32 minutes ago, scotchegg said:

Still this is the only, and major, barrier for me to buy. I just cannot imagine how anyone can find flying with the same weather all around you, all the time, knowing it’s being repeated around the whole world, in any way immersive. I know many do, and happily so, but I just don’t get it. I’ll take MSFS’s crushingly-disappointing post-SU7 cloud depiction with more natural placement over better looking world canopies any day of the week.

Having said that, I think Xenviro can do fronts? Is global repetition really the only option for 3rd parties?

I'm not flying all around the world at the same time so this argument is a bit skewed...

Looking at the images below, I think it does a pretty good job of having "the same weather all around you, all the time"

40 minutes ago, filou said:

But I can also understand that just "PRETTY" is enough for some people who don't have the same expectations. 

I consider AS as the "prettier" of both but a bit less realistic. Because it offers more eye candy and looks nicer and has a better visual representation of weather. Default is not as uniform, which at least when flying fast and high is more realistic.

On 7/10/2024 at 3:01 PM, Sethos said:

Transitions immediately kills the immersion with Active Sky

Immersion can be broken in many ways.  For you, not having a local weather model kills immersion, regardless what Active Sky brings to MSFS.

For me, a local weather model is just one feature out of many that affects my immersion.  As other have said, AS brings better looking clouds, layers, winds, turbulence etc.  Taking all of those features into account, MSFS weather kills my immersion more than AS does.

Edited July 11, 20241 yr by MrBitstFlyer

17 minutes ago, fsiscool said:

I consider AS as the "prettier" of both but a bit less realistic. Because it offers more eye candy and looks nicer and has a better visual representation of weather. Default is not as uniform, which at least when flying fast and high is more realistic.

I see the complete opposite on what's realistic or not. MSFS cloud's look totally unrealistic at times.

2 minutes ago, Car147 said:

I see the complete opposite on what's realistic or not. MSFS cloud's look totally unrealistic at times.

I agree, I have never seen skies filled with nothing but CU clouds.

Active Sky adds another sense and feeling of atmospheric depth to the visuals of the sim especially in VR .

I can't fly without it now.

 

1 hour ago, blueshark747 said:

Active Sky adds another sense and feeling of atmospheric depth to the visuals of the sim especially in VR .

I can't fly without it now.

Do you mind sharing crucial graphics settings?
My sim tends to present me with an atomic bomb like orange glow. Yours is beautiful!

17 minutes ago, Lars-Contrail said:

Do you mind sharing crucial graphics settings?
My sim tends to present me with an atomic bomb like orange glow. Yours is beautiful!

MSFS is too warm. One way to fix that is to install the Nvidia App and apply the 'color' filter to the sim.  You can turn the colour temperature down to tame an over warm sim.

The question is what will happen with weather depiction in MSFS 2024? 

Personally it won't matter much because I luv making my own weather. 

All that is lacking currently is a good cirrus rendition.  IOW wispy formations.

cheers

sp

You'd never see this with default weather....

Edited July 12, 20241 yr by Sticky

3 hours ago, Sticky said:

You'd never see this with default weather....

Yes you’re right, we will hardly see the same clouds in all directions up to the horizon 😎.

(sorry, could‘nt resist)

As per usual these AS threads become a showcase in what we've lost since the SU7 debacle, the same pictures showing the same differences and the same people - for some reason hating on AS (I really don't understand that!) - ultimately though where are we four years in from release? The answer is no better with live default weather depiction than what we had in SU6 and earlier. 

Queue people telling me I'm wrong and then someone will show up with videos and pictures pre-su7 showing what we had that we can't get now, then someone will pipe up and say that METAR integration is the bestest and "we" needed it before defending the volcanic ash clouds as "pretty" and then Ray will have enough and lock the thread....that should save 9 pages of internet trees 😄 

28 minutes ago, MarcG said:

where are we four years in from release?

Unfortunately it proves to be difficult to discuss the obvious shortcomings of Live Weather. I find it easy to accept that aesthetics are subjective and we all have different tastes. What remains a mystery to me, however, is why the "community" is so willing to accept that a key element of a flight simulator remains shielded from external participation and only seems to receive incidental improvements, while other areas strive:

• Scenery: countless partners create PG, TIN and bespoke airports. AI companies make the ground 3D etc…- you name it
• Aircraft: several partners create sophisticated Aircraft, Working Title enhances Avionics, flight planning...- you name it
• Atmosphere: some tweaking to bring it back to reasonable after an SU7 disaster, some value changes for sunset colors. At least MSFS2024 promises to improve the lighting. Otherwise it's "yeah, you know, I guess we'll have to talk to Meteoblue some time", which has been the standard answer in several Q&A's over years now.

SU7 "debacle" and "disaster"? maybe I missed something here, but what are you talking about? the expensive AS and their horrible "ASCA" had a good sense in P3D, because there wasn't any kind of live weather (but FSX had a sort of live weather!). So P3D was an empty ugly box and became an "addon machine", seeing the people spending their time and money attempting to get a complete and better looking flight sim. MSFS20 filled the gap, almost no more applications running in the background.

1 hour ago, Claudius_ said:

SU7 "debacle" and "disaster"?

AVSIM……