5 hours ago, VHOJT said:

That is downright rude, and you should withdraw the comment and apologise.

That was my first take on it too. But the comment has another interpretation, if you take ‘you’ to mean not @Damian Clark but a wider sense of us all in general.  I don’t know, but possibly there’s an English as a second language factor here? Let’s not jump to conclusions and start bashing people for what could just be a language issue.

btw, if that is right, fair play to you, because a) I’m rubbish at foreign languages; and b) posting in the crocodile infested waters of AVSIM (not well known sometimes for its tolerance and forgiving environment;) ) is a tremendously ballsy thing to do in a second language!

1 hour ago, kevinfirth said:

posting in the crocodile infested waters of AVSIM

Lol more like snapping turtles! Mild antagonising compared to the wild west out there. 

🐢🐢🐢

13 hours ago, Maxis said:

Its funny... some are completely satisfied with the weather that MS/ASOBO is giving. I am going to assume by the comments a good number if not most would like to see improvements. I can state a few

1. More variance in cloud types

2. The improvement in cloud depiction (fix the oil on canvas and ash cloud look)

3. A return to some element of danger when flying into certain cloud types (CB with convection for example) in certain weather conditions.

4. Increased instances of Lightning where appropriate (Got nerfed way too hard)

5. Properly adding a tilt feature with the Asobo radar since an api is out of the question.

6. Enhancing the turbulence. (Clear air and other types)

 

I would like these improvements done within MS/ASOBO since there may be contractual hurdles that prevent the publication of any development tools that access or manipulate meteoblue's data. So i have no issue at the end of the day for Mr. Clark to join the team if he (or someone else that is capable) can do the job.

I don't care who gives me these improvements. If that team includes Damian in a similar vein to Working Title then great. If plans are afoot already or things are already improved in MSFS2024 and are planned to be backported to MSFS2020 then this whole discussion would be kind of moot and hopefully ActiveSky can come up with a more unique feature set that satisfies end users demanding more granularity in the weather.

 

I personally do not use ActiveSky at the moment because of reasons ive previously stated in a different thread. But i don't dislike Damian or his company to dismiss them joining forces with ASOBO to improve the end product. That would be silly.

 

I agree with the above however I for one have given up on using MSFS as I find that visibility/aerosol density is not properly represented. The atmosphere is far too clean. Aerosol density is not injected into live weather. What we end up with is a ring of mist/fog surrounding the metar station with clear almost limitless visibility surrounding this ring. 

This for me is a show stopper and really spoils the immersion. 

Edited May 31, 20242 yr by Falconjet112
Spelling error

11 minutes ago, Falconjet112 said:

What we end up with is a ring of mist/fog surrounding the metar station with clear almost limitless visibility surrounding this ring. 

This for me is a show stopper and really spoils the immersion. 

This right here is the biggest show stopper for me right now. The atmosphere lacks depth. It's like flying in a vacuum if you know what I mean. Such basic weather parameter should have been in the SIM since day one. Talk about a flight sim without a working visibility system. Smh..

Edited May 31, 20242 yr by Baber20

39 minutes ago, Falconjet112 said:

I agree with the above however I for one have given up on using MSFS as I find that visibility/aerosol density is not properly represented. The atmosphere is far too clean. Aerosol density is not injected into live weather. What we end up with is a ring of mist/fog surrounding the metar station with clear almost limitless visibility surrounding this ring. 

This for me is a show stopper and really spoils the immersion. 

Surely improvements can be made, but look at the big leap MSFS made in the Fs world.

After release it was almost all praise and glory : the incredible realistic terrain and the wonderful clouds compared to other flightsims.

If aerosol density is not present than I can only have a smile on my face.

If it wil ever be present then I will welcome it…

I am enjoying this great sim to its fullest potential 😎 …..

Edited May 31, 20242 yr by GSalden

17 hours ago, JaseMelbo said:

It's okay to voice an opinion, just like the myriad of addons for MSFS that people either love or hate.

I agree but IMHO an opinion is something like " I tried it and didn't like it. I prefer the original".

