I wouldn't complain about that shot either, @Todd2

On 6/22/2022 at 9:50 PM, Krakin said:

 DCS is a close second and so far, XP12's clouds look terrible but it isn't released yet so there's room for improvement.

Austin had an interview 2 days ago and he was showing the XP 12 clouds in the interview:

Assuming this is the latest build for XP 12, and there is nothing with the quality of the streaming that would affect the look of the clouds (this stream was from XP's official Youtube channel), I do think the XP 12 clouds needs more work. I don't know why, but the clouds in this stream look so blurry, especially the clouds below the plane.  I had thought the XP team was rebuilding the XP 12 clouds from ground up? 

Anyways, this isn't the final version of XP 12, so maybe the clouds will be better when it comes out.  However, it really puts into perspective how good the clouds are in SU 10 for MSFS.  That's not to say we should let Microsoft/Asobo off the hook though - we should keep pushing Microsoft/Asobo to improve the clouds, albeit, push them in a constructive way.

Edited July 19, 20223 yr by abrams_tank

37 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Assuming this is the latest build for XP 12, and there is nothing with the quality of the streaming that would affect the look of the clouds (this stream was from XP's official Youtube channel), I do think the XP 12 clouds needs more work. I don't know why, but the clouds in this stream look so blurry, especially the clouds below the plane.  I had thought the XP team was rebuilding the XP 12 clouds from ground up? 

When I saw that video a few days ago, my first thought was that people criticizing MSFS clouds would not like these any better.

 

40 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Austin had an interview 2 days ago and he was showing the XP 12 clouds in the interview (...) this isn't the final version of XP 12, so maybe the clouds will be better when it comes out.

I have never played Xplane. I am a big MSFS supporter, despite its flaws, butI'm going to do something uncharacteristic and defend XP12 clouds right now.

It's my understanding that software devs tend to work on the foundation of a new system first. In this case, make sure winds work, data doesn't lose connection. Clouds form anvils and have downdrafts. The second to last thing a dev will do is boost the visuals to be visually appealing and glorious, and then the last thing a dev will do is do optimizing to try and squeeze FPS. I have a feeling this video is taken during the feature implementation (beta) phase, and Austin hasn't even begun working on the visual appealing part of weather.

I could be wrong, but I've played a lot of early access, and it's just something I've noticed after the 12th or so early access game I've played.

10 minutes ago, WestAir said:

I have never played Xplane. I am a big MSFS supporter, despite its flaws, butI'm going to do something uncharacteristic and defend XP12 clouds right now.

It's my understanding that software devs tend to work on the foundation of a new system first. In this case, make sure winds work, data doesn't lose connection. Clouds form anvils and have downdrafts. The second to last thing a dev will do is boost the visuals to be visually appealing and glorious, and then the last thing a dev will do is do optimizing to try and squeeze FPS. I have a feeling this video is taken during the feature implementation (beta) phase, and Austin hasn't even begun working on the visual appealing part of weather.

I could be wrong, but I've played a lot of early access, and it's just something I've noticed after the 12th or so early access game I've played.

For sure, the final version of clouds in XP 12 can look better. And yes, sometimes visuals are the last thing that developers work on. But at the same time, Austin was specifically showcasing the clouds in that part of the interview.  If Austin is specifically showcasing the clouds in that part of the video, he probably wants to demonstrate how good it is.

If there is a lot of work to be done on the clouds before XP 12's release, best is not to show it, or at least, don't deliberately showcase it and draw attention to it.  This is what PMDG and Fenix do. They don't show stuff, until it's fairly polished, because they don't want the public to come way with a bad first impression.  First impressions are hard to change, that's something that Randazzo (PMDG) and Aamir (Fenix) understand.

So if there are major improvements to come with XP 12's clouds, I am baffled by why Austin would specifically showcase them in the interview from 2 days ago (ie. he could instead, just showcase the plane, and say the clouds are a work in progress and that they will be much better by XP 12's release).

Edited July 19, 20223 yr by abrams_tank

53 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Assuming this is the latest build for XP 12, and there is nothing with the quality of the streaming that would affect the look of the clouds (this stream was from XP's official Youtube channel), I do think the XP 12 clouds needs more work.

