4 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

I seriously don't want cloud disappear and appear in front of my eyes like how AS did it for P3D and XP. I think we are over that, thanks to MSFS.

Haven't seen that effect in P3D in ages. In fact, I personally notice rapid changes in cloud formations more often in MSFS than in P3D with AS.

14 minutes ago, d.tsakiris said:

Haven't seen that effect in P3D in ages. In fact, I personally notice rapid changes in cloud formations more often in MSFS than in P3D with AS.

Are you sure? 😅. Last time I used P3D v5 back in 2019, that was the case, unless things have changed since then? 

59 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

What is that? I seriously don't want cloud disappear and appear in front of my eyes like how AS did it for P3D and XP. I think we are over that, thanks to MSFS. 

Though i myself wouldn't use any weather add-one with MSFS as I am super happy with the current default weather, I think is fair if they expose an API to allow weather developers to access the weather. Let's wait for MSFS2024 if this would be any different 

In the latest versions of ASP3D I used with v5.4 and v6 there was surely no cloud popping at all, quite on the contrary, and yet HiFi was limited by the base simulator itself, in terms of rendering. There aren't miracles, although proper configuration helps - you probably never even tried to configure your sim properly.

In XP the limitations are tied to a much weaker SDK, even now in XP12. At least LR didn't close it to  3pd, but close... Let's hope they do something decent with future updates...

In MFS the approach is totally different in terms of how weather data populates the World, and the only requirement is a decent SDK, which ASOBO / MS didn't make available. It's a shame because they're really clueless about many aspects of Weather and the results although acceptable in terms of graphics if you close your eyes to there being no stratified clouds properly depicted, and the effects in terms of turbulence, icing, convection, advection and subsidence being rather inconsistent, could certainly gain from the experience of developers who have produced the best alternatives to the base simulator ever available.

 

Edited January 30, 20242 yr by jcomm

To think that the MSFS team would cave in to a vocal minority is… amusing. They don’t listen to anything users might say except when they see torchs and pitchforks thru their windows after a major blunder.

Early on, Asobo said a couple of times that the weather engine was at the heart of their sim architecture and thats why they didn’t want to open it to outsiders. It makes sense but true or false, it is their IP, their blood, sweat and money, and they do whatever they want with it. There have no obligation to do anything. 

I am miffed with Neumann’s incoherent successive takes on the historical weather and ready to admit that Asobo+Meteo Blue weather depiction could be better. But, a big BUT 😉, it is already pretty good and better than what I had in older iterations of the FS franchise.

 

Edited January 30, 20242 yr by Dominique_K

2 hours ago, omarsmak30 said:

What is that? I seriously don't want cloud disappear and appear in front of my eyes like how AS did it for P3D and XP. I think we are over that, thanks to MSFS. 

I haven't seen that in many years when I use ActiveSky.

What I did see last weekend was an important streamer having pop-ups of connection failures with the MSFS servers. I thought to myself "I don't want that", "switch to MSFS for this? I don't want to...".

I have not used weather of any kind for a long time in flight simulation (FSX and P3D) for the simple reason of saving some processing power for my less than top end PCs. After purchasing MSFS late last year, I decided to test the performance of it with clear skies first. Since I have been impressed with the framerates and relative lack of stutters, I decided over the weekend to add some clouds into the mix!  I selected the "Scattered Clouds" option from the menu, loaded my PMDG 737-600 on the runway at BIAR Akureyri for an early morning test flight.....and was greeted with a really beautiful orange tinted sky full of realistic clouds

It was a quick 20 minute circuit around the valley and inlet at 5000 feet, and I was suitably impressed with the quality of the cloud graphics, the super realistic lighting effects with the sun shining through gaps in the clouds, and also the performance. I do not chase framerate figures, but the flight felt just as smooth as it had done with clear skies, and subsequent test flights at various different locations have confirmed that there is no detectable difference in performance.

