P3Dv5.1 HF 1 : addon compatibility

[mpo910 2,112]

P3D V5.1 EA mode on MARS INVASION

Guys at LM: THIS IS AMAZING (Ironie off). 

[chapstick 2,757]

AS P3D RC2 is now out

 

https://hifisimtech.com/downloads/

[Biology 1,347]

59 minutes ago, mpo910 said:

Slowly I am getting tired of this ugly truesky promised thing which is still not a word allowed implementation:

• still Mars like sunsets and dawns
• Still repeating cloud patterns
• Still Objects through clouds/fog (ORBX Building HD and EDDF Aerosoft Airport)
• STILL Ugly flat cloud layer which raises to much against the horizin. especially with higher cloud layers and low hanging sun a kille. Within VR much worser as on display. But also on display it looks not right.
• Still Exposure strange changing of light switching from cockpit to outside all is getting too dark (this is during Daytime....it should be soooo bright up here (LM has this exposure thing never get right in all these years......)
• Weather addon is FSGRW used here

Why do I always have the feeling that LM don´t want to make the sim looking really nice?

Marcus

As the developer of Enhanced Cloudscapes (freeware volumetric cloud add-on for X-Plane) I'm not much surprised... Most of the issues presented here are trueSKY issues, not Lockheed Martin ones. The main issue with trueSKY is computational costs - there is no way to get perfect results without losing significant amount of performance. Even though there are many demos/games with great-looking trueSKY implementations, most of the time they are static, small in scale and/or played on ground, which is not the case with a flight simulator, where repetition and other visual trade-offs are much more visible due to the larger scale and higher altitudes. Smaller scale, lower altitudes and a static scene greatly hides repetition and reduces performance impact, which allows developers to increase fidelity. I also agree that Lockheed Martin could have come up with a slightly better implementation, but there isn't much can be done with our current hardware.

Also, it looks like VolumetricClouds.cfg has been updated. @simbol, are you aware of the changes? Sadly I can't test v5.1 HF1 right now and I'm quite curious.

Edited November 19, 2020 by BiologicalNanobot

[mpo910 2,112]

4 minutes ago, BiologicalNanobot said:

As the developer of Enhanced Cloudscapes (freeware volumetric cloud add-on for X-Plane) I'm not much surprised... Most of the issues presented here are trueSKY issues, not Lockheed Martin ones. The main issue with trueSKY is computational costs - there is no way to get perfect results without losing significant amount of performance. Even though there are many demos/games with great-looking trueSKY implementations, most of the time they are static, small in scale and/or played on ground. This greatly hides repetition and reduces performance impact, which allows developers to increase fidelity. With a flight simulator, especially at higher altitudes the repetition, grids and other visual trade-offs are much more visible. I also agree that Lockheed Martin could have come up with a slightly better implementation, but there isn't much can be done with our current hardware.

Also, it looks like VolumetricClouds.cfg has been updated. @simbol, are you aware of the changes? Sadly I can't test v5.1 HF1 right now and I am quite curious.

Well.....I don´t care about that.

LM choose to implement this product. If it is not getting better......than my future switch is getting clearer and clearer.

The competitor will enhance their SDK, VR is coming, also 3.Party planes are getting better (FlyByWire).

It is really time now for LM to understand that their USP are shrinking month over month......for the casual simmers.

Volumetric clouds becomes state of the art. But it is not only that. Also the whole colorizing of dawn and dusk is a desaster! Orange to red horizons like on mars. THAT could be done way better with minimum effort. They did NOTHING about these complains. Just a few parameters, that´s it.

The whole appearance of cloud grid....a immersion killer, really. 

I am getting a little tired after every update I post the same issues and changes which are shared and whished by lots of us....

I give up. I will not post at LM again. It is worthless.

This FLAT cloudlayer whichs raises up to the horizon.....I posted it in April with screenshots.

Nothing happened on that.

Yesterday I installed another platform again. End the performance was great. I give it a half year to 9 months....then I will decide.

Marcus

[mikeymike 358]

4 minutes ago, mpo910 said:

Well.....I don´t care about that.

LM choose to implement this product. If it is not getting better......than my future switch is getting clearer and clearer.

The competitor will enhance their SDK, VR is coming, also 3.Party planes are getting better (FlyByWire).

It is really time now for LM to understand that their USP are shrinking month over month......for the casual simmers.

Volumetric clouds becomes state of the art. But it is not only that. Also the whole colorizing of dawn and dusk is a desaster! Orange to red horizons like on mars. THAT could be done way better with minimum effort. They did NOTHING about these complains. Just a few parameters, that´s it.

The whole appearance of cloud grid....a immersion killer, really. 

I am getting a little tired after every update I post the same issues and changes which are shared and whished by lots of us....

I give up. I will not post at LM again. It is worthless.

