NEW: Prepar3D v5 CLOUDS

[abandoned account 171]

1 hour ago, domkle said:

No matter what you may think of v5 with what we know so far, one thing is sure. FSElite makes a fool of themselves with their videos. Very unprofessional.

If what they are showing is actually V5, how could this possibly be FSElite's fault?

Aren't they just showing videos of V5?

According to the expert gurus, what the videos show is exactly how V5 is designed to be and the rest will be up to the 3rd party developers.

[kingm56 1,031]

49 minutes ago, domkle said:

No matter what you may think of v5 with what we know so far, one thing is sure. FSElite makes a fool of themselves with their videos. Very unprofessional.

Fools?  The fools are those who believe showcasing a new simulator in it's pure form is unprofessional; conversely, I submit it's 'unprofessional' to showcase V5 loaded with third party add-ons.  How is the latter fair to those entering the hobby or looking to glean factual information about this 'new' simulator?  In one video, a viewer was mystified at the notion of having to spend hundred/thousands of additional dollars to achieve the environment being showcased in a V5 video.   Again, how is that fair/professional?

Your disgust should be directed at LM; after all, they're the ones producing this bland simulator.  To that point, I think many of us have forgotten just how close vanilla P3D resembles FSX; the FSE videos are obviously reminding some of you of that fact.

Moreover, the notion that third party developers' presentation of V5 is more accurate than FSE is particularly comical; the former have a finical/personal interests in P3D success, which forms an obvious self-serving bias.  What finical and/or bias does FSE have again?  They're entertainment producers, which is platform agnostic...they'll go on creating content /videos with or without P3D V5.

In short, calling them fools and unprofessional for simply showcasing the simulator as it exists is unwarranted...

Edited April 12, 2020 by kingm56

[Dominique_K 10,149]

I didn't make myself clear. I do not mind at all showing P3D  as it is, with all its flaws. I think it is abundantly clear in my other posts here and at Fs20 forum. 

But can you say that calling this poorly designed video   « clouds » is close to the reality of what clouds can be in any simulator ?  I expect something showing me different kind of clouds at different times of day from different altitudes.  I maintain it is unprofessional to release a clickbait when you pretend to be a media leader in the field.

[Christopher Low 5,353]

I remain puzzled why they did not fly through different types of cloud more often. Half of the video does not even show the user plane anywhere near clouds. I accept that we also need to see what clouds look like from the ground, but I was expecting this video to be a bit more "dynamic" with respect to interaction with the new TrueSky clouds.

Edited April 12, 2020 by Christopher Low

[kingm56 1,031]

2 minutes ago, domkle said:

I didn't make myself clear. I do not mind at all showing P3D  as it is, with all its flaws. I think it is abundantly clear in my other posts here and at Fs20 forum. 

But can you say that calling this poorly designed video   « clouds » is close to the reality of what clouds can be in any simulator ?  I expect something showing me different kind of clouds at different times of day from different altitudes.  I maintain it is unprofessional to release a clickbait when you pretend to be a media leader in the field.

Fair; however, if they were going to do 'clickbait' videos I think they would focus on other content.  The V5 videos are not generating many viewers, especially when compared to their other videos.  

[Dominique_K 10,149]

1 minute ago, kingm56 said:

Fair; however, if they were going to do 'clickbait' videos I think they would focus on other content.  The V5 videos are not generating many viewers, especially when compared to their other videos.  

V5 is the topic of the day. They all rush to be the first to tell us about it. 

[CFIJose 5,485]

Rob needs to make a video showing showcasing the new new cloud models. I'm very concerned that my ASP4 & Skyforrce 3D combo looks better. I need to see some TCBs in the distance, hear the thunder, and see the lightning. So far, I'm not impressed at all!

[Sethos 4,336]

Just now, DJJose said:

Rob needs to make a video showing showcasing the new new cloud models. I'm very concerned that my ASP4 & Skyforrce 3D combo looks better. I need to see some TCBs in the distance, hear the thunder, and see the lightning. So far, I'm not impressed at all!

I'm inclined to agree. I will give them the benefit of the doubt, volumetric clouds have a ton of potential, with lots of options for weather engines to manipulate shapes and size to create the look we want. However, everything I've seen so far, I'm still leaning towards the visuals Sky Force and Active Sky produce. 

[CFIJose 5,485]

12 minutes ago, Sethos said:

I'm inclined to agree. I will give them the benefit of the doubt, volumetric clouds have a ton of potential, with lots of options for weather engines to manipulate shapes and size to create the look we want. However, everything I've seen so far, I'm still leaning towards the visuals Sky Force and Active Sky produce. 

I got some bad news. We will need ASP4 & SkyFore 3D.

https://www.aviationlads.com/p3d-v5/#1586457876496-e449ba98-e37e

I'm still waiting for REX Studios to make a statement.

