1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

That is exactly what I have been seeing since SU5, and frankly, it sucks, 

Strangely enough i dont see that degradation. Mine looks like picture one i guess.

Have flown low and slow from KATL-8A1-KMEM-KDEN-KASE with crisp building and ground textures 

Michael Moe

1 minute ago, Michael Moe said:

Strangely enough i dont see that degradation. Mine looks like picture one i guess.

Have flown low and slow from KATL-8A1-KMEM-KDEN-KASE with crisp building and ground textures 

Michael Moe

Well can you then explain so that we can understand, how so many are seeing this degradation and even Asobo is admitting that it is a problem that they hope to fix? Are their two versions of SU5 that were released, and one was a Placebo with no problems, and the other was the SU5 version with issues?

4 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Well can you then explain so that we can understand, how so many are seeing this degradation and even Asobo is admitting that it is a problem that they hope to fix? Are their two versions of SU5 that were released, and one was a Placebo with no problems, and the other was the SU5 version with issues?

Hi Bob, i cant explain anything

Lets try a location on your choice

Michael Moe 

9 minutes ago, Michael Moe said:

Hi Bob, i cant explain anything

Lets try a location on your choice

Michael Moe 

I just cannot understand how anyone using a standard PC with a standard monitor cannot see the changes to the lighting and shadows amongst other degrades. It's so obvious that the whole exercise was to get the performance up to make the sim usable on an XBox? And to do so they have had to compromise the graphical quality at the expense of PC users.

 

Edited August 3, 20214 yr by jarmstro

4 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

I just cannot understand how anyone using a standard PC with a standard monitor cannot see the changes to the lighting and shadows amongst other degrades. It's so obvious that the whole exercise was to get the performance up to make the sim usable on an XBox? And to do so they have had to compromise the graphical quality at the expense of PC users.

 

Maybe i am blind but the middle picture look almost something from FSX were pic 1 and 3 looks like MSFS to me .

Were is this location btw ? Maybe i can try it out but as i was telling my sim looks more like pic 1 and 3 to me ,

Michael Moe

 

10 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

I just cannot understand how anyone using a standard PC with a standard monitor cannot see the changes to the lighting and shadows amongst other degrades. It's so obvious that the whole exercise was to get the performance up to make the sim usable on an XBox? And to do so they have had to compromise the graphical quality at the expense of PC users.

 

9 minutes ago, Michael Moe said:

Maybe i am blind but the middle picture look almost something from FSX were pic 1 and 3 looks like MSFS to me .

Were is this location btw ? Maybe i can try it out but as i was telling my sim looks more like pic 1 and 3 to me ,

Michael Moe

 

And that fine. If you are happy with it that's great. I however am not and just can't believe what they have done to what once a beautiful thing to behold. Do you seriously think that the FPS increase was achieved through optimisation alone?

Edited August 3, 20214 yr by jarmstro

 

Is this what Asobo wants our simulation to look like? Saturation and Bloom taken to +100? 

The lighting even looks different in their video, looks like the gamma was too extreme for the Youtube encoding (pretty sure it was). Most likely the Youtube encoding clipped it. Youtube is supposed to be to handle HDR, but I've heard it doesn't encode it right.

Edited August 3, 20214 yr by Alpine Scenery

The color balance in that video is broken. As simple as that.

2 hours ago, RustyFlyer said:

Utter nonsense. ........visibility is *often* significantly greater than "6 or 7 miles at best". In fact, ..........we often see the ..........(13 - 32 miles from aircraft depending on route & location of aircraft), and we *often* see ....... approx. 85 miles away in Massachusetts.

complete nonsense! currently I see nothing but rain, and more rain, where we live. and that is mid summer. I guess we call it weather or weather change .... ?

2 minutes ago, Aristoteles said:

 

Is this what Asobo wants our simulation to look like? Saturation and Bloom taken to +100? 

It's nothing to do with bloom and saturation. It's about the subtlety of the lighting, contrast and shadows. They've dumbed them down for extra FPS for the XBox.

5 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

And that fine. If you are happy with it that's great. I however am not and just can't believe what they have done to what once a beautiful thing to behold. Do you seriously think that the FPS increase was achieved through optimisation alone?

No i think i believe my fellow simmers 🙂 something is buggy ,

I took these above Chicago , they seems ok ? check them out and judge please

https://ibb.co/DtTXKyM

https://ibb.co/MhTnwMS

https://ibb.co/THT0GBJ

 

Thanks Michael Moe

 

9 minutes ago, Michael Moe said:

judge please

I have often seen screenshots from MSFS where I had to take a second look if they were indeed screenshots or irl pictures. That's what made me a bliever from day1. With all the pictures surfacing now to prove everything's fine I only need a short glance to realize it's from a game. That goes for your three pictures as well, and I viewed them in full resolution.

Edited August 3, 20214 yr by Tom_L

4 minutes ago, Tom_L said:

I have often seen screenshots from MSFS where I had to take a second look if they were indeed screenshots or irl pictures. That's what made me a bliever from day1. With all the pictures surfacing now to prove everything's fine I only need a short glance to realize it's from a game. That goes for your three pictures as well, and I viewed them in full resolution.

not sure i understand ? , i think it looks great , then i shall have glasses 😀

Here i take 3 from the KMSP area

 

https://ibb.co/rFTT6Br

 

https://ibb.co/9hPWtBG

 

https://ibb.co/4Nyqjp3

 

Michael Moe