13 minutes ago, ZKOKQ said:

Great shots Roman. What PTA preset are you using ?

ENVSHADE. 

1 minute ago, sbs9 said:

ENVSHADE. 

Many thanks. I will revert to that.

1 hour ago, sbs9 said:

Shots from my first test of SF:

https://sbsim.de.quickconnect.to/photo/share/eKbrsxpD

Weather data source: AS16. 

Very nice screen shots, I could feel the cold :)

10 hours ago, Paul_ said:

Hi Steve

Hmmmmm I can't quite buy that one  ..... SkyForce 3D has been in the making for a very long time so surely  it should be good to go from day 1

I don't know the answer to this question but I am sure someone will tell us  ..... I wonder how much flack HiFi Simulations got when they first released AS16 and ASCA? ....

name  one  addon  thats  was  good  to go  on release,  that had  no issues  at all,  find  it  strange  that users  here   are  complaining  on what  sf3D  can  and  cant  do  when they  even  havnt  got  it

A couple more minor observations regarding RSF. Again, to summarize, I'm using it with the ASP4 weather engine and EnvShade. Did a flight from Spokane, WA KGEG to KDEN. I was quite impressed with the realism of the overcast layer. It was both dense and in daytime a solid gray color. I've always found ASCA's overcast to be a bit on the blueish side and also it's not always as opaque as what one sees in nature. Second, the ASP4 in-cloud effect does work with the RSF clouds. I'm not sure why I missed it before. I would say more but I was flying the RealAir TD and experienced an port engine failure just as I reached cruise altitude. I called an emergency (via VOXATC) and ATC vectored me to the Bear Gulch strip south of Spokane. The visibility was bad almost to ground level and I wish I could say that the story had a happy ending, but...

8 hours ago, DaveCT2003 said:

Not to knock any statements made thus far... but I'll be purchasing this product later today, and will do a full review by close of business Friday - I'll post a link in this thread.

Best wishes everyone.

Thanks for your contribution, Dave.
Looking forward to your review.

This may sound dumb, but do I need a weather engine at all?  Can I use the default weather settings in P3D4.1 and generate a more realistic looking overcast without worrying about updates/redraws?

9 hours ago, DaveCT2003 said:

BUT THE REAL BASIS FOR THIS BEING A GO or NO-GO is how it will be perceived by the average flight simmer, who doesn't necessarily care that a certain type of cumulus cloud appears over another, they want cool, semi-realistic looking weather that makes sense and doesn't impact their sim performance

Yep. But I also want to actually SEE a difference compared to what I've got NOW! I don't care if the inner workings of SkyForce are revolutionary if I don't SEE it or if I don't NOTICE a real difference.

Now the problem here is that my skies have been looking great thanks to just ONE texture... the cumulus01.bmp from HDE v2. P3D, together with AS, is giving me very varied skies. Things never look the same. When I look at all the screenshots and video's of SkyForce I think: 'Ok... nice skies... but I've got nice skies already.' I just don't see a difference that's worth the money.

Well, on the contrary, I sometimes see a difference that I don't want! Quite a few of the SkyForce pictures show me those same old REX clouds I never liked. (Just like I seldom see ENVTEX clouds that I like.)

While I am at it... I seriously wonder how much of SkyForce is actually new and how much is just a repackaging of previous products. I mean, seriously, how many cloud textures can one make...?!? The old REX products contained an incredible amount of textures (way too many imho) and now we get 20 GB of new textures again? Really?!? What is actually NEW in SkyForce? Yes, the cloud structures supposedly are new. But I haven't seen any new cloud structures so far. Everything I have seen so far I have seen for years already. 

Yes, I am very sceptical when it comes to addons that do things that no one of use can really check. Yes, you can SEE things but you can’t actually check what is going on in the background. Those “cloud structures based upon weather conditions” might as well be totally random structures which are being loaded. If they are being loaded at all, that is, because as I said the ‘old’ system can already give us some amazing skies and most of the screenshots I’ve seen show me nothing new. And the same goes for the textures. How the heck can a program know just from METAR data which textures to load anyway? In all seriousness, I simply have a hard time believing all this. (And the same goes for ASCA btw.) Who tells me SkyForce is nothing but a randomizer? Yes, the developer will tell me so but sorry, I don't really trust developers, specially when they mainly talk marketing language. A lot of people seem to take everything a developer say for granted, well, I don't. Sorry for that.  

 

12 hours ago, joseg175 said:

 The cloud structures are not 3d.  

This is bloody classic! 

And they won't be "real" 3D until we all have an computer core of the Enterprise-D to drive P3D.

Edit: Just copied some text from the Homepage of HiFi:

ASCA includes cloud textures, sky textures, and 3D cloud models to transform your skies, while also incorporated Real-Time Dynamic Cloud and Sky Textures!

