7 minutes ago, GoranM said:

I do have 3 computers (1 iMac, 1 MacBook Pro and 1 Windows PC), I don't have a network set up between them, so I couldn't tell you.

If you ever get the chance in the future would be nice to know if they are making progress.

Thanks

4 hours ago, GoranM said:

On a slightly different note, it seems there are some (one) people who complain about the same thing, several times, and then when I offer to test what they complain about in the newest alpha, they choose to stay silent.

Shame, because I've been testing this alpha with a vengeance, and it's a very nice update.

@GoranM, I know Austin is working on that but not sure if it'll make it's way into 12.2 - the problem with the CW twin props (and even some single props) rolling right instead of left. 

Could you test it for me please?

I believe it'll only be ready for 12.3 or 12.4, but, just in case....

Edited April 1, 20251 yr by jcomm

12 hours ago, jcomm said:

@GoranM, I know Austin is working on that but not sure if it'll make it's way into 12.2 - the problem with the CW twin props (and even some single props) rolling right instead of left. 

Could you test it for me please?

I believe it'll only be ready for 12.3 or 12.4, but, just in case....

Well, in his case, I am sure it would be one of the things he tests - LES DC-3. 🙂

cloud quality MAXIMUM x-plane 12.2.0b2, real weather, KPDX

overall not bad, except ...

 

Edited April 12, 20251 yr by turbomax

Been testing XP 12.2 against MSFS 2024 regarding cloud depiction, lighting and colours, and accuracy to RL weather data... Xp12.2 looks way way better...

1 hour ago, jcomm said:

Been testing XP 12.2 against MSFS 2024 regarding cloud depiction, lighting and colours, and accuracy to RL weather data... Xp12.2 looks way way better...

Yes, XP is taking the lead in weather-depiction, atmosphere and haze-simulation. That’s a good step forward.

2 hours ago, jcomm said:

Xp12.2 looks way way better...

affirmative, especially in low visibility, twilight and haze conditions xp12.2 beats MSFS 2024

Yeah, after a long break from MSFS 2024 I hopped into it yesterday and today and it was jarring how the cloud visuals are nowhere near what XP 12 does nowadays. Additionally, with the most current beta on all High settings, the ground textures appear blurry. It may be that it's because I am currently flying in Africa but it's not good. Even 2020 looked better and at this point I am wondering how come MSFS is starting to lose its graphics edge. All the same, XP keeps getting better. 

9 hours ago, BostonJeremy77 said:

Yeah, after a long break from MSFS 2024 I hopped into it yesterday and today and it was jarring how the cloud visuals are nowhere near what XP 12 does nowadays. Additionally, with the most current beta on all High settings, the ground textures appear blurry. It may be that it's because I am currently flying in Africa but it's not good. Even 2020 looked better and at this point I am wondering how come MSFS is starting to lose its graphics edge. All the same, XP keeps getting better. 

I agree that XP12 is far better than what it was visually with update 12.2, but as long as the other sim has photogrammetry they will always have the edge. 

23 minutes ago, Mike_CFII_MEL said:

but as long as the other sim has photogrammetry they will always have the edge. 

Not really. I switch it off whole the time because it's pretty useless and doesn't even look great when approaching that PG-area (melted down, builidng up, blurry etc.). It may be good if flying very slow and low over a big city, otherwise I pray that Laminar won't lose time with such a useless feature. Satelitte-based textures, yes absolutely but please no photogrammetry-Autogen.

Yeah, the whole photogrammetry deal is a bummer. It always annoys me. Yesterday I downgraded from SU2 Beta to stable release. It looks SO much better. Doesn't perform as well due to no AMD FSR3 FG feature, but looks SO much better. 

I think even sat imagery isn't necessary. As long as ground textures get more variety, plus autogen buildings, a new mesh and realistic streets that use real data, it will be fine without sat imagery. Basically... what X-World+Global Forests are, but native and updated. It would improve XP scenery drastically. 

3 hours ago, Franz007 said:

Not really. I switch it off whole the time because it's pretty useless and doesn't even look great when approaching that PG-area (melted down, builidng up, blurry etc.). It may be good if flying very slow and low over a big city, otherwise I pray that Laminar won't lose time with such a useless feature. Satelitte-based textures, yes absolutely but please no photogrammetry-Autogen.

Photogrammetry is in its infant stage of growth and looks this good, it's only a matter of time before the bugs are worked out. XP will never have the edge with their plausible world. 

One of the reasons Ortho4XP, Auto-Autho, Ortho maps , ortho overlays and the rest all exist. 
 

 

On 4/12/2025 at 3:58 PM, jcomm said:

Been testing XP 12.2 against MSFS 2024 regarding cloud depiction, lighting and colours, and accuracy to RL weather data... Xp12.2 looks way way better...

Still hit and miss here (northern Europe), jcomm.
XP is giving me high peaks but also deep valleys in regards to graphics

On my end, I have these patterns quite frequently, not sure what XP is trying to depict ...looks like St with Cb edge definitions.

(I spent fri-sun at the airport due to EASA exams and I can swear this type of cloud did not appear today.)

Minecraft cloud 2.0

Edited April 13, 20251 yr by SAS443

Yeah, I've experienced those types of odd looking clouds. But it looks like they are just getting started, can only imagine what awaits going forward. 

1 hour ago, Mike_CFII_MEL said:

Photogrammetry is in its infant stage of growth and looks this good, it's only a matter of time before the bugs are worked out. XP will never have the edge with their plausible world. 

One of the reasons Ortho4XP, Auto-Autho, Ortho maps , ortho overlays and the rest all exist. 
 

 

That’s what I said: if you fly low and slow over a city it may add to the immersion. Otherwise it’s just a hype. I am working with digital twin cities using photogrammetry and there is always rendering issues. We even see them in that video. And it’s not made to be used in a fast moving environnement like a game. Perhaps in 5 or 10 years. Orthos are something different and used for the ground textures. Asobo throws some hyped technologies to the face of their users to test a new technology and then some think it is absolutely necessary. It is not, at least not when flying airliners.

Edited April 13, 20251 yr by Franz007