Noel

The biggest initial challenge will be in setting up your controllers--but I don't use SPAD.Next and don't know if that somehow bypasses controller setup in-sim. There are some good videos about controller setup and you will want to view those, specific for MSFS2024. I can heartily recommend BATC for ATC it has evolved to an excellent product now, esp the 'experimental' version. Even default un-handcrafted airports in 2024 are superior to P3D defaults and many of those handcrafted airports included in the more advanced versions of 2024 are quite excellent. Because MSFS 2024 is/can be fully streamed there is hardly a compelling reason to use Addon Linker. I don't, load times are fast and I have a fair amount of addon airports, planes, utilities, etc. You will need a very decent net connection to use 2024.

And the other 'we' group was miffed because early on the SDK wasn't robust enough to enable 3rd parties to be able to create addons. Simulating aviation reality in toto is a massive endeavor and anyone who actually thought all realities would be present in MSFS were sucked into that delusion because of how innovative and impressive 2020 was at launch. The main reason why XP has elements further developed is secondary to its nearly 30y lifespan under the same developer--and it depends hugely on 3rd parties as well.

That's nonsense. I don't use FSRealistic and am finding UTL's effects quite decent and very noticeable, so your 'nothing comment is false, nonsensical.

Thank you Redge for posting that. To be honest to me it just looks like MSFS 2024 cloudscapes ultimately. The subtleties are there but that's ultimately it, pretty subtle in terms of overall impact. Until there is a new method to render volumetric clouds that is not so performance impacting I will most likely hold pat with default. Perhaps AI can come up with a new method to code volumetric clouds and if Xbox compatibility is playing much role in this MSFS 2028 might make a significant jump forward for cloud depiction since their touted next gen Xbox is hugely more capable than the current models from what I read. I did pick up UltimateTerbulenceLive and that should make a significant difference in that arena. Thanks again

Sure, and yet the rest of the experience pales in comparison to modern sims including MSFS.

It wasn't my own it was one inserted by BATC and indeed the gear do not disappear at visible distance. And yes, of course I know what people are talking about, as does everyone else. And by the way the user's plane is subject to culling as well when viewed from a drone camera. The luggage in GSX carts culls at about 30-40 feet or so. Someone made an app years ago sold in the Marketplace that changed taxiway sign LOD parameter but I don't think it works in some 3rd party airports.

From around 550 yards away, though compression will make it hard to see here. It does not go out of sight until it's literally out of site. Clearly FBW found it a simple fix:

Next time you get a 'wow' moment reflective of what you're saying, take a quick screenshot I'd love to see the differences you're referring to. Cheers

That's an amazing testimony and I can't imagine why we were so disparate. I was using a GTX Titan 6Gb along with a i7-3930K at ~4Ghz initially, then upgraded to I9-9900K and RTX2080 Super in early 2020. For about 6 months after MSFS2020 arrived I would fly P3D but had to keep autogen at Sparse, and eventually just flew at night because...realism was shattered otherwise. P3D was a POS for me, but I didn't know that til MSFS 2020 came 😉. I have assembled all machines since Win 3.1 and always tested them rigorously to insure they were setup and overclocked optimally.

Sure, come in and complain once, not with every opportunity like your liker does. No one is doing clouds much better (other than essentially subtle differences) which is absolutely a function of voxel technology and its current impact on performance. Given that Asobo, directed by MS, needs to accommodate the full range of hardware capabilities I think they've done a fabulous job with weather overall--it's far more plausible than it was pre SU5 which is touted to be vastly better by those perpetrating this urban legend. And we can indeed be thankful Asobo enables the SDK for others to come in with focused mods. That 'others' can come in and focus on one thing is just that--they don't need to deal w/ an entire project with its steady flow of sim and world updates, server management and so forth. I find people who repeatedly bash Asobo as if they could do better w/ the entire project of this scope, as engaging in a form of hubris. Just sharing my opinion, as you are here.

Why do you think bugs and excuses happen? Is it because Asobo is lame or wishes to PPO, despite the fact they brought the most incredible desktop sim in history to the masses for an exceeding modest cost, w/o ongoing fees to stream massive data into each user's sim? Do you believe for $59, or $119, that every bug that has not yet been addressed warrants explanation to all users? I don't, I trust they will address them in due time, as they roll out myriad free sim and world updates. I'm very impressed w/ what MS/A has done thus far, and compared to the $600 I gave to LM for P3D, I find it exceedingly awesome as I have dramatically more immersion and experience than I ever had previously. My cup runneth over, and I'm glad it does. We have some here who repeatedly bash Asobo and talk as if they could do better when they're completely clueless about what is required to pull of something of this magnitude.

And FS9 was missing 90+% of everything else you see in 2024. My favorite recollection in P3D v4.0 was the fact I had to reduce autogen to SPARSE, never could use the Orbx Regionals I bought because they just killed performance, and eventually ended up doing night flights only because of this.

In your experience, what might be a crude estimate of the percent of bridges in 2024 that aren't modeled? I ask because I see a lot of modeled bridges. But...I fly airliners pretty much exclusively so get up in altitude quite quickly and aren't surveilling for defects per se.

When missing landing gear was initially brought up myself and several others said they really hadn't noticed this and others who said they noticed this but it didn't bother them, which I believe has to do mostly with how one uses this sim. For me that is because I'm engrossed in pre-flight preparation, and then taxi and TO focusing on avionics and adhering to how Self Loading Cargo does its flight scoring routines. In the grand scheme of all that is displayed, all thousands of objects that aren't culled, having landing gear culled at X yards and my crude estimate was about 300 yards, it's an exceedingly modest issue for myself and many others as well. That is my/our reality. So indeed, I'm out of touch with a few others' realities who whine constantly about this particular issue as I can't relate to it, again, in context of how excellent the sim is in most all other areas. Plus, my sense is it's a nothing issue and will eventually be addressed. I've said in other threads it is a mystery why it hasn't been addressed as clearly the performance impact is modest at worst. My guess is that most testers at Asobo aren't bothered by it, like many users here aren't, hence it has been deprioritized. I don't have a better explanation, nor does anyone else who isn't working with the team at Asobo tasked with this sort of thing. Most users eh? How so, not that it matters, but that is a weird and near as I can tell, entirely false comment. And by the same token there is nothing wrong with pointing out how ungrateful the recurrent whiners are, the chronic Asobo bashers who can't see an incredible forest for a few bum trees, free speech 😉

Interesting thanks. Was in NAV mode and everything else seems compliant with those criteria. Perhaps just a bogus initialization.