2 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

Hi, funny that you mention the cloud lighting in XP 12.  Because XP 12, since it was released, and for all subsequent versions of XP 12, have constantly had issues with lighting and shadow with its clouds.  Here is a good example from a thread about clouds in the official MSFS forum:

 

Specifically, the lighting/shadow of the clouds in the top 2 photos just look unnatural and weird.  Something looks a little off with the lighting/shadow in the bottom photo too.  But this is an ongoing issue with XP 12, LR still hasn't fixed it.  MSFS 2020 used to also have major lighting/shadow problems, as known with the "volcanic ash" looking clouds, but these "volcanic ash" looking clouds have been greatly reduced by MSFS 2024, because they rewrote the lighting/shadow algorithm for the clouds. I personally think the lighting/shadow algorithm for the clouds in MSFS 2024, is superior to the XP 12 lighting/shadow algorithm, because I see far fewer videos & screenshots of clouds with odd lighting/shadow in MSFS 2024, than I see in XP 12 (to be fair, that's not to say MSFS 2024 never has odd lighting/shadow in the clouds - it does too, but just far fewer instances than XP 12).

Furthermore, I have mentioned this many times before, the XP 12 clouds are blurry.  But it was Ben Supnick from LR, who said that clouds are very resource intensive. This is my educated guess, but I am guessing LR could be throttling the sharpness of the clouds, to help with performance.  But we know that XP 12's architecture is not as efficient as MSFS, because Torsten from Toliss said MSFS's architecture is more efficient than XP 12,  because MSFS is able to utilize more CPU cores, and because the architecture is more asynchronous: 

What MSFS lacks though is the variation of clouds, as many people have mentioned in this thread.  This is something that XP 12 does better than MSFS 2024 at the moment.  Having said that, for the clouds that MSFS are able to render, because you can make out the definition of those clouds because they are less blurry (clouds are not that blurry as XP 12 in real life, you can make out the definition in them), and because the lighting/shadows of MSFS 2024 clouds is better than XP 12, I personally prefer the clouds in MSFS 2024, despite the lower variation of clouds in MSFS 2024.  But I guess everyone has their own preferences.

Good points @abrams_tank regarding the cloud rendering among the two sims, and yes, both have their problems and limitations, but there's yet another important factor lacking in MSFS 2024's weather, and one you didn't mention above - the physical effects of some convective clouds, which in MSFS you can cross without fearing turbulence or even icing, hail, ...

When MSFS 2020 was released the effects were very noticeable, but then after many users complained about it they got tamed off so much and never returned to realistic values that it's a bit of a disapointment to me, not having the thrill of flying next to a Cb, or even worst, crossing one ... although, yes, you shouldn't even get close to it IRL...

But I do like ASOBO's approach to turbulence simulation, not being a directly tunable parameter but rather calculated on terms of various factor that IRL give rise to it, although their thermals still need a lot of work to be decently / realistically usable...

Edited April 5Apr 5 by jcomm

2 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

Hi, funny that you mention the cloud lighting in XP 12.  Because XP 12, since it was released, and for all subsequent versions of XP 12, have constantly had issues with lighting and shadow with its clouds.  Here is a good example from a thread about clouds in the official MSFS forum:

You sure they are from recent XP12 versions, because they look like clouds from several versions back.

18 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

You sure they are from recent XP12 versions, because they look like clouds from several versions back.

The photos were posted 20 days ago in the official MSFS forum: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/5-years-in-and-pretty-much-zero-improvements-to-clouds/637016/1999

But this is an ongoing issue with XP 12.  I have seen photos and videos of XP 12 with this lighting/shadow problem with clouds for a while now. It's not a new issue, it's an issue that has been there in XP 12 for some time.

Issues with Live Weather in 2024;

• METAR "Bubbles" still exist since SU7 for 2020
• Above resulting in poor weather transitions (albeit not as bad as they once were, but they still happen)
• Thunderstorms still far too easy to fly through, not realistic at all not to mention they look poor
• Issues with servers preventing Live Weather from functioning properly
• Graphically Clouds still look very poor when up close even on ULTRA (issue since SU5 for 2020 when this area was downgraded massively for the Xbox), they look pretty decent from a distance.
• Sunlight still shines brightly through thick cloud resulting in totally unrealistic light levels at times

2024 is a big step up from 2020 and the years of weather degradation since the ill-fated SU7 update, the clouds generally are better depicted with no more mass cotton balls everywhere. I only ever use Live Weather and so far have not felt the need to revert back to ActiveSky like I did with 2020, aside a flight the other day where the Live Weather was just "poor" with straight lines of Rain and aforementioned METAR Bubbles ruining the experience somewhat, but that is a rarity with most flights pretty realistic.

