1 minute ago, rka said:

There is a difference between a guess and wishful thinking, you know 😉

Absolutely, and that's exactly why they provided base numbers in their video. Should I check out how many FPS I get above NYC in XP and maybe take a screenshot? 😄

You are probably counting the days to the update more than actual MSFS users. I somehow like that...

Him and a few more lol

2 minutes ago, rka said:

You are probably counting the days to the update more than actual MSFS users. I somehow like that...

Just to get it on record, dear moderators - I didn´t start this! 😆

But yeah, you are right - I really can´t wait for the 27th 🙂

 

Edited July 21, 20214 yr by Janov

16 hours ago, BijanStudio said:

That's true. Nothing is free. We will lose some. For some, the trade off is fair, for some it's not and and for some it's a disaster.  Everyone uses to sim differently.

 

 

This worries me a bit. Are you running the beta build? 

"... for some it's a disaster" doesn't sound very good. Are you saying the sim's visuals and experience will be degraded severely for people who are used to running everything on high/ultra settings?

That would be unacceptable for me. 

27 minutes ago, RobJC said:

Just going off the video they showed, they were getting a 20 fps improvement in NYC. Not 20%, but a solid 20 fps in a heavily populated area. Right now I get low 30s at takeoff at Heathrow to high 40s/low 50s after takeoff. But I do see the super quick drop into the high 20s (for a split second) so if they can boost things up even 5 fps and get rid of the occasional stutters (especially during ATC comms) I am happy. But I understand this isn't good enough for a lot of users. 

Well, it comes down to what the trade off is. What might be an acceptable loss to me, might not be to you. For example, make the electronic systems update once every five seconds: wouldn't matter to me, might be everything to you. Reduce the LoD, that matters to me, might not to you.

8 minutes ago, devgrp said:

Oh and just because the game has been optimized doesnt mean it was coded badly. Everyone who knows about software development knows that code goes through refactoring and optimization.

Except that this is more than refactoring. It's an engine overhaul. To make it perform better than ever before.

What a pity that we are forced to update Would have wanted to wait and see how the new version performs.

Karl

I'd rather have 45 fps with current visuals than 60 fps with xbox visuals. 

I don't think hardcore flight simmers will appreciate having their sim degraded.

And all their addons not working. 

19 minutes ago, Republic3D said:

Are you saying the sim's visuals and experience will be degraded severely for people who are used to running everything on high/ultra settings?

It's all a matter of sensitivity. Most people do not seem to notice or be bothered by things like the LOD regressions, grainy/pixelated clouds, terrain morphing and degraded TAA that came with later updates. I imagine it won't be any different with Sim Update 5, but some will definitely be upset.

Although I don't disagree with those who are trying to temper expectations regarding a "free" performance upgrade, I would recommend waiting until next week to form your own opinion on the matter, because your mileage can vary greatly.

8 minutes ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

It's all a matter of sensitivity. Most people do not seem to notice or be bothered by things like the LOD regressions, grainy/pixelated clouds, terrain morphing and degraded TAA that came with later updates. I imagine it won't be any different with Sim Update 5, but some will definitely be upset.

Although I don't disagree with those who are trying to temper expectations regarding a "free" performance upgrade, I would recommend waiting until next week to form your own opinion on the matter, because your mileage can vary greatly.

I can definitely see a huge visual downgrade coming. Like they say, nothing is free. That massive performance boost sounded too good to be true.

1 hour ago, Janov said:

Perfect example of why many users struggle to understand the concept of performance improvement.

If I get 200 fps while flying over NYC...and then get a solid 20fps increase with the new patch - is that much or not so much?

Reminds me of the joke where the teacher says: "45 percent of you children failed the last math test!" - "But Sir, we aren´t even that many!"

An absolute number for "fps increase" is not quantifying things. You need the "base value" to value it.

Lol! Trolling again? As if XP is the exemplar of perfect optimisation.😂 And you don't even have MSFS so I don't see how you can even comment without hypocracy.

Edited July 21, 20214 yr by jarmstro

18 minutes ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

It's all a matter of sensitivity. Most people do not seem to notice or be bothered by things like the LOD regressions, grainy/pixelated clouds, terrain morphing and degraded TAA that came with later updates. I imagine it won't be any different with Sim Update 5, but some will definitely be upset.

 

Now I really worry 🤣

This is why NDAs are a thing

2 minutes ago, Krakin said:

This is why NDAs are a thing

A thing of what ? A NDA is a wonderful engine for the rumor mill 😁. 

As Beta tester, i have to thread carefully about what I can say or not. That being said  you can always make the following assumptions : Every update is always going to be good for some and worst for others. Some mods will be broken and require update. You don't have to be a beta tester to know this.  This is why I keep saying to everyone "Your experience may vary". 

Edited July 21, 20214 yr by fogboundturtle

I don't really care much about fps, all I care about is the total elimination of soft-stutters, having a butter-smooth experience being at 30fps or 60fps or anything in between as long as the fps are consistent, works for me. What is the point of reaching 60fps if you still encounter stutters, this is the immersion killer for me.