45 minutes ago, fppilot said:

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.  Here then are 6,000 words.  Please hazard a guess of which sim and which textures are in use.....

Something retro by the looks of it comparing it to MSFS. 

23 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Yeah, and my expertise is software development.  I can tell you that it may take a long time for Asobo to get the SDK up to the level required by Rex and Active Sky.  And then it may take Rex and Active Sky, who knows how many more years to get the add-on to the level that you show in your pictures.

Anyways, "Could have been in place at first release" is past tense. The present is the present. And the best course for Asobo in the present is to continue their work on live weather and not waste a single minute on the SDK for Rex and Active Sky.

They choose Metroblue long ago as a vendor for live weather, so live weather should not suffer. Why would releasing the relevant portion of an SDK slow anything down?  One might otherwise believe it would speed other elements up.

Just now, Ianrivaldosmith said:

Something retro by the looks of it comparing it to MSFS. 

ROFLMAO on that one.

21 hours ago, Silicus said:

While I agree the clouds have improved in SU10, they are still missing most of the major cloud types.

 

High clouds	Cirrus
	Cirrostratus
	Cirrocumulus
Middle clouds	Altostratus
	Altocumulus
Low clouds	Stratus
	Stratocumulus
	Nimbostratus
Clouds with vertical development	Cumulus
	Cumulonimbus

Most clouds are based on cumulus clouds in the sim or haze/fog type of implentation. 

For example: Altostratus are missing, at least I haven't seen them after SU10. I am happy to be proven wrong.

 

Totally agree with you. At the moment MSFS weather looks very 2D and simplistic. Not realistic at all. If people want their weather to look like a "Game Of Thrones" scene that's fine but please don't impose it on me. I want realism not fantasm.

3 minutes ago, TrafficPilot said:

At the moment MSFS weather looks very 2D and simplistic. Not realistic at all.

I mean, I’m speechless when people say this. I can only assume that MSFS is your first simulator? Because, everything we have had before this over the last 25 years hasn’t even come close to what Asobo have achieved…. 

If MS/Asobo can keep working towards improving live weather to get it as close as possible to be able to render all what its current weather/clouds engine is capable of (seen via manually configured or preset weather), then that'd be ideal and the most cost/time efficient... and it seems like they're on that path. I too didn't care for their initial rework of live weather ever since they brought METAR blending into the picture, but given that they have all the local-level data (METAR) and global-level data (Meteoblue), they can surely keep improving the live weather simulation at the very least by improving their blending techniques to a point where live weather with METAR is at or close to pre-SU5 levels.  I doubt they'll ever go back (or are able to) to pre-SU5 levels and provide METAR as optional although that might be ideal to satisfy all camps.

And if the current MSFS weather is "very 2D and simplistic" to you then I'd say you definitely need to get your vision checked, and by that standard all the previous sims and current alternative sims are positively cartoonish (even outside of that standard, clouds rendering in a certain new sim is cartoonish but I digress lol). MSFS has advanced clouds and weather rendering in home computer sims/software to such a great level (certainly as evidenced by what's capable currently with manual/preset weather), so it's just a matter of them getting their live weather + METAR blending to a point where the core sim's capabilities are maximized.

Edited September 23, 20223 yr by lwt1971

26 minutes ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

 I can only assume that MSFS is your first simulator?

Big LOL. I've been flying REAL aeroplanes for many years (profile pic shows my PPL) and simming since I had a Commodore 64.

If you think the MSFS clouds look realistic you really need to take a flight in a real aircraft. Preferably from the cockpit 😉

1 minute ago, TrafficPilot said:

Big LOL. I've been flying REAL aeroplanes for many years (profile pic shows my PPL) and simming since I had a Commodore 64.

If you think the MSFS clouds look realistic you really need to take a flight in a real aircraft. Preferably from the cockpit 😉

I didn’t say they looked realistic did I? LOL as you put it. I too have a PPL thanks. Not that it’s relevant, because what I said is that what Asobo have achieved is light years ahead of what we have ever had, and it looks pretty spectacular to me. 2D you say? New eye test before they revoke your license? 😉

38 minutes ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

I mean, I’m speechless when people say this. I can only assume that MSFS is your first simulator? Because, everything we have had before this over the last 25 years hasn’t even come close to what Asobo have achieved…. 

With cloud textures, specifically? GMAB!  Occasional trips outside have done wonders for my perspective on clouds...   

MSFS is way ahead....  The dewpoint is always 10°.  No matter where you are.  Always 10°.  That's amazing control of our environment and we should ask them to disclose that portion of their prized SDK so we call apply it to real life.  

 

Edited September 23, 20223 yr by fppilot

2 minutes ago, fppilot said:

With cloud textures, specifically? GMAB!  Occasional trips outside have done wonders for my perspective on clouds... 

 

Perspective? It’s a game…. 

Just now, Ianrivaldosmith said:

Perspective? It’s a game…. 

Now we have gotten somewhere....

5 minutes ago, fppilot said:

The dewpoint is always 10°.  No matter where you are.  Always 10°.

I was talking about how it looks, not how it behaves 😬

1 hour ago, fppilot said:

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.  Here then are 6,000 words.  Please hazard a guess of which sim and which textures are in use.....

All of those look terrible. Flat 2D shapes trying to imply 3D. No thanks, I'll stick with MSFS's volumetric clouds.

3 hours ago, Sceadu said:

You think thats bad?, try visiting the MSFS  Discord🙃

Indeed!🤣

Sat in there one day, and the amount of overzealous moderation is ridiculous along with the official forums.

Some of those moderators were certainly picked on in school as children.😂

3 hours ago, fppilot said:

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.  Here then are 6,000 words.  Please hazard a guess of which sim and which textures are in use.....

While I partly understand why you think these look realistic - namely the Cirrus layer in the first quoted pic and the Cumulus Congestus in the second - the Stratus layer in the top quoted pic looks awful and is distracting.
It's why when P3D finally introduced volumetric clouds, I instantly consigned 2D cloud textures to the dustbin of history, inspite of numerous issues with P3D's attempts at 3D clouds.
 

1 hour ago, Tuskin38 said:

All of those look terrible. Flat 2D shapes trying to imply 3D. No thanks, I'll stick with MSFS's volumetric clouds.

Not all, but most 2D attempts certainly look worse, in my very subjective opinion.
While I want to see much more variation in the types of MSFS clouds depicted, Asobo's attempts are (again, in my very subjective opinion) the best volumetric clouds in a flight sim, so far.