That has been a very pleasant surprise, and I have also noticed what seem to be gentle gusts of wind when on final approach (subtle, but definitely there). I know that there is a distinct lack of variety of cloud types in MSFS at the moment, but just having clouds back in my virtual skies after all those years without any noticeable performance penalties has put a BIG smile back on my face

Edited January 30, 20242 yr by Christopher Low

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

That has been a very pleasant surprise

you should try the live weather and have an even larger smile on your face 😇. Who knows ? Works for me most of the time. 

9 hours ago, Juliett Alfa Romeo said:

an important streamer

I am lol.

6 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

I am lol.

Two important streamers...

6 minutes ago, Juliett Alfa Romeo said:

Two important streamers...

🤣

Unfortunately some interesting effects like those of temperature in geopotential height are only modeled with real world weather, so, if you try to set a trainning scenario for cold ir hot weather operations and use manually defined weather these effects aren't reproduced 😕...

Another ver weak aspect os the modelling of convective soaring weather / thermals. These are represented in a rather inconsistent and umrealistic way that render any real life soaring techniques useless ...

Edited January 30, 20242 yr by jcomm

On 1/29/2024 at 12:31 AM, Damian Clark said:

I think it's pretty clear that weather write access will not be coming any time soon.  I do think they considered it quite a bit at different points, but public sentiment is so vocally against it, I would not blame them for dismissing this.  Of course contractual issues may be the reason as has been suspected.  Who knows.  

Using "extra-SDK" techniques aka hacking to control weather is likely all we will ever have IMO.  So unfortunate.  It could have been so great!

Maybe if the tide turns and public sentiment is more favorable to weather add-ons, or some contractual factors change, we'll get another chance (as users).  HiFi will likely be long gone by then, of course, but it will still be great for everyone to have this one day.

Damian - it's good to see that HiFi is finally coming out with an MSFS2020 product!

Although I'm sure the limitations and roadblocks you've mentioned previously in this thread still apply, I will definitely be getting ASFS.

I hope that MSFS comes around eventually to open up the sim weather access, maybe in a way that doesn't allow read access to the global weather model, but allows 3rd parties to create their own regional model for a specific flight.

All the best with ASFS and your continued success and contributions to the flight sim community.

On 1/30/2024 at 1:40 AM, DD_Arthur said:

Really?  At the moment,  without Damien or Activesky, it's like this....

 

Yes, that sky looks great, but the problem is it's all cumulus.  All weather in MSFS these days is cumulus.  Rex and xEnviro display many more cloud types.  Default Live is still good of course, but the addon weather developers just do it so much better (if cloud depiction is more important than local weather model).

Looking forward to how ActiveSky portrays the sky.

As has been said over and over, by many including me, it's obvious MSFS weather is great.  Some may choose to look at the possibility of any weather add-on as a black and white "this or that" proposition, something that has to either replace the internal weather, or not be used at all.  One or the other.  But I think that view is strange.  Add-ons are supposed to enhance the sim. 

While it's true that AS has provided many features that haven't been in other sims before, it has always been an add-on, adding features and capabilities for those who want more depth in their weather experience.  By real life pilots and hard core enthusiasts, for real pilots and hard core enthusiasts.. that's how it started, and we haven't drifted very far from that.  Nobody was ever forced to use Active Sky.  While MSFS now has many of the features of the legacy Active Sky tech, we can always improve and offer valuable features to certain users.  Why not?  I think we've proven over and over that we can always succeed in that.

I know there's a very few very vocal critics of myself and Active Sky, that have somewhat dominated the AVSIM wx discussions over the past few years.  You've nearly succeeding in making us give up.  But our supporters and their growing encouragement helped us overcome that.  This product is made for them, the Active Sky fans, supporters and weather enthusiasts everywhere.  It's not for those who can't find value in our efforts.  Enjoy MSFS default weather, or ASFS, or any wx enhancement you want.

Exactly. No one is forced to use AS or even Historical Weather, but this is fundamental for me.

Btw, I've already bought MSFS, the 737 from PMDG, the 320 from Fenix and GSX Pro. I repeat, only because of AS and Historical Weather...

 

 

Edited April 17, 20242 yr by Juliett Alfa Romeo