kkbelos

Ahh yes, sorry for that. I had read the instructions looking for the initial issue, but did not remember to look again when I saw I could not change the number. You are fully right and it works as described. Many thanks again man.

Many thanks!!! Indeed, it works now. Really appreciated. I just realized that there is still a small bug, at least on my side. The % GPU recovery value does not stick. I can change it but as soon as I click somewhere else, it goes back to 80

Hi, having an issue with this wonderful little app that has kept my rig alive for longer than I ever thougt. Currently, running latest AutoFPS version, MSFS2020 SU16 beta (1.39.9.0), even if I think this problem was happening before already. My computer takes a big hit with clouds, especially with overcast. Therefore, I am very interested to use the option to decrease cloud quality, triggered by GPU load (don't want to use TLOD trigger as the drop in FPS seems to be due to cloud mainly, even with the lowest TLOD I still have a drop in FPS). Anyway, with GPU-Z installed, and clouds in ultra at the start, it seems that AutoFPS never decreases cloud quality, no matter the GPU load or the FPS. I set a scenario with plenty of clouds and the GPU load skyrockets, but clouds stay at ultra. I played with the % load for activation and it does not change anything. Even above 98%, no change, clouds stay in ultra. I attached 2 screenshots. Any idea what I may be doing wrong? I read the instructions but did not find any solution.

Hi Sergio, probably you are right, which makes me much less worried about the possible introduction of pay to play and similar ideas.

Fully agree with Sergio. I was looking forward trying the missions. Specially the helicopter and waterbomber ones. But I was utterly disappointed to learn that the "cool" missions are blocked behind several sim-hours and multiple examinations, making it a chore rather than something fun. To be clear, I am not against having a career mode, but about making it mandatory in order to fly any missions. Even worse, for some missions or aircraft you also need to get some credits by "farming" them in missions you may not like at all to do. Here in the official forum it is discussed (apparently with some proof, but I cant confirm) that the goal is to sell "credits" in the marketplace. 100 simcoins will cost 28 euros. https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/the-career-mode-is-server-side-for-one-reason-only/671348 If that is confirmed, the decission to make missions exclusive for the careers mode, not being able to use 3rd party addons, the need to accumulate flight hours... becomes no more a bad design but a greedy approach to make the sim a pay per play platform! If this is confirmed I will be very disappointed with Microsobo. Not just for the bad direction they want to take with the sim, but by being shaddy and unclear with all this story

Just saw a very good and insightful article from Sergio (Helisimmer) about his impressions of MSFS2024 and the nonsense of having to go through the career mode in order to fly the missions. Missions were one of the main selling points of 2024, and now are hidden behind a career mode which requires to fly multiple missions and checks in order to get certificates, earn prestige, currency... It's already bad like that, but on top of that many of the missions are bugged or just make no sense at all. There is a wishlist item in the official forums where you can vote to make the sim a real sandbox with all missions available for those who want to try them. Of course, it does not mean to remove the career mode for those who enjoy it. Heck, even I can imagine going through it at some point. But if I have 30 min and I want to try a mission, I don't want to be blocked because I am missing virtual currency or I may risk the reputation of my virtual pilot, I just want to fly it and have fun. So if you would also like to have this option, please vote in the MSFS forums and hopefully (even if I am always a bit pessimistic about reverting these design decisions) Microsobo will listen to us.

For most of the top irritants I doubt we will see significant progress in at least 1 year. This is based on the average lead time to deal with bugs in msfs 2020, the amount of issues introduced in 2024 (and some are not glitches but actually design decisions) and the habit of creating new ones when solving another.

Are the wipers working now?

Mmm actually not completely unexpected with the msfs 2020 experience (awesome sim, but took some time). What makes me no so happy is the Microsobo bimonthly update schedule (sim updates) to solve bugs. They were never able or willing to launch smaller, more frequent patches for msfs 2020 to progress with some of the bugs at least. Let's see what they do here but from what I am reading, waiting for several months to fix some stability issues and key bugs could lead to big frustration.

Some more interesting tidbits. It seems that airport vehicles won´t drive recklessly anymore, and will receive alerts from ATC.

