improving soon. 

Yup, that'd be my main concern too. I appreciate that it is a sim which is attempting to push the boundaries, so that will demand some decent hardware, and that it is Early Access, but the fact that there is DLC for it now (all of which I've bought) means that it is something one is expected to use now rather than a mere preview which we've chosen to pay to join.

Thus I'd like to see a few more options tick boxes and sliders in the GUI so we can have it interact with our fancy GPUs and CPUs and perhaps have them override or enhance some settings more easily than is the case at present. With a GPU which has 8Gb of DDR5 memory and an 8th generation Intel processor sat on the motherboard which can make first person shooters and MMORPGs fly along at frame rates which make it well into triple digits, all of which which have far more fancy graphics than any flight sim I've ever seen, I'm hardly bereft of graphical firepower to bring to the table, but I'd like to be able to faff about with that ability a bit more than I can at present.

I have to agree with jymp. As far as "false sky" and all the shimmering, bad coloring, and I have a brand new state of the art build! I think REX would have been a much better choice for the environment. I'm willing to hang in there to see where it goes, but I can't understand why DTG thinks things look ok? look at the trees in the engine failure lesson?? I just don't get it. Can Nvidia Inspector correct anything?

Mike    

DTG don't think things look OK. That's the whole point of Early Access, so you can get an idea of how good it will look when it's finished. Things won't look OK until trueSky is fully integrated and the dynamic lighting and shadowing can be activated. Nvidia Inspector won't help until all that is in place, and DTG are quite rightly focusing on the game engine first before they worry too much about the graphics. Every update so far has been another step in the right direction, this one included, and I have no doubt that DTG will keep tweaking the graphics as and when the game engine development allows it.

You said "That's the whole point of Early Access, so you can get an idea of how good it will look when it's finished." I have an idea, and it looks bad. Sorry.

4 hours ago, vortex681 said:

 

 

35 minutes ago, simaddict said:

I have to agree with jymp. As far as "false sky" and all the shimmering, bad coloring, and I have a brand new state of the art build! I think REX would have been a much better choice for the environment. I'm willing to hang in there to see where it goes, but I can't understand why DTG thinks things look ok? look at the trees in the engine failure lesson?? I just don't get it. Can Nvidia Inpector correct anything?

Mike    

Assumptions of what DTG sees or doesn't see fail to recognize the fact that a work in progress has a unique logic which may not necessarily make users happy. This is why a public wide "early access" was and still is a very risky proposition. Some folks want the meal to taste right at the first bite, and if it doesn't, they will never touch that dish again.

TrueSky is about pushing the limits for the future. Folks forget how many years it took for good looking weather to come to FSX, and it took a number  of dedicated third party developers. My hope is that these features will be there for new, dedicated developers to take up. DTG will not and cannot be expected to deliver 10 years of third party, dedicated development to fill the voids. Imagine, a new whiz kid seeing True Sky and deciding that he can develop a utility to make it all happen. That's innovation, and that's why the SDK is so important.

It's here that P3D strategy differs from DTG. P3d stuck to the core sim and is still trying to do that. The rest goes to third parties.  DTG is trying to have an acceptable product without the third party support ready to fill the voids.

I suspect that when the SDK comes out, DTG can start to let others fill the void.

Right now it's a very delicate balancing act in a sea of many impatient users or gamers who are quick to pick only the bad, forgetting that Rome was not built in one day.

I am not a defender of DTG. I am simply trying to be realistic as well as remembering that 25.00 spent on them does not give me the right to always take the high ground for the sake of picking on only the negatives.

And there are still many negatives in the sim--- and because they are so obvious, I have to assume DTG is well aware of them.

I remember when FLY! came out, and the developer was so knowlegeable and competent that the forum was always alive with his comments and presence. He would explain the issues as well as the challenges, but all of us trusted him because of his passion and dedication to "his" sim.  All questions, technical and non technical, would be answered.

We know very little about the developers behind FSW. From what I can see, they don't or are not allowed to interact with the community. The public faces we hear from  are non-programmers who cannot answer most sim related technical questions. The exception being with questions regarding the Mission editor. Here DTG is quick to have a DTG-programmer interact with the users.

A simple question like, " why not more graphic options", may goes unanswered for months. People have asked these questions over and over, yet not much is said that's specific.

Anyway, I support DTG fully, and my observations are always aimed at getting DTG's attention, since I think they are a bunch of great, caring people.

Curiously enough, I think their Fishing sim has a programmer always interacting with the users.

 

 

20 hours ago, flyforever said:

 

Assumptions of what DTG sees or doesn't see fail to recognize the fact that a work in progress has a unique logic which may not necessarily make users happy.

Great, caring people, I'm sure. But we are not fishing.

Edited September 30, 20178 yr by n4gix
Removed excessive quote! Please do not quote an entire post, especially for only a one sentence comment!

20 minutes ago, simaddict said:

You said "That's the whole point of Early Access, so you can get an idea of how good it will look when it's finished." I have an idea, and it looks bad. Sorry.

So sorry you don't like it but you will have plenty of other choices to go to. 

Yes! Like going to the Warren County airport and taking my PA32 Saratoga for a flight over Lake George because I am a pilot!!

28 minutes ago, simaddict said:

Yes! Like going to the Warren County airport and taking my PA32 Saratoga for a flight over Lake George because I am a pilot!!

Wow! You are so cool! Take care and blue skies to you.

looking to fill the seats, if you were close to upstate NY, I'd invite you!

The Adirondack Mountains are beautiful this time of year!!