Looking at the patch notes for SU5 Beta there's very little mention of Weather related fixes or improvements, but agreed with others it does need a refresh and a proper improvement in most if not all areas, the biggest issue is the Bubbles for me, they make the Sim look weak.

4 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

The photos were posted 20 days ago in the official MSFS forum: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/5-years-in-and-pretty-much-zero-improvements-to-clouds/637016/1999

But this is an ongoing issue with XP 12.  I have seen photos and videos of XP 12 with this lighting/shadow problem with clouds for a while now. It's not a new issue, it's an issue that has been there in XP 12 for some time.

The same thread has these clouds from early MSFS2020 - I could weep at how good the weather was in the early days 😪

Not pushing AS...just happen to like this cloud structure.

https://imgur.com/a/0HXX7Fx

the sim does model storm turbulence, but it seems to only effect small aircraft significantly.

Like try flying the C172 through a thunderstorm, you will be thrown about, but if you take an airliner through the same storm you'll barely feel anything. 

updrafts/thermals off hills/mountains are modelled, I don't know how realistically. I flew into KSAN RW27 a couple weeks ago in the iFly, and I felt the aircraft rock from that hill on approach.

Reminder that in 2024 you can enable thermal visualization in either the custom weather window, or in Settings > General > Flight Interface 

2020 you can do the same, I don't remember where.

 

Edited April 5Apr 5 by Tuskin38

Did Asobo ever comment on this "post SU5" downgrade of the weather in MSFS 2020? Or did they just post a picture of someone playing Halo?

2 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

Did Asobo ever comment on this "post SU5" downgrade of the weather in MSFS 2020? Or did they just post a picture of someone playing Halo?

Again, not "post SU5" but post SU7, when METAR blending was introduced. Before that live weather was purely global and purely based on Meteoblue global weather data.

And yes they have been since asked about it many times and they have commented on it many times (Dev Q&As, interviews, etc). As already mentioned, they have improved it a lot since the 2020 SU7 regression especially in 2024, but still not as good as it was pre SU7 in 2020. As Krakin said, Seb has also mentioned they will be doing overhauling later for MSFS 2024. I imagine after the bug fixing and stabilizing SUs are done with.

Not sure what Halo has to do with this 🤷‍♂️

Edited April 5Apr 5 by lwt1971

I would have been perfectly happy without the METAR blending.  Must be another case of be careful what you wish for.  🤤

dd

4 minutes ago, Sky_Pilot071 said:

I would have been perfectly happy without the METAR blending.  Must be another case of be careful what you wish for.  🤤

dd

I imagine it might not be feasible to implement, but would be nice if they give the option to METAR blend or not.

 

1 hour ago, Tuskin38 said:

the sim does model storm turbulence, but it seems to only effect small aircraft significantly.

Ya this has puzzled me and I wonder if it's some deep rooted bug when it comes to larger aircraft (and/or their FM config and/or the sim's weather interaction with them, etc). If smaller aircraft are reacting as expected in storm turbulence then one would think it should scale to larger aircraft.
 

1 hour ago, lwt1971 said:

Not sure what Halo has to do with this 🤷‍♂️

The original Halo was an XBox exclusive game.

2 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

Did Asobo ever comment on this "post SU5" downgrade of the weather in MSFS 2020? Or did they just post a picture of someone playing Halo?

We never got an official explanation as to why they downgraded the graphical quality of the clouds with SU5, but it was blatantly obvious why at the time. 

As for SU7 they never explained why they didn't bother with a public beta test either, just chucked it out untested and incredibly broken for VR & TrackIR users not to mention the poor implementation of the METAR system, which was rushed in because the VATSim crowd harvested votes on the wishlist forum and Asobo/Jorg bent over for them and we got what we got. 

All a complete shambles at the time and the very fact we're still dealing with issues today just shows how poor their management decisions could be at times, hence the frustration from users who experienced decent live weather pre SU7.

But yeah it's better in 2024, just a shame they had to go so far backwards in order to go forwards.

I bought a computer after going several years without one at home—except for a small work laptop—when the 2020 beta was released. After a couple of years, seeing that despite the promises, the weather simulation wasn’t improving—it was only getting worse—I bought a copy of XP12. Despite having invested a lot of money in 2020 and owning 2023, I do most of my civilian flights in XP12—the main culprit is the weather. With every patch and every update, there are always improvements, but for me, the weather and physics are the main components of the simulation; I suppose others value different things.

I hope that someday Asobo takes the weather more seriously; I have some gems in the hangar that I’d like to fly more often.
 

2 hours ago, Sky_Pilot071 said:

I would have been perfectly happy without the METAR blending.  Must be another case of be careful what you wish for.  🤤

dd

too many people complained that the weather at the airports didn't match IRL, that's why they added METAR