If the scenery is high resolution up close, and it is that way in 2024 compared to 2020, then far distance clarity would mean miles and miles of this new 2024 high res scenery. I believe that there is no optimization that MS can do to to allow this to happen given the hardware on computer systems these days. I love the new 2024 high resolution scenery up close. I do not want the same clarity in the far distance in 2024 because my hardware would be chocked. I run 200 and 200 in Tlod and Olod and DLSS only, never TAA, when flying in 2D. I can't turn it up higher.

I have no complaints with 2024 scenery, and enjoy it way better than 2020 in every flight.

29 minutes ago, LRBS said:

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

If those people don't see the 'problem', why would they need the product fixed?

I mostly see very sharp textures as far as the weather allows, to the point I stare at how good we have it. Some areas in the MSFS world are very poor texture wise, but that doesn't make the product itself blurry.

I haven't followed this thread completely, but I've just popped in here to share my recent experiences with 2020, which have been amazing  in relation to terrain resolution and loading. The one major niggle for me over the years of flying in 2020, has been the morphing/slow loading of terrain and low resolution at distance. I recently started to use the map enhancement tool and the Dynamic LOD tool. The combination of setting the DLOD tool to a minimum setting of 60 at TO, with increments of 30 up to an LOD of 250 at 4000ft and the higher LOD maps of the map enhancement tool, has given me some absolutely stunning looking terrain. I was flying yesterday across northern Italy and I was immediately aware that I was no longer seeing the slow loading, out of focus, texture loading of the mountains. OK, to say it was 100% eradicted would be incorrect, but I would say that I am now experiencing, in those scenarios, a massive improvement, to the point where it's no longer an issue for me. OK, there are some caveats when using the map enancement tool, in regards to different coloured tiles, but this is only occasional, and to be honest, I feel it's a small price to pay for the improvement in terrain resolution.  The improvement could also be that the maps are loaded by a different server than MS servers, at least this is my understanding. Although I do wonder if the release of 2024 has not had an impact on the speed of data streaming for 2020. Maybe, but whatever it is, my experience has certainly improved no end. 

14 hours ago, Huascar said:

I walked away from MSFS simulator this morning, realizing that both MSFS 2020 and 2024 look dismally and universally bad.

25 minutes ago, Rocky_53 said:

but I've just popped in here to share my recent experiences with 2020, which have been amazing  in relation to terrain resolution and loading. 

And round and round we go.......

3 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

If those people don't see the 'problem', why would they need the product fixed?

I mostly see very sharp textures as far as the weather allows, to the point I stare at how good we have it. Some areas in the MSFS world are very poor texture wise, but that doesn't make the product itself blurry.

Wow, just because some people don't recognize/have the problem while others have documented it, and even though you recognize that there are places in the MSFS with very poor ground textures, it's not worth looking into or fixing? With this type of mentality, nothing will get fixed or improved. 

best bet  to  get it  solved or complain  is in here

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/

5 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

Is this thread about MSFS 2024 only, or both versions of the simulator?

This is a thread about attention seeking.....

I mostly fly in and out big cities. Some of the issues in big cities are hard to ignore.  As you set up for landing (about 12-15 files from the airport) objects and buildings look blurry (especially if you set up the weather "clear skies"). I shared several pictures earlier in the post, and I believe a few others shared similar screenshots.  In MSFS 2024, my experience was not that much different.  In real life, buildings looks like a buildings from many miles away.  For instance, the buildings in downtown Manhattan look blurry as you take off from runaway 31L at JFK,  and as you get closer, the quality gets better. This is what I am suggesting should be improved. There's nothing controversial about my post and it's very unfortunate to watch the reaction by some individuals.

Following is a screen shot of Manhattan shortly after take off from JFK (31L), clear skies and TLOD set at 205. 

Airline distance from  JFK to Manhattan is just 13 miles.

 

 

24 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

This is a thread about attention seeking.....

Or whining😉

I'm more curious about what you want it to look like. Could you post some of these FSX screenshots, where you claim it's so much better? Does X-Plane do it better? What is the yard stick aimed for, because none of your (weirdly cropped I might add) pictures seem to back up your point in the slightest, at least in my book. I need to see what the golden standard is and why you're on this crusade against MSFS specifically. 

Just now, Sethos said:

I'm more curious about what you want it to look like. Could you post some of these FSX screenshots, where you claim it's so much better? Does X-Plane do it better? What is the yard stick aimed for, because none of your (weirdly cropped I might add) pictures seem to back up your point in the slightest, at least in my book. I need to see what the golden standard is and why you're on this crusade against MSFS specifically. 

thats  what i was thinking we all are  sitting  in front  of  a pc  and  each have different  set  up surely  we cant  expect  to see  what the  rw  pilots  see whilst  they are  in  the  air

3 minutes ago, Sethos said:

I'm more curious about what you want it to look like. Could you post some of these FSX screenshots, where you claim it's so much better? Does X-Plane do it better? What is the yard stick aimed for, because none of your (weirdly cropped I might add) pictures seem to back up your point in the slightest, at least in my book. I need to see what the golden standard is and why you're on this crusade against MSFS specifically. 

Never said FSX was much better.  Again, I am merely highlighting one of MSFS graphics deficiencies. Can Asobo do better with the lighting of the sim and bury horizon?  MS is a fortune 500 company, I am sure they can.

As for attention seeking, I have been a member of this forum for approximately 15 years, and if you care to review my profile, you will find that I rarely post. You'll also find I rarely reply to people's posts unless I feel I can assist them.

Attacking people because they have a different point of view about how they see things in MSFS is the definition of attention-seeking behavior.

 

18 minutes ago, pete_auau said:

thats  what i was thinking we all are  sitting  in front  of  a pc  and  each have different  set  up surely  we cant  expect  to see  what the  rw  pilots  see whilst  they are  in  the  air

Adding a few commas to your sentences will help us better understand the point you're trying to make.

4 minutes ago, Huascar said:

Never said FSX was much better.  Again, I am merely highlighting one of MSFS graphics deficiencies. Can Asobo do better with the lighting of the sim and bury horizon?  MS is a fortune 500 company, I am sure they can.

As for attention seeking, I have been a member of this forum for approximately 15 years, and if you care to review my profile, you will find that I rarely post. You'll also find I rarely reply to people's posts unless I feel I can assist them.

Attacking people because they have a different point of view about how they see things in MSFS is the definition of attention-seeking behavior.

 

 

Ok that's great, now as Sethos asked can you give any examples of how you think it should look (per other sim screenshots and/or IRL photos)? As some others have said, unfortunately the screenshots you've posted don't seem to show the issues you claim AFAICS.