Super Six-Four

Exactly. Not impressed. Looks like a bunch of bug fixes for the 2.X version. I was really hoping that they would do something about the clouds and water (if you don't know what I'm talking about, then you have no worries). FSX is definitely staying on my drive.

Yes, you are right, a LOT of simmers have noticed this. Of course it's silly to say that it would never happen in real life, but the way clouds are rendered has changed, or mishandled and don't look nearly as good as in FSX. Having said that they do look great close in, but the further out the more the popcorn look becomes noticable. They also have a weird color cast, especially at the base. Again, much different than FSX, and not for the better.

I have the FCS Lanc and love it. The VC is really outstanding. And no, there is no FMC...

Well, I certainly don't have a paper clip collection, but I do appreciate accurate models and great textures. Some could care less if the AI actually looks like what it's supposed to. Others do. Everyone has their own preferences. I started with Ultimate Traffic in FS9, but it has slowly morphed into my own concoction, all freeware, and looks better than anything you will ever buy. I did look at UT2 but several things bother me: Lack of mip-mapping, limited variants of aircraft and inclusion of MT models to fill in gaps.

Sorry, how's this: Usually in real life the sky horizon is more of a very light neutral color and the landscape horizon definitely more bluish. If you have a blue sky horizon then that effect isn't seen as well and doesn't look as realistic. Even on a gray overcast day the blue horizon mountains really stand out. Check out Rise of Flight to really see it in a sim. I can't seem to replicate that with REX. The closest I have seen in FS are Pablo Diaz's textures and Flight Environment in FS9.

Usually in real life the sky horizon is more of a very light neutral color and the landscape horizon definitely more bluish. If you have a blue sky horizon then that effect isn't seen as well and doesn't look as realistic. Even on a gray overcast day the blue horizon mountains really stand out. Check out Rise of Flight to really see it in a sim. I can't seem to replicate that with REX. The closest I have seen in FS are Pablo Diaz's textures and Flight Environment in FS9. I have a chart showing how the colors are assigned on the sky textures, but don't want to go through the hassles of posting (used to be easy). Anyway the bottom two bars are for high and low horizon.

Do a search for Chris Evans on Simviation. He's compiled packs that are ready to go, including vc and sounds.

Wow, that was a shock to see this old post. Totally forgot about it. Thanks so much for taking the time to reply. I installed the other scenery you linked to and it looks great. Think I'll turn off the airport photo base as Holger suggested. But the ramp is full of neatly lined up 366 Wing F-15Es. Wonderful!!

I'm using the V2.4 Bonanza in FSX without any problems at all...but I guess it's not native.

KBOI - KGEG Spokane would be a great pair.

A few of us would rather fly and enjoy the scenery looking as realistic as possible rather than with our head buried in a manual and staring at a 2D panel.....imagine that, people can use the sim "seriously" in different ways.

The Carenado FSX 172 shadows look great even on low, but the 182 just don't regardless of setting. The Overland A319 (FS9 model) only look good on high. The NoShadow box didn't seem to matter.

I've noticed that the external shadows on an aircraft vary from model to model. Some are very jagged and won't improve no matter the setting, others look great even on low settings, and some only look good on high settings. Is this common experience? Also, I'm guessing reflections don't work on FS9 models? Specifically, I'm trying to get them to show up on an Overland A319. I've put environment maps in the texture folder but nothing seems to work. Thanks for any input.

Neil, thanks for those shots. I can see that the new textures take care of the burnt charcoal look of the winter trees. That's enough for me.

Anybody notice more shimmering?

Seriously?

If you don't care what the models and textures look like I guess this is a good deal. I've moved my all my freeware AI over to P3D with no issues.

I'm using the one that comes in this package: http://simtweak.com/ I was stunned at the picture quality. I'm using their profile in X as well only with Transparency SS at 2X without SweetFX (ENB). Running 2.4 btw.

I have a 4 month old GTX660 3Gb card I purchased specifically for P3D2.4. I get occasional brief terrain spiking but I can live with that. I installed 2.5 and it was much worse. I did notice that the card is running in the mid 50C range, and low 40s when running FSX. Do I have a bad card?

I too was on the fence, but jumped in with 2.4. Initially I was pretty happy. But then I started noticing a few things. Here's what I found: LIkes: 1. Cloud shadows and lighting 2. Much improved frame rates (Seattle) 3. No autogen popping 4. VC shadows 5. Much improved picture quality (not much jaggies) 6. Improved AI fps hit 7. Handling feels more realistic Dislikes: 1. Clouds (they don't render as well as FSX) 2. Water (same) 3. Can't use ENB (FSX looks so much better with it, and SweetFX isn't as good handling bloom) 4. Can't see AI strobes in distance at night. 5. Occasional graphic spiking So on the whole there are more positives, but clouds and water are a big deal for me, and one reason why I'm keeping FSX. And yes I've tried many different textures (REX Ess and REX4) and settings. But I will continue to fly P3D. I installed 2.5 and it was a big disaster. Lots of graphic corruption. I have a 3Gb card. Tried several things to no avail, so went back to 2.4, which aside from the occasional spiking, works well.

I've been getting brief flashes of spiking in both 2.4 and 2.5 as I pan around. Is this normal? Never had it in FSX. This is a fairly new card that I bought specifically for P3D. My settings aren't maxed at all. I do have cloud shadows enabled on low quality at 40k distance. Tessellation is on high. i2500 3.3 GTX660 3Gb 4Gb RAM Win7 64bit

This issue and the water are why I still have FSX. I jumped in with 2.4, and felt that the clouds have taken a step backwards from X.

I am actually grateful to ORBX for porting their sceneries to P3D2 for free. They can take all the time they want as far as I'm concerned. The world will not end. And P3D2.5 JUST came out, and they stated that there were some things they were going to have to change in their scenery libraries (if you bother to read the ORBX forums). All for free no doubt.

It's funny after all the "HD" hype, that now softer clouds look more realistic, which they do. I doubt I'll drop more money for REX.

I held off jumping in until 2.4. Some things I like, some I don't. Addon Clouds and water I think actually look better in FSX. That's a lot of territory so I'm not ready to dump X. 2.4 also has a more saturated, gamey look to it. Would like to be able to tone it down a bit. On the plus side I love the cloud shadows and object shadows, and it seems to run smoother than X. I think 2.5 could be a stellar sim.