18 minutes ago, JoeFackel said:

ASCA includes cloud textures, sky textures, and 3D cloud models to transform your skies, while also incorporated Real-Time Dynamic Cloud and Sky Textures!

Yes, well, so nothing new here... Although I have to add that the SkyForce site talks about "redoing the 3D cloud model structure"... Odd, I had the impression it was something completely new...?

32 minutes ago, J van E said:

Yep. But I also want to actually SEE a difference compared to what I've got NOW! I don't care if the inner workings of SkyForce are revolutionary if I don't SEE it or if I don't NOTICE a real difference.

Now the problem here is that my skies have been looking great thanks to just ONE texture... the cumulus01.bmp from HDE v2. P3D, together with AS, is giving me very varied skies. Things never look the same. When I look at all the screenshots and video's of SkyForce I think: 'Ok... nice skies... but I've got nice skies already.' I just don't see a difference that's worth the money.

Well, on the contrary, I sometimes see a difference that I don't want! Quite a few of the SkyForce pictures show me those same old REX clouds I never liked. (Just like I seldom see ENVTEX clouds that I like.)

While I am at it... I seriously wonder how much of SkyForce is actually new and how much is just a repackaging of previous products. I mean, seriously, how many cloud textures can one make...?!? The old REX products contained an incredible amount of textures (way too many imho) and now we get 20 GB of new textures again? Really?!? What is actually NEW in SkyForce? Yes, the cloud structures supposedly are new. But I haven't seen any new cloud structures so far. Everything I have seen so far I have seen for years already. 

Yes, I am very sceptical when it comes to addons that do things that no one of use can really check. Yes, you can SEE things but you can’t actually check what is going on in the background. Those “cloud structures based upon weather conditions” might as well be totally random structures which are being loaded. If they are being loaded at all, that is, because as I said the ‘old’ system can already give us some amazing skies and most of the screenshots I’ve seen show me nothing new. And the same goes for the textures. How the heck can a program know just from METAR data which textures to load anyway? In all seriousness, I simply have a hard time believing all this. (And the same goes for ASCA btw.) Who tells me SkyForce is nothing but a randomizer? Yes, the developer will tell me so but sorry, I don't really trust developers, specially when they mainly talk marketing language. A lot of people seem to take everything a developer say for granted, well, I don't. Sorry for that.  

 

Well J, you have your answer right there, If it's not worth your money, don't buy it! Maybe these developers should just fold-up and leave if they are not putting anything "new" on the table? Right?

I choose to support REX just as I support PMDG, FlightSimLabs, TFDI, Flightbeam, FSDT and countless others who continue to, in my very subjective opinion, improve this addictive and very expensive hobby of ours :-) . Happy to be the fool in the " a fool and his money" phrase right now.

Rather than continuing with the rant, could you post some snips of your "nice skies already" instead or email the developers directly on your issues?

Kind regards

23 minutes ago, J van E said:

Yes, well, so nothing new here... Although I have to add that the SkyForce site talks about "redoing the 3D cloud model structure"... Odd, I had the impression it was something completely new...?

Honestly, what a complete bloody mess for us as users and for REX from a PR perspective. 

It is really sad that a company can put so much effort and talent into producing something (which according to them is unique) only to have the entire thing crash and burn (within 48 hours) because: 

1. your (generally intelligent clients) don't really understand what your product does 

2. you are unable to provide an EXPLICIT confirmation that cloud changes are dynamic, based on the latest METAR string and weather variations along a flight routing.

Despite my protestations yesterday about holding off on this, I did buy it.  Using it with AS16 - and wasn't disappointed with what I saw on my 2 hour flight from Leipzig to Gatwick.

But again, I don;t want to have to choose - or even worse, randomize cloud options.  I want the injection to be intelligent and based on current cloud model conditions.  I may have to read the manual again.  

So, before I do that - can anyone confirm,  one way or the other,  whether cloud changes are dynamic (intelligent) - if I use AS16 with REX SF textures?

 

13 hours ago, joseg175 said:

he cloud structures are not 3d.

The cloud structures and models are 3D. But the textures are still 2D - or sprites. Just as usual. I suspect, that it's an inherent limitation of FSX/P3D and the way it's depicting the clouds. For something that's true 3D, we'll have to hope for Lockheed Martin to incorporate something like trueSky or similar additions. 

15 minutes ago, Tokitaumelie said:

Rather than continuing with the rant, could you post some snips of your "nice skies already" instead

Well, I hardly take any screenshots but here is a recent one I found: rather simple and nothing extraordinary but good enough for me. I like this more than some of those over the top REX clouds. If I come across a few nice skies the coming days I will take some more screenshots.