What do you reckon is going on here? Sone of the buildings actually look creepy.
 

 

Old hat topic. Join the beta. It uses a different server.

Edited June 2, 20251 yr by jarmstro

1 hour ago, alanw2005 said:

What do you reckon is going on here? Sone of the buildings actually look creepy.
 

 

Standard PG. Good tech (sometimes!) from a distance, awful up close. 

1 hour ago, jarmstro said:

Old hat topic. Join the beta. It uses a different server.

And when the beta finishes? You get dumped back on the servers with the hoi polloi and back to square one. 

They're simply trying to show the World how it'll get when melted by the Climate Changes.

MSFS is far ahead!!!

That looks more like how it would look after a nuclear war.....

PG off is amply good enough.

5 hours ago, jarmstro said:

Old hat topic. Join the beta. It uses a different server.

Should it really be “old hat” at this point in time? 6 months after the launch of 2024, many MS flight simmers still claim that PG looks better in 2020 than in 2024. 

I blocked time to fly 2024 this last weekend. The sim loaded the wrong keyboard and hardware profiles. How can it not know which profile goes with which aircraft? It literally took hours to try to cycle through hardware profiles to get to the right one. Why is my hardware profile for the C172 even an option I have to consider for a 777?

I know it will get better, but when?

 

 

1 hour ago, alanw2005 said:

Should it really be “old hat” at this point in time? 6 months after the launch of 2024, many MS flight simmers still claim that PG looks better in 2020 than in 2024. 

If they claim that, I don't know what they're seeing.  PG looks the same in 2020 as it does in 2024 to me (bad).  Not a fan of PG tech as it currently exists.  At least on my hardware.

I’m not sure what to expect of pg. It looks fantastic to me where it’s enabled.

 I don’t expect to be able to fly just above or between buildings but from a few hundred feet up I think it’s astonishing.

Was the idea to be able to fly down the street? If so, then yes; it’s certainly a molten world.

27 minutes ago, Mace said:

If they claim that, I don't know what they're seeing.  PG looks the same in 2020 as it does in 2024 to me (bad).  Not a fan of PG tech as it currently exists.  At least on my hardware.

Anecdotal and perhaps some version bias?

16 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

Was the idea to be able to fly down the street? If so, then yes; it’s certainly a molten world.

The problem is, airports within a PG area look exactly like this; a molten world. Burbank is a good example. 

6 minutes ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

The problem is, airports within a PG area look exactly like this; a molten world. Burbank is a good example. 

The Orbx add on for MSFS 2020 looks great though!!!
 

 

8 minutes ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

The problem is, airports within a PG area look exactly like this; a molten world. Burbank is a good example. 

MSFS 2024 for Burbank looks okay. Even looks good!
 

Burbank MSFS 2024

 

5 minutes ago, alanw2005 said:

MSFS 2024 for Burbank looks okay. Even looks good!
 

Burbank MSFS 2024

 

I mean, to each their own but that video shows scenery popping in to place as you’re approaching, which just looks really really poor. Not to mention the blobs for trees. Even the taxi way signs are popping in front of you about 30-50 foot from your view 🤦🏼‍♂️

In fact this video rests my case. It is a perfect example of not only the horrible PG but also the awful LOD. 
 

Edit, I’ve just watched it again; it’s everything I’ve been talking about wrong with MSFS, all contained in a short video, so thank you. It’s a visual eyesore, it looks drab, and there are so many objects popping in all over the place it’s actually distracting. Not to mention the ghosting of the traffic. 
Yes I understand that when flying IFR you may not be focused on that stuff, but, once you’ve noticed it you can’t unsee it. 

Edited June 2, 20251 yr by Ianrivaldosmith