A little soft maybe, but the structure of the clouds, the flat bottoms and thick layered clouds look fantastic.  The thick top layer with a flat and dark bottom surface is far better than any high altitude cloud MSFS can currently produce.

I am so excited we will soon have two modern flightsims to use!

16 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

A little soft maybe, but the structure of the clouds, the flat bottoms and thick layered clouds look fantastic.  The thick top layer with a flat and dark bottom surface is far better than any high altitude cloud MSFS can currently produce.

I am so excited we will soon have two modern flightsims to use!

The clouds below the plane just look blurry and IMO, look awful.  The clouds above the plane look better, but not the clouds below the plane.

The best way I can describe this is, the plane looks like it is in 4K resolution, but the clouds below the plane look like they are in 240p resolution (240p resolution is back to the resolution in the 1990s). There is a mismatch in the detail of the plane, and the detail of the clouds below the plane.  That's why the clouds below the plane look so blurry to me.  It doesn't look good, IMO, and several people in the Youtube chat during the stream also say the clouds aren't good (keep playing a little longer, and you will see more negative comments about the clouds come into the chat).

Edited July 19, 20223 yr by abrams_tank

I really couldn't care less what XP clouds look like, it is yesterdays sim, period. 

Yes, clouds are better now, my only problem is there are many airports with clear skies where, according to the metar, there should be clouds. But in flight the clouds are much better.

This is with clouds on high, not ultra.

 

 

13 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

The clouds below the plane just look blurry and IMO, look awful.  The clouds above the plane look better, but not the clouds below the plane.

The best way I can describe this is, the plane looks like it is in 4K resolution, but the clouds below the plane look like they are in 240p resolution (240p resolution is back to the resolution in the 1990s). There is a mismatch in the detail of the plane, and the detail of the clouds below the plane.  That's why the clouds below the plane look so blurry to me.  It doesn't look good, IMO, and several people in the Youtube chat during the stream also made the same comment about the clouds.

1000% agree.  MSFS clouds now look 480p to me especially the closer you get to them--too blurry, too soft, w/o definition, and I also agree mismatch to the rest of the sim.  Better than what I see in the XP video above, but still need work!

As it stands, those clouds in XP12 are hot garbage and you are lying to yourself if you think otherwise. I cringed when that Brian guy went, "Incredible". Really? Nah. The fact that it looked like it was running like a slideshow certainly didn't help things. Maybe that was just a streaming hiccup. The limitations in the engine's lighting also makes it look really fake. It has potential tho but if that what they ship with......

Edited July 19, 20223 yr by Krakin

2 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

I really couldn't care less what XP clouds look like, it is yesterdays sim, period. 

Considering it hasn't been released yet that is an odd comment.  Like most things, flightsim is about balancing performance, visuals, realism and personal choice with what is more important in a sim.

I know you value the worldwide satellite imagery, so with that missing in XP12 you are likely to dismiss it, regardless of how good the quality of other aspects are.  I like satellite imagery but I value weather, lighting, flight model and other aspects more. Therefore my start score for XP12 is going to be higher for me than you.

I completely understand your requirements mean that MSFS is going to be your only choice, but that fact does not mean XP12 will be a poor flightsim.  It may or may not excel in some areas over MSFS, but if it has more good points to overcome the bad then I'll purchase it.

 

1 hour ago, Krakin said:

As it stands, those clouds in XP12 are hot garbage and you are lying to yourself if you think otherwise.

Wow, so if we don't share your view we are lying to ourselves?  

1 hour ago, Krakin said:

As it stands, those clouds in XP12 are hot garbage and you are lying to yourself if you think otherwise. I cringed when that Brian guy went, "Incredible". Really? Nah. The fact that it looked like it was tunning like a slideshow certainly didn't help things. Maybe that was just a streaming hiccup. The limitations in the engine's lighting also makes it look really fake. It has potential tho but if that what they ship with......

Yeah, they definitely need to work on the clouds for XP 12.  I had thought the XP team were doing the clouds from scratch but I guess not.  The cloud algorithm they are using must not as sophisticated as MSFS.  That's a pity, I guess, when you have a smaller development team.

Edited July 19, 20223 yr by abrams_tank

20 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

The cloud algorithm they are using must not as sophisticated as MSFS.

Au contraire - the XP algorithm is more sophisticated than the one of MSFS. You know why? There are turbulences within the clouds ...