Noel

Gee, what do you know, it's not absolutely perfect.

No one sees the sim being absolutely perfect, of course. But some are more able than others to tune out the modest imperfections such there is never a need to descend into 'mad' due to an occasional defect in what amounts to an amazingly functional, visibly gorgeous, fabulously performing sim. Kudos to MS/Asobo for delivering what they have thus far.

Just like the urban legend claim that cloud depiction was destroyed with SU5 the amount of 'regressions' you claim is a massive COS. For starters cloud/weather depiction currently is massively improved over initial launch of 2020 with its ashen volcanic clouds, lack of anything approaching cirrus, pixelation, it's just so much more plausible now than it was years ago.

Yep, about 0.0001% of all default assets are very poor 😉

I use an addon from the MSFS Marketplace that largely addresses this though on some 3rd party airports the issue can remain. I forget its name but it's great.

Good to know thank you. That being the case what is all the hoopla about this coming from? Here's another stunning reality I've noticed from Day 1 in 2020 as well as 2024: the difference between TLOD of 100, and 400, is really so modest I typically always run at 100 on the ground. Yes, I can see a SLIGHT difference but that's just it, it's not so much better as it is different. I do use DynamicLOD_Reset and typically run 200-300 TLOD at altitude mainly because the machine can handle it, not that I really notice anything from on high, visually speaking.

The 1000' was just a guess as I just went to drone mode when I was awaiting pushback at the incredible LIPZ. You're talking about pop-ins and outs I assume and I do notice a few of those now and then, but happily this doesn't adversely impact my experience significantly.

I don't know what 'MS voice' is but if each platform is running its own build why the heck would they make LOD the same in both?

I'm not seeing any degradation in this scenario. I'm looking out from about 1K feet now at LIPZ and it's razor sharp as far out as I can see, absolutely stunning.

Why not 'sense' which platform is operating and display a slider commensurate with the platform, so that when console is running a slider maxes out at X LOD, whereas for PC, a slider maxes out at X+ LOD. I would imagine anyone truly enthralled on a console would be figuring out how to upgrade to PC.

I haven't yet, with six years of no troubles the motivation is a bit weak. If there was a single, fully automated routine to do that I def would but it looks like it might take as much time to back them as it would take to do them over.

...did you find BATC's orientation is 180 degrees off? That's what's happening for me as this image exemplifies. I contacted BATC and they said it was from bad metadata from LisiumDesign, so I contacted them this morning and am awaiting a response. I posted here in case someone has insight into this.

I wonder why this happens to some users. I've been at 2020 since Day 1, then 2024, and have never had this happen.

Are you using the free Local voices? That was a great upgrade ;o) Same here, most of the time it's quite good now...

I'm certain there have been 'improvements' but it's got a ways to go. Here's a question I don't know the answer to and feel like I must be missing something. I am flying a STAR for an RNAV-W approach into MROC, RNW 25. And this happens in other like scenarios. It seems like even though BATC directs me to a particular STAR and as well instructs me to plan on this RNAV approach, it often takes me completely off the STAR more often than not. Today, in this ultra mountainous approach never put me into a place where I could safely land and would have sent me into the side of a mountain but I finally shut BATC off and aimed for the last two waypoints in the STAR. Why does BATC instruct me to a specific STAR, then takes me out of the STAR quite frequently. I guess it's about traffic management?