45 minutes ago, andy1252 said:

That is certainly the way it feels to me. I couldn't detect any real difference when I put my TLOD up to 400 (or even 500), and I'm not going to start playing with any "dynamic LOD" stuff. As Filou says, just another bug on the list. For me 2024 is just a very specific thing for exploring only certain areas and at very low, or now even actual ground, levels. Hopping about in the English countryside and exploring the back lanes is something I find very enjoyable. Going anywhere closer than several thousand feet over some places (try Boise, if you want to see some really awful PG) is a complete no-go.

I have found some amazing scenery in 2024, but even within the good areas, there are huge problems with stuff popping up or disappearing at very small distances. A few hundred yards or so in a lot of cases. Airports in particular are just a joke. Still, 2024 is likely to save me a bundle - I'm not going to buy anything more for 2020, even though I plan to keep it around for a good while yet, and I'm going to be buying very little for 2024 until it is working a lot better.

Thanks for the great write up.

I am still in a holding pattern on a MSFS2024 purchase.

On 12/31/2024 at 2:31 AM, LRBS said:

I see clearly that you don't understand and are unaware. 

These small things that are not perfect can be easily fixed for a better immersion. After flying over 44 years of airline experience around the World, regarding visibility, I can share with you that there are geographical places where visibility at lower altitudes is restricted due to various factors and many places where it is not. Sometimes, during climb out, below the deck in an overcast condition, you can see sharp in the far distance for miles and miles ahead, or while on top, even with undercast conditions, you have unlimited visibility of a clear and sharp outside picture. 

Yes, things can be improved for a better simulation experience, and those bugs should be acknowledged and eventually resolved.

It is very difficult to understand argumentative people when a discussion is all about fixing a product.  

Yes the whole visibility distance thing can be "easily fixed". I have been meaning to drop MS and Asobo a little email telling them how to do it but haven't had the time.

Why introduce this photogrammetry technology since it only works half way? Wow! I just understood! That's why we got FS2024 at half price! isn't it? And if I understand correctly, this is also why FS2024 was released half playable? There are a lot!
 a lot! things! in FS2024 but everything is "half". Apart from the performance and speed of execution without forgetting the famous Big Canyon... I would have liked them to take more time before taking our money. Just do less but better, it will be easier for everyone. They should also stop giving us a tech show before release. It's been so ridiculous everywhere I look since the November 19 release.

1 hour ago, Noel said:

Some shots from the dismal and universally bad sim...but I just can't help being blown away by dismal and universally bad 🙃

You still haven't understood the problem with the subject and that's the whole drama. Everyone knows that FS2024 is visually beautiful.

1 hour ago, Huascar said:

I prefer the more realistic mode of PG despite its issues

I love PG but personally I find the issues you describe spoil my simming more than enhance it.  Others may be the opposite. 

If you do the flight from ENGM in winter, you will notice the horrid PG trees blobs fully green everywhere! For this reason I use Bijan Habashi trees mod with PG off. The trees are bare for winter, but of course I lose the good PG of Leeds.  Its a compromise I wish I didn't have to make, but that's where we are - at least we have the choice 🙂

2 hours ago, Huascar said:

....not that your shots are bad, they look good.

I'd put it this way:  they look fricking fabulous!  Seriously when I harken back to early 2021 when I still had P3D 4.x up and running I cringe to think about the frame rate it could render in any of those scenes in the shots shared above:  may one frame every 2 seconds?  Nope, it would likely just flat out freeze up.

I don't remember if I had PG on or off on those shots.   Most of the time I had PG on up until fairly recently when my take was on my routes often the downside of PG ends up making its upside a net loser.   Just now, was getting ready to TO out of KLGB (Los Angeles area) and changed to PG on, and geez I see what Huascar was saying re distortion, if it was PG he was referring to.  If so, I think the crux of the OP is simply this:  PG isn't what we would want it to be, too often.  Which is why I've had it off lately.  I'm also one who prefers a perfectly brand-new looking windscreen, not one full of scratches and dirt.  I like brand new everything pretty much!

Edited January 1, 20251 yr by Noel

2 hours ago, Huascar said:

I promise I will make that flight and provide you with feedback via the private chat.

Thank you for your offer to assist, you are a decent guy.

Sometimes things get confused when communicating by text, but all is good when we can sort or improve things.

11 minutes ago, Noel said:

Most of the time I had PG on up until fairly recently when my take was on my routes often the downside of PG ends up making its upside a net loser. 

I very much like what Bijan Habashi is doing with the trees and PG.  His mod gives us more correct trees, but he has been working to remove photogrammetry trees that show in the wrong season and are just PG blobs.  PG trees are the main reason I mostly have PG off, but with Bijan improving this, I may use PG more!

2 hours ago, Noel said:

Some shots from the dismal and universally bad sim...but I just can't help being blown away by dismal and universally bad 

They do look spectacular!

3 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

 PG trees are the main reason I mostly have PG off, but with Bijan improving this, I may use PG more!

I need to get a list of what cities have optimized PG.  Is there such thing?

Aaah. Tree sizes. Much nicer. 😁👍

Youz folks who focus on tree size:  are you mostly GA, lower altitude flying?  I don't see any issues with it but I'm doing airline flying for score so it's off my radar as it were.

1 hour ago, Noel said:

Youz folks who focus on tree size:  are you mostly GA, lower altitude flying?  I don't see any issues with it but I'm doing airline flying for score so it's off my radar as it were.

I am about 70/30 GA/Airliner.  Bijan season pack does make the trees a more realistic size, plus he has added more realism by replacing trees with bushes where appropriate. For example, default UK has hedgerows all trees, where in reality they are mostly bushes which he has fixed.  Default often has far too many trees which Bijan has fixed.

1 hour ago, Noel said:

I need to get a list of what cities have optimized PG.  Is there such thing?

He posts all his edits here

He uses the default 3d trees but but has corrected various aspects of them for realism.  He is currently removing the PG tree blobs from many (user requested) areas.  

2 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

He posts all his edits here

He uses the default 3d trees but but has corrected various aspects of them for realism.  He is currently removing the PG tree blobs from many (user requested) areas.  

Ahh, okay I was wondering about which cities Asobo improved or did PG for.  I'm 100% airliners but plan to install 2024 and do some GA as well, as I did way back when.

Edited January 2, 20251 yr by Noel