[AUA425 130]

to be honest - I'm really neutral, I like P3D and have all versions - but what I see on the videos is just a P3D v4.x with DX12, nothing else.
no improvement of the "default" scenery, no ATC improvement (probably), lighting is, well, better, but as I've noticed on the P3D forum for ages - the developers have to work in a bunker. if you've ever been in the air on a sunny, beautiful day, well one sunglasses won't do and with P3D v5 it looks better, but again this light "like through sunglasses". Besides, the scattering effects are a bummer. 
and what is this "mini" sun again - did they look into the sky?. I already got "blows" because certain people who prefer P3D reacted quite angry in other forums to my comparison between the, i must say great, FS2020. that's why i don't want to start such a discussion here again. I know a lot of people say - "yes, you have addons to improve it anyway - but I don't want to sit there for hours again just for the basic requirements, like sun or terrain display.
Why not OSM data or GIS - it seems to me that LM just rushed out this P3D 4.5 update (also because of the VULKAN update of XPlane11, and for the Beta performance is really great) - the thing should be called P3D 4.6 but not P3D v5.
I don't want to do it bad, really, but if you compare the sceneries (also on the pictures) the other simulators (I have "heard" there are people who are alpha testers in FS2020 and can compare this with the video ;-), and also my selfmade ones in XP11) and now with the Vulkan at all - it looks so much more plastic and realistic than in P3D v5 even with ORBX England South - and what's the point of this "doubled" FPS - even there it jerks in between (as you can see at least on the videos) - 30 FPS with fully loaded addon scenery ? and ? what if Addon Traffic and FSLabs or PMDG is added ? again between 15 - 25 FPS in approach, great.
I hope these are not recordings from the P3D V5, there are some with "night lighting" and it gets dark around the eyes :-), unfortunately.
Of course it's a guess and it would be great if it wasn't, but I'm skeptical - sorry without OSM sceneries or improved ATC (yes I know there are tools, but even they are bound to the SDK, I have them some of the time) I will probably fit in the version, for me of course - everyone should decide for himself.

ops, sorry for getting carried away - it was above the clouds - yes TrueSky is great but apparently not fully integrated here either !

(of course it's good, and it will be the tactic behind it that only minor changes are needed for the updates, but there has to be a cut at some point.)

Edited April 12, 2020 by AUA425

[mikeymike 360]

I’m reading some of the comments and it’s really pathetic how negative some people are. Like little children, my opinion is that flight simming has come along way since FSX days when I started simming. And I am really pleased with the flight experience I am having now days.

yes we all want to have it as close to reality. 
But at the end of the day it’s a sim.

you want the real deal get your pilots license!

just my opinion, not trying to come across being an word not allowed.
 

mike

[threexgreen 3,139]

I think trying to come to any truly meaningful conclusion based on the media available so far is going nowhere. In order to be able to do that you would probably need something like Asobo/Microsoft are doing with MSFS, because even if I haven't made in into the Alpha program yet I have little doubt about the sim's success and I at least feel like I've got a good picture of it.

What we have so far for v5 is not more than a bunch of pictures and videos and a change log. The latter of which I think is actually most convincing. I'm still surprised at how dull and unimpressive the official trailer is. I was honestly underwhelmed when I saw it and the first couple of pictures weren't showing much either, so I was disappointed. FSElite's video of the clouds doesn't help much either because there is very little action with regards to the clouds.

The next bunch of pictures included some really good ones that started to excite me, but only Rob's videos actually convinced me that v5 is a whole lot more than what a fair amount of the footage released thus far suggests. Of course he uses addons for the ground textures, but his videos actually show what trueSKY can do. If you watch trueSKY demo videos you will be disappointed at what you saw in the v5 trailer, but in all of Rob's video so far trueSKY looks to me like what it really is.

I think the media so far showing off v5 isn't really conclusive because it looks like two different versions of v5, one leaves me disappointed but the other looks a lot better. The only way I'm going to get to a real conclusion is to buy v5 when it's out and see for myself, on my own system. If I don't like it I can make use of the refund policy and stick with v4.5 and I haven't lost anything.

[PhotoReal Earth 93]

16 hours ago, Quasimodo said:

I've already decided that FSElite are deliberately showing the Sim in a negative light. As Rob suggested, I wonder who's paying them.

That's funny! I thought the same when I saw Rob's videos. They have such a dark and depressive atmosphere. Do you know what I mean?
And in the minutes over London I could not identify a single building.
Tower Bridge, Big Ben and Palace of Westminster / House of Parliament, Trafalgar Square, London Eye (the Giant Ferris Wheel), Buckingham Palace, Westminster Abbey and so on, and so on. Where have they all been?
If you compare this with the good mood, the sunny atmosphere and the details of MSFS (default!)  . . .

And if Rob takes LC sceneries to present P3D, a black ocean at the shores of California to show P3Dv5 from it's best side, I still wonder if he is pro or contra the new P3Dv5.

Edited April 12, 2020 by PhotoReal Earth

[Christopher Low 5,353]

The most important question for me with respect to Prepar3D v5 is.......will it reduce some of the stuttering that I get in P3D v4 (all other things being equal)?

Edited April 12, 2020 by Christopher Low

[dave2013 1,130]

If P3Dv5 is an improvement, even a small one, over P3Dv4, *and* it doesn't require major updates to my P3Dv4 aircraft and scenery, then I'm happy.

Pretty simple.

I don't understand all the negativity.

Dave