38 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Probably why Hi-Fi sold so many licences for Active Sky which greatly enhances the default clouds. I’m very happy with how they look in P3D v4.5 even if they’re not volumetric.

I agree with you. The P3D default clouds are not so bad and Active Sky makes the most of what P3D can offer and cures some of the unwelcomed FSX legacies like cumulus at ground level etc.  BTW, FS20 will have a full blown weather engine something that P3D doesn't care anymore to include.  

Getting back to FS20 clouds. What we have seen so far makes me think that their shape and distribution are far better than what we have had over the years in the FS/P3D family even with AS. The fact that they are volumetric will help having heavy turbulences inside and updraft/downdraft as I understand. Something we've been longing for quite some time.

But, on the artistic side, in some screenshots they too often look  like they belong to a doomsday cloudscape. Overdone. Colors and contrast. Also the texture could look homogeneous, kinda bland. Now it may very well come from the resolution of the picture or from some post-processing from the tester.  

1 hour ago, Dominique_K said:

I agree with you. The P3D default clouds are not so bad and Active Sky makes the most of what P3D can offer and cures some of the unwelcomed FSX legacies like cumulus at ground level etc.  BTW, FS20 will have a full blown weather engine something that P3D doesn't care anymore to include.  

But, on the artistic side, in some screenshots they too often look  like they belong to a doomsday cloudscape. Overdone. Colors and contrast. Also the texture could look homogeneous, kinda bland. Now it may very well come from the resolution of the picture or from some post-processing from the tester.  

If Hi-Fi can gain access who knows how much better they could become. There are some clouds with colours definitely overblown. The CBs in particular don’t look realistic at all. Anyway, not that important for me as I’ll not be buying on day one.

Most revolutionary about the clouds that is not in any other sim as far as I know is that they roll/move dynamically. Remember that first movie of the rolling clouds. Regardless how they look at their worst, this alone is an unprecedented step forwards.

2 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

If Hi-Fi can gain access who knows how much better they could become. There are some clouds with colours definitely overblown. The CBs in particular don’t look realistic at all. Anyway, not that important for me as I’ll not be buying on day one.

I won't be buying on day 1 either - probably day 2 or 3.

Regards

bs

People have apparently forgotten that DTG utilized trueSky in their “early access flight simulator”. DTG limited the resolution of the clouds because of performance considerations.  

Did anyone get some clues from this episode if the landing rwy and STAR is dynamically assigned due to weather changes?

I like to file a flight plan between two airports but leave the SID/STAR out of it and have this dynamically assigned in the flight due to weather and ai-traffic.

 

 

I don’t get the complaints about the ATC, it sounds a lot better than the default FSX/P3D voices IMO.

1 hour ago, Tuskin38 said:

I don’t get the complaints about the ATC, it sounds a lot better than the default FSX/P3D voices IMO.

Agree here.

Yet imagine if they put some ultra realistic ATC voice over ... complaints will go like :

"OMG ATC what the hell is this ?! They talk way too fast and it is so low quality with tons of scratch sounds I can't even understand sh... ! "

😛

1 hour ago, Athlonic said:

Agree here.

Yet imagine if they put some ultra realistic ATC voice over ... complaints will go like :

"OMG ATC what the hell is this ?! They talk way too fast and it is so low quality with tons of scratch sounds I can't even understand sh... ! "

😛

I have a DVD of BA Concorde operations and the instructions from Kennedy Approach and Tower are extremely rapid. If English wasn't your first language you could struggle to understand.

I have stated this many times, but I personally think that the ATC voices in FSX/P3D sound very good. Quite how they can sound "robotic" (as some people have claimed) when they are actually recorded human voices is difficult to understand.

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

I have stated this many times, but I personally think that the ATC voices in FSX/P3D sound very good. Quite how they can sound "robotic" (as some people have claimed) when they are actually recorded human voices is difficult to understand.

Same was said of the Radar Contact voices. I'm no robot the last time I checked. After a while you just grow impervious to it.

I recall seeing a screenshot of airport+ on the 320 (maybe it´s in the IFR video..can`t remember).

Airport+ is another service of Navblue (Usable on-board with the Airport Moving Map function running either on Airbus avionics systems or on any Electronic Flight Bag) that I really hope we get besides Airac updates and not only with the 320.

Now, the unpopular opinion, (but it´s just that, an opinion) and I really wish to be wrong, but I think NavBlue will be a subscription. Navblue is Airbus, not Microsoft, and I don´t see them giving data to simmers "forever". If I have to bet, I´d say we´ll have it free for sometime after buying MFS2020 (put it 3-6 months) and after that period, subscription if you want to be Airac and Airport+, and maybe charts+, updated. I repeat, I hope I'm wrong, and I´ll be extremely happy If I am, but that's the way I see it.

Cheers

Carlos

Edited May 31, 20206 yr by chass32

On 5/30/2020 at 6:15 AM, siggy said:

Regarding ATC pronouncing waypoint names, go to translate.google.com , select "English" as the language, type in a few of the waypoint names, one per line, and click on the play button. Even bing translator can produce something similar.

If you type the waypoint in caps e.g. GRIFFY it will pronounce the letters individually although if you type in lowercase e.g. griffy then it will pronounce it as expected. However putting the waypoint name in caps makes it stand out more in the text which is helpful if you didn't quite catch/understand the audio.

All updates were always outstandingly beautiful to dream about. But ATC makes me think, my mood is very cloudy. Too bad

"Now, the unpopular opinion, (but it´s just that, an opinion) and I really wish to be wrong, but I think NavBlue will be a subscription."  I can't see why it is an upopular opinion, cause I think you're absolutely right.

Although MS and Asobo have said that it won't be a subscribsion, I'm pretty sure that only goes for the simulator itself. At the time they said it, there was no talk of addon programs, like airacs, charts, etc, maybe they hadn't even considered it by then, but it would be stupid to think that ie. Navblue will deliver it without seeing a profit. I'm sure MSFS will come with a navdata cycle, ready to use, and I only hope we can continue using it IF we decide not to get a navblue subscribsion.

I also believe that charts will be a subscribsion, but there's a lot of free chart online, so that won't be a problem (for me at least).