2024 looks better in every way

Honestly, it's hard to compare because the lighting is so much different between the two. It definitely needs a little lighting adjustment though, the effects of the month are too extreme for the lighting. It's not just changing tree colors when it applies the monthly color seasonal filter, but changes the entire light spectrum across the whole image. A lot of places in Europe look downright amazing flying under 5000 feet though, especially some improvements in placement and buildings, but I agree the forests are too dense in general.

When it comes to GA and low level flying, 2024 for sure shows its potential (if the server issues will be sorted out) - maybe even more in pure nature than in urban regions.

If you fly IFR / airliners most of the time, 2020 does its job.

Out of experience over the past decades, I decided not to (pre)order 2024, wait for a few weeks and then decide again.

13 minutes ago, Watsi said:

When it comes to GA and low level flying, 2024 for sure shows its potential (if the server issues will be sorted out) - maybe even more in pure nature than in urban regions.

 

It's good for tubeliner flying too

 

1 hour ago, Rimshot said:

That's also why I suspect the video has the sims reversed. The flights I did in MSFS 2024 where smooth as butter.

Oh please, sounds like the " Don't believe what you see, believe what I tell you instead" line. 

I'm presuming that to the best of his ability, the OP is comparing like-for-like.  Thanks - it's an interesting comparison.  

What I do like is that there's more variation in the buildings in 2024.  They are very homogenous in 2020 and whilst there are styles in different regions - where it's hot, buildings are often white to reflect the sun for example -  but in 2020, the non-specific buildings all look a bit samey.  The railway station is much better modelled in 2024.

That does look like a lot of trees though!

1 minute ago, Bobsk8 said:

Oh please, sounds like the " Don't believe what you see, believe what I tell you instead" line. 

Could be, but I'm going to compare for myself when I get home from work to make sure I'm not loosing it 😆

I removed last bits of FS 2020 yesterday. 2024 has a lot of bugs but the experience is so much better in every way. The whole athmosphere feels much more realistic for me. The mountains when up and close is just on another level especially in VR, the new details gives a lot more depth. The days of streched cliffs is gone, that ruined bush flying visuals. That one alone was worth my money:)

Been bush flying with the  Twin otter mostly and having a blast.
When flying winter conditions the air feels cold somehow, never had that notion in 2020. I guess i could go on and on to praise this thing:p.

I only have one issue with 2024, I NEED a computer upgrade… Gotta push that TLOD slider :D. Waiting for RTX 5000 series:( and do a full upgrade with 64 GB RAM.(Already exceed my 32GB)

Edited November 23, 20241 yr by Kaboki

A lot of it just depends where you fly and exactly how low. i noticed when there are buildings it also loads more ground detail at a higher elevation, which means the best looking areas tend to be small cities and large cities, rather than 100% rural areas.

Here is the Venice Area (can reach this area by flying southwest from LIPV)

Edited November 23, 20241 yr by Alpine Scenery

The lighting and clouds in 2024 are so much better to me in 2024. The atmospheric effects seem better, its hard to describe. I was in the clouds and it was streaming them threw the back end of the turbines and looked pretty cool, when I exited the clouds that effect became less pronounced. Never saw the effect as well in 2020. I flew into Munich and on approach to runway 26L you can see windmills to the right and a factory with working smokestacks on the left (not sure if those were in 2020 tbh). 

Last night I installed RiveTuner and limited my FPS to 30 and its really helped the experience too. 

Edited November 23, 20241 yr by Lotharen

IMHO - not really worth the pain and suffering of the upgrade process until its matured a while or they stop supporting 2020 in new products/applications.    

I don't need a comparison video to show me the differences between the two sims. I tried MSFS 2024 and it looks exactly like the video. It's a dark, poorly optimized, sometimes blurry, with lots of trees everywhere, and the night lighting is horrid.

I am comparing it to a fully loaded and optimized sim that is 4 years old. I go a refund for 2024 because I will not spend any more time testing and waiting for updates. The only way I'll buy it again is if MSFS 2020's support is dropped. Then I'll have no choice than to upgrade. For now is MSFS 2020 all the way. I'm now waiting for FSHUD 2.0 to be released.

You can say about it what you want, but again, the truth is it depends where you fly. It's still inconsistent too, the water looks better when there is wind or waves, but sometimes lately I'm seeing no waves at all and the water looks like glass (no idea why).

The visuals are still inconsistent at times, maybe they'll patch it.

Bend, OR looks a lot better, so does Cascade, Idaho. Taking off is an entirely next level experience with the more detailed ground and better looking trees. The Grand Canyon was re-done with higher resolution textures, and that seems to extend about 100 miles in every direction. Some areas in Colorado appear to have been improved slightly.

The low-ground textures and new trees make the Bend, OR area look better even when you are flying around 4000 feet, so it's not always having to fly 100 feet above the ground.

There are a lot of variables, when the trees are too dense it looks similar to dense forests in FS 2020, but like in Bend, OR where the trees are spread out, it looks next level compared to FS 2020.

The night lighting is messed up because of the bloom effect inside the planes, though as a couple real pilots pointed out, that problem does exist in real life with some displays and you have to turn the brightness down, it's just exaggerated in the sim.

 

 

Edited November 23, 20241 yr by Alpine Scenery

11 minutes ago, CFIJose said:

I don't need a comparison video to show me the differences between the two sims. I tried MSFS 2024 and it looks exactly like the video. It's a dark, poorly optimized, sometimes blurry, with lots of trees everywhere, and the night lighting is horrid.

I am comparing it to a fully loaded and optimized sim that is 4 years old. I go a refund for 2024 because I will not spend any more time testing and waiting for updates. The only way I'll buy it again is if MSFS 2020's support is dropped. Then I'll have no choice than to upgrade. For now is MSFS 2020 all the way. I'm now waiting for FSHUD 2.0 to be released.

It's so odd that people are having such massive swings in the visuals. Mine looks nothing like you describe. Night lighting seems far better than in the alpha but I believe the airport lighting needs to be turned down a bit. I was amazed that town/city lighting illuminated the clouds from beneath like it really would, ect. 

Not discounting your issues, mind you. Just find it so strange that the difference between two simmers is so large.

Edited November 23, 20241 yr by Lotharen

3 hours ago, Lange_666 said:

I see quite a bit of stuttering in the 2024

Maybe how the video was created. Nothing but a smooth 90fps here in ultra settings 4K.