Very interesting, also some info about the World Hub (scenery gateway). It seems that it will be possible to add some objects and not only modify taxiways and aprons https://docs.flightsimulator.com/msfs2024/html/9_WorldHub/World_Hub.htm

Of course there is wake turbulence when the aircraft is on the runway, even if probably dampened by the proximity to the ground. Wake turbulence can be created by basically any object through air. And concretely, what we commonly understand by wake turbulence (actually the most dangerous part behind an aircraft, but not the only aerodynamic effectledt behind) is the twin vortex turning turning in the vertical plane. They are generated as soon as the wing produces lift. That is, as soon as the wing starts moving through the air. Of course, it will be negligible at low speeds, but significant when close to rotation speed. These vortex don't appear instantly when the aircraft rotates.

Not my case, with a rtx2070 super performance is abysmal, while I can get a very fluid experience in MSFS2020 (comparing with the default F-18 in both sims). I guess I will have to buy a new GPU if this is representative of the final version.

Indeed, it's here (in French, but can be easily understood or translated) https://jobs.eu.lever.co/asobostudio/7abe037b-e9d4-4af2-84ba-5a5c0e1de752

Has this been said clearly? Or is it more a "we have some ideas and we'll see"? I mean, I would love to see something more concrete about the ATC plans. I'm not missing the many improvements coming with MSFS2024 but I have to say I was a tiny bit disappointed that there was nothing about ATC (AI can be easily patched with AIG or FSLTL). Finally, I am also a bit concerned when I see the job advert in Asobo's careers page, still looking for an ATC programmer after 4 years. Hoping that it's there just someone forgot to remove it.

If the CL-415 and the fire extinguishing operations are even half good, it is enough for me to buy it.

I disagree. Loseless Scaling is working great with my RTX2070 card. You just need to ensure to have enough FPS buffer before using it. For example, for 60 Hz 1440p monitor, you need to achieve 40 fps stable before activating loseless scaling (as described in the instructions). That, I can do easily thanks to autofps. I will lose 10 fps due to the LS resource usage, but then the magic of the tool will still multiply the remaining 30 fps by 2, so you get 60 fps. In my view, even with a RTX2070, Loseless Scaling is superior to the FG mod. Less artifacts (even if not perfect) and much less cumbersome to install and keep updated. Also, it can be activated and deactivated "live" (with keyboard shortcut) and does not require dx12, which is not running well with my GPU due to the low VRAM. Only drawback I see with Loseless Scaling is the price, but I think that for 7 euros it is well worth it.

Not sure why, but after tinkering with many options (LSFG, NVCP, in-game settings) now, each time I activate LSFG, I lost around 10 FPS (in-game). Even if afterwards this gets the x2 treatment, the gain is much less than before. Any idea of what could be causing this?

Does it play well with AutoFPS? For me it´s the only way to achieve good (30-40) FPS as a basis to apply FG or ML or whatever magic spell I am using.

Ground night lighting looked also much better in one of the clips. Much more similar to XP

Nov 19th The sea looked really cool... were the boats tilting with the waves? Or was it my imagination?

This mod is working great in my system, but I have a strange side effect. Ground shadows cast by my aircraft are very jittery, whereas the aircraft itself moves smoothly. Anybody having the same issue who found a solution for it?

Thanks! I ran Fragtality´s installer and that did the trick.

Unfortunately it doesn´t work in my computer. The most recent installer removed 0.3.8 from my system, but is not giving me the option to remove 0.3.6 test.

Many thanks to ResetXPDR for his continuous dedication to this hobby... for me, this has been the biggest game changer since the launch of MSFS. Finally, no need to continuously tweak, optimize, reconfigure... even if I will continue doing it, because it became part of the game for me😁 Quick question. What is the consensus now about using AutoLOD or DynamicLOD for tubeliners? Some versions ago it was mentioned that probably DynamicLOD was better suited to the predictable flight profiles of the bit passenger aircraft. But I see now some new features in AutoLOD catering to that market too, and everybody seem to be using AutoLOD for IFR flights too. And question for ResetXPDR: how can I uninstall an old version of DynamicLOD (0.3.6 test)? The current DynamicLOD installer allows to remove the "reset edition", but not the older versions.