Parroting a comment by a questionable youtube "influencer" is NOT  IMHO an opinion. Oh, I am making the assumption that you actually purchased and tried the product.

You have been noted as not liking the product, which is your right - your other comments are out of line IMHO.

On 5/29/2024 at 6:13 PM, Damian Clark said:

I am committed to improving ASFS for MSFS2020 and MSFS2024

This man knows things, grab him!!!

Jase is one of the most laid back and helpfull guys in the community, that he is getting so much flak even after an explanation and now also from a moderator is disheartening to say the least.

 

5 hours ago, vgbaron said:

I agree but IMHO an opinion is something like " I tried it and didn't like it. I prefer the original".

Parroting a comment by a questionable youtube "influencer" is NOT  IMHO an opinion. Oh, I am making the assumption that you actually purchased and tried the product.

You have been noted as not liking the product, which is your right - your other comments are out of line IMHO.

Thanks for the note.

Just like everyone on this forum, I respect and understand your position.  Like me, you have an opinion.  

Keep enjoying your virtual flights.

Jase

This thread seems to have a wrong subject, it should be: please vote and support Active Sky! 😂

Regarding other areas like ATC, Navaid database, AI Traffic, Scenery, Aircraft addons, MS/ASOBO haven't closed access to 3pds, so I really assume what happens to weather is mostly due to contractual clauses with Meteoblue.

This means to me that either they decide to find a different feed for MSFS2024 or the same will apply...

Damian is crystal clear about his thoughts, and I am 100% with him. He has made it clear that sometimes when some of us "want to help" while at the same time looking to feed our own interests (mea culpa, because as much I would like to see HiFi and other developers being able to offer their products in MFS like they did in the past with FSX and P3D, I would also like to see some faults and limitations in MSFS2020's weather being ironed out) end up putting it in a way that is not fair for ASOBO or weather enhancement developers... and gives rise to negative reactions from users who either were never fond of those products in the past, and they're 100% in their right to think that way, or find MSFS's weather already satisfactory enough...

I can just hope for the best possible scenario for MSFS 2024.. for HiFi which has always been my main choice, but also for the alternatives which surely have their very positive aspects too... and for ASOBO and ... well... MS too because we need them to feel happy with their investments and I am in the front line of the victims of the MS FLIGHT disaster... (still the sim, before MSFS 2020 I considered my preferred ever!)

 

Edited June 1, 20242 yr by jcomm

20 hours ago, Lonesome Cowboy Burt said:

Jase is one of the most laid back and helpfull guys in the community, that he is getting so much flak even after an explanation and now also from a moderator is disheartening to say the least.

 

DOH!  get out of line, you get moderated -  as I see you have found out elsewhere. - let's move on - Jase made his point, I made mine - no need for third party interference. Let's all get back on topic plz

i thought weather was fixed using active sky

Edited June 1, 20242 yr by motishow

On 5/27/2024 at 11:25 PM, abrams_tank said:

if you are going to make statements like this that don't contribute anything constructive to the discussion

What a ridiculous post ... the topic is "vote to fix weather in MSFS" ... I agreed as weather is of primary importance to flight, so important that it's the first thing pilots reference before then do anything with an aircraft.  4 years later and MSFS weather is still a problem for many, hence the OPs post.

Posting that MSFS weather implementation is poor, is being constructive ... that's how one instigations change.  What are you gonna say next, some crazy like "why don't you code a replacement"?  I wish I could, but the weather SDK is extremely limiting (decades behind what can be done in other simulators).

You seem to be on a mission to control the narrative, why?

 

On 5/31/2024 at 11:38 PM, Claudius_ said:

please vote and support Active Sky!

Already supporting them in other simulators, just not for MSFS.  But the issue is MSFS need to provide a robust weather SDK like other platforms do ... far better to have choices and more developers working on weather for MSFS than restricted to just one company/developer.  Monopolies stagnate development/creativity that's why we have laws against such practices.  

I guess no one remembers the days when Microsoft tired to ONLY allow IE for a web browser on their OS and the Feds told them NO.  Choice is a good thing, not a bad thing.  And lets not forget Microsoft have recently started pushing for "open source" ... hopefully it's not just marketing.