2 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

Hey Sethos, 

I fly photoscenery probably 90% of the time, usually 25cm per pixel super-hires tiles. P3D v4 is just beautiful with photoscenery (particularly once you add some enviromental tweaks). I seem to remember my first impression was that v4 was sharper than V3, once my shader cache settled down on the second flight.

So it definitely should not be a blurry mess, it is just so much nicer than FSX.

If your experience is terrible, there must be a technical problem. I'd clear the shader cache, check the settings, make sure the scenery you're using is quality and I'm sure that there must be more things you can do. Again, I've got literally hundreds of hours of photoscenery time with this sim, and I love it.

 

Do you have any screenshots of that, that aren't taken at crazy altitudes? Because I've yet to see some photoscenery in V4 that wasn't a disappointing sight. 

So am i right in thinking if I uninstall the scenery and reinstall the new sceney application update the only change is below??

 

Prepar3D Scenery

Fixes and Improvements

Fixed missing textures in St. Louis Adams Mark

Removed invisible objects that could cause vehicle to crash at KBWI

1 minute ago, ZLA Steve said:

I fly an average of 2-3 10+ hour flights a week with the 777 & 747 and haven't had this issues. You should either do a reinstall or verify you have the most recent set of nVidia drivers. 

Same here.

I fly the 747 across the pond a lot and same with the 777. Ive flown down under as well and all across asia with no issues.

Many P3D point updates over the years have not been spectacular, when you look at the list. But the sim is constantly improving, there's a lot of points that the team has been working on there.

And I note a lot of people are negative about the VR, which is interesting (and this is even over on the VR forum, where I just posted - got lost on my way here!). I'll confess that I don't understand that. If you give VR a good go - at least a couple of weeks - with the right type of flying and a properly balanced computer, the results are just increadible (your brain and body do adapt to VR with time). I was a sceptic for a while there, decided to go the cockpit building route rather than Oculus, and I still wan't convinced after my first flight or two with the DK2. But once you get used to it,  there's nothing like the feeling of actually sitting in a cockpit ("presence"). I haven't flown with a screen view for months now, can't imagine doing it again apart for some occasional niche purpose.

And that's with the native v4.0 VR. I can't wait to try the 4.1 implementation on the CV1.

 

There was a comment on the other forum about virtual cockpits MSFS being considered ineffective/non-serious when they first came out. I agree, I think VR is the same, it really is the future of flight sim. If you haven't tried it, get a cheap DK2 in ebay (they're pretty much giving them away now) and give it a go.

 

1 minute ago, akabam said:

Same here.

I fly the 747 across the pond a lot and same with the 777. Ive flown down under as well and all across asia with no issues.

I had it 3 hours ago 

https://www.vatstats.net/flights/6346891

I think that we all need to remember that if VR works better, then using a monitor will work better too.

I did see it before when I had almost maxed out my graphics settings, smudged out ground textures and missing autogen. After I reduced a number of the settings it does not happen as often anymore, although autogen still seems to have an issue sometimes.

Usually the .x update seem to disappoint from the description, but sometime they give the biggest improvements because of some underlying fix we can't really translate into how it would affect the sim. For me the biggest point is that a lot of developers were waiting for this update to release new stuff, so I'm mostly looking forward to it as a way to unlock this new stuff. And as always I will be waiting a few days until Active Sky and the likes are updated for 4.1.

Well its out so go try and see if dynamic lighting is fixed.

Fixed bug where unlimited frame rate value   was written out differently in saved profiles compared to Prepar3d.cfg   settings

 

Is that the cause of my autogen disappearing when using unlimited framerates?

Let's see what will the update bring. 4.1 is out and available to download 

3 minutes ago, HighTowers said:

Why is there disappointment for fixing CTD issues, and bugs. Support for new features via SDK. Opens the door wider for 3PDs.  It's progress and refinement. 

What did you want to see? FPS improvement 600%? 

Literally no one is asking for a 600% FPS improvement. It would be nice, however, to be able to use the same AA levels I used in V3 and be able turn on landing lights without my FPS tanking into single digits. That’s not an insane demand. 

 

11 minutes ago, captain420 said:

What a disappointing update. VR? Seriously. They need to get their priorities in order.

Why is this a bad priority? For me Finally i can maybe do a flight whit my headset again. 

I know vr is not for all, but there is a few of us out there that been waiting since end of May for this update. Im sure LM know what they doing and have a reason for it.  They cant do everyone happy on a update but for once it seem to hit us vr users. 

Thanks for NOT fixing dynamic lights, LM. Really appreciate that /s

I also second dynamic lighting, if you have a 4K monitor and PMDG it’s horrendous at night... my gpu usage during day is around 60% then dynamic lights at night and it’s pegged at 100% lag fest... I’m almost at the stage of p3d for daytime and X-Plane for night because the dynamic lighting hit and pmdg deciding not to give the option of legacy lights (which is possible as just look at default p3d aircraft which work with legacy lights when DL is off).

 

so now that LM haven’t fixed it... pmdg how about letting your customers who paid for your products fly at night in 4K in p3dv4... give the legacy landing lights that you already have made for v3....

I find all this complaining about what they fixed and didn't fix to be a wee bit humorous, I mean, in order to fix a higher objective.. lower supporting code has to be fixed first and not being A+ coders ourselves, how could one make the judgment that LM is just spitting in the wind by wasting our time with so-called frivolous and fruitless fixes?