1 hour ago, Delta111 said:

Perhaps VR would be your cup of tea....

I think it's very difficult to take advantage of this option until you try it. But if it is for MSFS the resolution of the tile photo which is already not very good will be severely affected.

i write about these sims for FLYING magazine now but featuring XP12 with it shimmers and poor AA is gastly sometimes and hard to frame shots that don't look hideous.... ugh, once this is fixed both will be great.. and I do love XP for its feel of  flight and realistic compete jetliners.. etc... i still USE XP11 cuz to me it looks overall superiour clean and smooth like FS2020

5 hours ago, JETPETER2 said:

i write about these sims for FLYING magazine now but featuring XP12 with it shimmers and poor AA is gastly sometimes and hard to frame shots that don't look hideous.... ugh, once this is fixed both will be great.. and I do love XP for its feel of  flight and realistic compete jetliners.. etc... i still USE XP11 cuz to me it looks overall superiour clean and smooth like FS2020

But you see, that is how you see it. I dont notice the shimmering or the AA, im too busy flying. And that is why I enjoy xp12. Its already vastly superior to 11. Havnt touched 11 since 12 came out.

The sensations of flying with X Plane 12  are simply incredible and inimitable. I found by chance a a little XP12 addition which brings a significant visual improvement ( Clouds / lighting ) . It's "VisualXP" (Basic) and moreover not expensive . I have never felt as good in a simulator as I do today.

I will come and share my settings soon so that everyone can benefit from them.

 A little off topic : I would also like to invest in a few airliners and if you can give me your opinion on a range of choices. I take it. I have an attraction to the Boeing 757...

Here are some examples of what VisualXP combining with the default live weather (which I find excellent in its diverse representation) can do without any difficulty. It brings unparalleled depth and realism. When I come back to MSFS out of stubbornness and passion, it's guaranteed indigestion.

 

 Of course not everything is perfect but this is my little definition of realism.

 

The rest in pictures here:

 

16 hours ago, mjrhealth said:

But you see, that is how you see it. I dont notice the shimmering or the AA, im too busy flying. And that is why I enjoy xp12. Its already vastly superior to 11. Havnt touched 11 since 12 came out.

Same.

 

10 hours ago, filou said:

 A little off topic : I would also like to invest in a few airliners and if you can give me your opinion on a range of choices. I take it. I have an attraction to the Boeing 757...

I wanted to sell you on the A321neo as a modern 757 equivalent, but running the numbers, all it can do is match the Boeing's range. Thrust/weight (0.31 vs 0.34) and wing area (185 vs 124 m²) is lower, which means less fun rocketing out of small airports at low weights.

But if a modern narrowbody Airbus can tickle your fancy regardless, go for the ToLiss.

14 hours ago, Bjoern said:

Same.

 

I wanted to sell you on the A321neo as a modern 757 equivalent, but running the numbers, all it can do is match the Boeing's range. Thrust/weight (0.31 vs 0.34) and wing area (185 vs 124 m²) is lower, which means less fun rocketing out of small airports at low weights.

But if a modern narrowbody Airbus can tickle your fancy regardless, go for the ToLiss.

Thank you very much, I will take your advice with consideration.

On 9/26/2023 at 2:50 PM, filou said:

 A little off topic : I would also like to invest in a few airliners and if you can give me your opinion on a range of choices. I take it. I have an attraction to the Boeing 757...

There is FlightFactor 757, which is....OKish... Actually I lean a little bit more flight time to Captain Scam 757 in P3D than it, it did came with more "in depth"  failure system, but some annoying bug in the FMC/AP system makes it less fun to fly at a normal flight.

Maybe the predecessor of 757 then? FJS 727 is quite nice, but You'll have to wait a bit for their V4 to came to XP12 finally .

Also IXEG 733 is quite good, same era and similar tech to 757, FMC is a bit incomplete but good enough for a normal flight, and they'll work on that soon.

Edited September 27, 20232 yr by C2615

On 9/25/2023 at 2:33 PM, JETPETER2 said:

i write about these sims for FLYING magazine now but featuring XP12 with it shimmers and poor AA is gastly sometimes and hard to frame shots that don't look hideous.... ugh, once this is fixed both will be great.. and I do love XP for its feel of  flight and realistic compete jetliners.. etc... i still USE XP11 cuz to me it looks overall superiour clean and smooth like FS2020

Yeah, It's really bad in VR,,

3 hours ago, ohsirus said:

Yeah, It's really bad in VR,,

That sounds like a setting issue,

_maybe_  

"Running out of memory mid-frame. Turns out if you got into a fairly tight situation VRAM wise (and we try to do that to max out the texture res you can have) then X-Plane might run out of memory trying to draw trees and…melt down like a toddler who can’t have any more candy."

related.

XP12 VR is truly phenomenal. 

On 9/23/2023 at 9:26 AM, Greazer said:

Well the first Vulkan Beta was 5 years in the making, so yes things take time for these Dev's.

(my) general rule of thumb for any development, 28 years into watching developments rise, fall, flounder and break the sound barrier. 

It takes 10 to 15 years from tech demo to "production ready" best case. generally longer.

 

21 hours ago, mSparks said:

That sounds like a setting issue,

_maybe_  

"Running out of memory mid-frame. Turns out if you got into a fairly tight situation VRAM wise (and we try to do that to max out the texture res you can have) then X-Plane might run out of memory trying to draw trees and…melt down like a toddler who can’t have any more candy."

related.

XP12 VR is truly phenomenal. 

Dunno, I have a 7800X3d and a 4090, with a Pimax Crystal and Quest Pro, settings high. The scenery has AA problems and some cockpits have too much shine that needs AA.

2 hours ago, ohsirus said:

Dunno

No one does particularly, there is to many variables at play and not enough VR users yet to make generalisations.

Two biggest factors seem to be

steamVR settings, there is a lot going on there and valve keep messing with the defaults - not 100% sure what that is like on windows because I dev on linux. But renderresolution is a prime candidate for mischief. 

scenery settings and assets. A lot of scenery, especially XP11 hold overs and old ones from 3rd parties have duff level of detail settings, trying to draw to much detail in the distance is a sure fire way to create all sorts of nasty effects, turning down render distance in XP can help. Roads are particularly bad for this, I ripped all the road sources I had out and made my own from what I found worked well. Some of the default small roads try and render themselves at 25km, all you get there is a mass of high contrast dots that really do look really bad, in 2D and worse in VR.

Easiest way Ive found to get a grip on it is to use orthophoto with no autogen, that should be pretty much perfect at a distance (and if not a steamvr setting is bad), then add in any autogen and try to work out what the bad apples are.

Hello,

here some news if got in an E-Mail with the Link

https://www.x-plane.com/2023/10/coming-in-x-plane-12-0-8-and-beyond-roadmap-update/

WOW!!! Xplane 12 going to a $80 price tag!!!! 😲😬. Looks like the physical copy is going to $100. Did they previously announce this or is this the first? 

On 9/26/2023 at 3:29 AM, mjrhealth said:

But you see, that is how you see it. I dont notice the shimmering or the AA, im too busy flying. And that is why I enjoy xp12. Its already vastly superior to 11. Havnt touched 11 since 12 came out.

This has to be the most embarassing comment here.

Quote

It takes 10 to 15 years from tech demo to "production ready" best case. generally longer.

Sadly the world moves on.

1 hour ago, bogdansrb said:

This has to be the most embarassing comment here.

Are you embarrassed 😡. Im certainly not.