This FLAT cloudlayer whichs raises up to the horizon.....I posted it in April with screenshots.

Nothing happened on that.

Yesterday I installed another platform again. End the performance was great. I give it a half year to 9 months....then I will decide.

Marcus

😂 

mate.. pack it up. Untick EA and enjoy.

I’m  hoping that hifi will update their cloud models to look a little softer.

with my envtex skies 

im a happy camper.

mike

[simbol 5,819]

25 minutes ago, BiologicalNanobot said:

looks like VolumetricClouds.cfg has been updated. @simbol, are you aware of the changes? Sadly I can't test v5.1 HF1 right now and I'm quite curious.

Yes, more settings to avoid grids, squares, etc. When you update, you can read the new parameters inside the file. They also updated default values with recommendations I did from input on Avsim. Most of the changes discovered by @GSalden.

S.

[Biology 1,347]

18 minutes ago, mpo910 said:

Well.....I don´t care about that.

LM choose to implement this product. If it is not getting better......than my future switch is getting clearer and clearer.

The competitor will enhance their SDK, VR is coming, also 3.Party planes are getting better (FlyByWire).

It is really time now for LM to understand that their USP are shrinking month over month......for the casual simmers.

Volumetric clouds becomes state of the art. But it is not only that. Also the whole colorizing of dawn and dusk is a desaster! Orange to red horizons like on mars. THAT could be done way better with minimum effort. They did NOTHING about these complains. Just a few parameters, that´s it.

The whole appearance of cloud grid....a immersion killer, really. 

I am getting a little tired after every update I post the same issues and changes which are shared and whished by lots of us....

I give up. I will not post at LM again. It is worthless.

This FLAT cloudlayer whichs raises up to the horizon.....I posted it in April with screenshots.

Nothing happened on that.

Yesterday I installed another platform again. End the performance was great. I give it a half year to 9 months....then I will decide.

Marcus

I understand the frustration, and yeah, probably Lockheed Martin shouldn't have introduced trueSKY at first place, as it is really not too great for large-scale applications. And yes, I'm also quite excited about the "competition", it is already beautiful out-of-the-box and will be perfect once Prepar3D airliners are out for it in following months/years. However, I don't think Lockheed Martin could do anything about colorizing of dawn and dusk, or grid issues. Just check the trueSKY SDK, you just set a few parameters, the rest, including rendering, is handled by trueSKY itself with minimal control over it. So I guess this is the best thing they were able to do. Also, volumetric clouds and lighting really takes a lot effort, so I really wouldn't say "that could be done way better with minimum effort".

Edited November 19, 2020 by BiologicalNanobot

[simbol 5,819]

There will be more improvements in the future, we flagged lots of these issues with redness, Antialiasing and others, they are aware... all WIP.

HF1 had to come out.. Please remember Hot fixes address medium to hard bugs.. They are not designed to introduce new features or big changes that could make matters worse.. It is standard developing practices.

We talked during 5.1 release about these things, let's not get dragged again into the same topic.. I personally would have wished 5.1 to be released in January with more improvements but I am not in charge of LM.

I would also wished lots of stuff for other platforms and they haven't happened yet either, we are stuck this year with lots of negative results on many things.. Not only in flight sim, but life and quiet frankly it is taking a tool in all of us.. We need to start being more positive and focus on the good stuff for our own well being and health.

Focus on the things they fixed, enjoy them.. The others are in the queue, believe me when I say this. I ring their ears constantly about these things with each of their beta drops, so do others developers.. They know, they are working on these things..

Stay positive, P3D developing is NOT STOPPING.. That alone is a good sign.

Regards,

S.

 

[mpo910 2,112]

27 minutes ago, simbol said:

There will be more improvements in the future, we flagged lots of these issues with redness, Antialiasing and others, they are aware... all WIP.

HF1 had to come out.. Please remember Hot fixes address medium to hard bugs.. They are not designed to introduce new features or big changes that could make matters worse.. It is standard developing practices.

We talked during 5.1 release about these things, let's not get dragged again into the same topic.. I personally would have wished 5.1 to be released in January with more improvements but I am not in charge of LM.

I would also wished lots of stuff for other platforms and they haven't happened yet either, we are stuck this year with lots of negative results on many things.. Not only in flight sim, but life and quiet frankly it is taking a tool in all of us.. We need to start being more positive and focus on the good stuff for our own well being and health.

Focus on the things they fixed, enjoy them.. The others are in the queue, believe me when I say this. I ring their ears constantly about these things with each of their beta drops, so do others developers.. They know, they are working on these things..

Stay positive, P3D developing is NOT STOPPING.. That alone is a good sign.

Regards,

S.

 

I do understand what you are saying here Simbol.

I turned it around: LM stated back in April a whole new Truesky and NvidiaWaveworks would enhance the sim. APRIL!

