abennett

@kayjay1c6b I set exactly the same settings as you, and this is what I see.... Clearly not TLOD 400

This is brilliant news!

Same. I tried it in VR Optimized and still does nothing despite the TLOD showing being changed on the app. I am very confident with the app and know all what the various settings do, as I was quite an early user of the original app and helped with testing.

Hmm. Gave this a try but I am not sure it is actually changing the LOD. I set the LOD in sim to 10 to make it obvious. The app was showing it had changed my LOD to 600 but still the sim was definitely running with 10 LOD. You can see says 600 TLOD, but as you can also see it definitely isn't....

These are the settings I used, was always delighted with the results, just gutted won't be able to use in 2024 .

No it is not directed at you. Ahh but TLOD does affect ground imagery. It only loads at a high resolution at a certain distance. This is why the distance beyond the LOD radius defined by TLOD setting is blurry. Set really low TLOD and you will see the ground imagery blurry close to you, set max and you will see that the distance at which the imagery becomes lower resolution gets further away. So they can easily tie the distance at which the ground imagery becomes lower resolution to LOD levels. Then your setting determines at what distance you see these different levels.

I am absolutely not trolling. Many people are suggesting that LOD has been downgraded in 2024, resulting in lower resolution of objects as move away than in MSFS. The ground textures when you are actually on the ground in 2024 look amazing 100% amazing. But as soon as I climb the resolution gets very blurry compared to 2020. The ground looks really sharp in 2020 all the way up to cruise, but 2024 just looks low resolution in comparison. I have even just paused the sim just to make sure it has streamed all the data. I can tell it has done this by viewing the bandwidth in dev mode. Many streamers who have spend a lot of time on both sims have said exactly the same thing. It is hard to show in screenshots because the resolution just gets compressed etc. But I know what I am seeing on the screen. If others do not have this problem, great, genuinely pleased for them, but it is real for me. This is with high end PC on 400 TLOD. (The draw distance of TLOD also seems reduced to me.) I am not suggesting anyone here is, but I think many are blinded by the hype of 2024, and see the amazing ground textures when you are on the ground and then their brain convinces them the sim is amazing and the ground textures are incredible an way better than 2020. As I say, they are on the ground, but for me at least, they get considerably worse with distance. Best wishes to all and happy simming!

Yep, just would love a program like we had before when I can say, hey sim, give me always 50 TLOD on the ground and then increase it as I climb so long as i am above my frame rate target. Then on descent start lowering it so it is 50TLOD when I am on the ground at the other end. This simple little thing, makes sim performance way way better. Even with high end PC, 24GB VRAM etc, I get periods in 2024 when it drops to single figure FPS when on the ground or in final approach... unheard of in 2020, especially when using an FPS app like Reset's.

In my opinion the best way to have both on the system is, 2020: Separate drive from windows, dedicated SSD e.g D:\MSFS2020 2024: C:\Recycle Bin 😜

About the only thing that is better with 2024. Pretty much everything else a huge regression, the ground textures in 2024, oh my days, such a step backwards. Luckily with Rex Atmos, you can still make the atmosphere look great in 2020 and with that for me it is by far the superior sim, better graphics, more stable, better performance, better aircraft, you can actually use live weather and change the time unlike in MSFS 2024.

@Reset XPDR MSFS 2024 seems to be a lot more stable now. Sure there are bugs but these will only get solved the more people use the sim. Your app certainly makes the sim a lot more usable for so many people. The in-game dynamic quality is nowhere near as good as your application in so many different ways, interface, being able to see what the app is doing, amazing customisation of TLOD, ability to select which settings are being changed, altitudes for TLOD changes etc. In my opinion it would still be a game changer for MSFS 2024. Especially considering the blurry ground textures, we really need that low TLOD on the ground for performance, but then need to get that TLOD up asap to counter the blurry textures. The MSFS dynamic is also too slow to react. Takes ages to reduce settings resulting in massive stutters on landing. It would be so awesome if you were to consider doing the App for 2024, in my opinion it is certainly needed. I would also certainly be happy to pay for it. Best wishes

I would also love to have this App in MSFS 2024. I believe the in-game dynamic setting reduces all settings and not just TLOD. I don't want all this other stuff reduced. just the TLOD like I can with this App.

First of all, let me just say thank you for your and other members of the team's work, and let me just repeat and clarify what I said in my post that it is an exciting project and given it is only in alpha stage, I think it has huge potential and is a very exciting project. Some issues that make me want to wait for future updates rather than fly the aircraft as it is now include (and I'm sure some, if not all of these will be known): Performance Very stuttery and low fps even with very high-end hardware and appropriate settings. Lateral Navigation The aircraft frequently cant draw the lateral path properly, and also often doesn't follow the path it has calculated, ending up quite a distance away from it during turns etc, which then result in it requiring manual intervention with Direct-to's to stop it then over compensating and getting in a mess. An example of the path drawing issue - Vertical Navigation A lot of the ND symbology is bugged, either missing completely, or appearing and then disappearing, or there but very slow to react. These things are incredibly useful when managing descent and meeting constraints. For example, here there is a lack of level off altitude pseudo waypoint, symbol, etc. The aircraft is at FL130 with a FCU selected altitude of 5000, 8000 to lose, doing a roughly 3 degree descent, as we are, -1600fpm at GS320, should reach 5000ft in about 24nm, you can see the ND display out to 80nm and there is no level off symbol. Constraint Management When there is a speed constraint the aircraft aims for that constraint at the waypoint with the constraint but then does not plan to stay at that speed after the waypoint, instead accelerating back to the calculated econ descent speed. For example, here, 250kt speed restriction at DM476 and DM457 instead of staying at this speed after these waypoints, the aircraft plans to accelerate back to 290kts, which, as can be seen from the right side FMS, as the planned managed descent speed. This is incorrect behaviour. Climb Performance The climb rate of the aircraft is very unrealistic, even when fully loaded the aircraft is able to climb at ridiculous rates all the way up to cruise level. ECAM Things missing from ECAM such as an indication when the landing lights are on etc. Flight Model This may be subjective but the aircraft feels very 'pitchy' to me on approach and I find myself constantly pitching up and down to try and stay on path. Whilst I have never flown an a380, my other half flies the a350 and has asked colleagues at work who fly the 380 about this, and how they described the feel of the aircraft seems to fit with my impression. However, as I mentioned, this is subjective and if a380 pilots have said it is realistic then of course I am happy to defer to this, maybe I need to play with the sensitivities of the sidestick. Summary These things I would consider basic features to be present for me to enjoy flying an aircraft, but as I have said this is not a criticism, I am fully aware the aircraft is both freeware and only in alpha stage, and this is why I said I am excited to check back in the future and give it another try when more work has been done. When there are other aircraft out there that do not have this problem (yes I know they are not 380s) for me I just can't choose to fly the 380 over them. Best regards.

Given the FBW A380 some time to bed in and do quite a few flights. It is certainly exciting for a freeware aircraft in an alpha stage. It is not really good enough, and has too many issues for me to want to fly it at this stage, but I'm sure excited to check back in 6 months - a year to see how it has come on.

No, put it where your main flightsim exe is. Might be a different folder depending on install location and msfs version.