We are in November.......still it looks dreadful, ugly, clouds look really awful, especially at dawn and dusk....these heavy noise and way too much "churn". 

Water with big waves in cities like London, Frankfurt, Nice...etc. Really ugly!

Static waves from FLx up to the......remaining wave patterns and at x NM from viewpoint flattened out......with sunset and dawn, again ufff!.

Direct X12. A catastrophe. Still VR isn´t that smooth as it could and should be. Dynamic lights in VR, one eye rendered one eye not, partly or rendered with a straight cut through the texture.

It has nothing to do with being negative. It has something to do with expectations which LM raised by selling a half baked word not allowed product!

How long do we have to wait? Further 6 months? That means "half time" of V5! Or? 

Sorry. But if they act further like this....this will be a "ending" story for me.

My rig and addons costs me 10K within 2 years! As soon as competition gets better......I will choose the product which fits best to me.

The next problem are the scenery devs. They will probably not enhance their existing airports. Most of them look still like FSX times. No PBR, No material scripting, bad shadowmaps, etc. I do understand why.......but that is another reason to watch the market and decide upon that.

And LM with P3D V5 did not went well for me (us). 

Marcus

Edited November 19, 2020 by mpo910

[G-RFRY 1,708]

PMDG 747-400 FMC cannot change the FRQ on the Nav Radios once you have one in, checked for updates none at the moment someone else needs to check this before posting on PMDG support.

[pgde 571]

FYI -- the newest Active Sky has been posted with HF1 compatibility.

[Mroberts95 136]

6 minutes ago, G-RFRY said:

PMDG 747-400 FMC cannot change the FRQ on the Nav Radios once you have one in, checked for updates none at the moment someone else needs to check this before posting on PMDG support.

My 1LSK button doesnt work on either FMC in the 747 now

[micstatic 4,316]

I personally have no issues with DX12.  In fact one of the better moves IMO from lockheed.  But I still don't like the red mars clouds and I don't like the grid like clouds.  Oh and some of the pictures i've seen of night shot from the outside where the airplane has a weird glow.  All of these frustrate as I want to use true sky, but not that bad.  I'm still on 5.0HF2.  Really the main reason I can see to update is the elimination of the menu/gsx CTD and pbr updates to make bare metal look like bare metal.  The menu CTD is so rare for me I'm not sure it's worth it.  

[mpo910 2,112]

P3D V5.1 HF 1 with TE Netherlands:

Well LM or ORBX: Still the Simobjects blend horrible! Not only in Netherlands but ALL OVER THE WORLD!

Who is responsible for this now? LM or 3.Party. Is there someone who can answer this with 100% knowledge? 

Mathijs Kok wrote he would expect an apologize for those who hyped this thing about Aerosoft products on the Aerosoft forum (I did post issues with EDDF, LSZH LLBG LGSK LGSM GCLP GCLA etc....) if LM would fix this this week! He really wrote that on my thread!

Linke here: https://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/156926-scenery-compatibility-issues-with-p3d-v5x-textures-simobjects-showing-through-fogclouds/&tab=comments#comment-1001484

And now? Now the HF is out and still most of all addon products have this kind of issues?

@Rob_Ainscough or @simbol: Can you please clarify who has to solve this? This ball is getting kicked from us to LM from LM to 3.Party, from 3.Party to LM again......it is a shame and one of the things which make me really being confused about this V5....thing.

Maybe you have someone at LM who can give us feedback. THANKS!

@simbol AILRP works great! THANKS for at least that one with AIGAIM!

 

 

[simbol 5,819]

2 minutes ago, micstatic said:

I personally have no issues with DX12.  In fact one of the better moves IMO from lockheed.  But I still don't like the red mars clouds and I don't like the grid like clouds.  Oh and some of the pictures i've seen of night shot from the outside where the airplane has a weird glow.  All of these frustrate as I want to use true sky, but not that bad.  I'm still on 5.0HF2.  Really the main reason I can see to update is the elimination of the menu/gsx CTD and pbr updates to make bare metal look like bare metal.  The menu CTD is so rare for me I'm not sure it's worth it.  

And the cloud flashing, blue threes, objects begin clouds, effects correction, weather fixes (including for HiFi), Antialiasing issues with clouds, the list goes on..

Staying in 5.0 or prior 5.1 HF1 has no advantages, just adverse effects..

Yes we all hate the redness and square patterns. Give it a go on 5.1 with ActiveSky and other weather programs.. You will barely see these squares.. And I bet in 1 week @GSalden and others will tweak the clouds with new settings available even more.

The issues you mentioned, they know.. We need to stop beating the dead horse they are working on it..

The alternative is MSFS and if we are all here wishing better results for P3D is for a reason.. So let's try to move on, and provide feedback to LM in a positive manner so they continue to be motivated and keep pushing improvements..

S.