fogboundturtle

it doesn't have any light pollution affecting the sky and it's only orange light so lots of work to be done on their part.

When you use rasterization as a methodology to generate light/shadow, it doesn't account for ray bounce. In real life. Light bounces off surface. In order to demonstrate that to you. Here's a example of a game that with Ray Tracing. The image on the left is using Global Illumination but no light bounce. There is only 1 light source in this scene. AS you can see. on the left, The rest of the room is super dark but reality is more like image on the right. So what developer has been doing for years is they are adding additional light sources to try to approximate the image on the right. Xplane 12 does that as well. There is a differently light source from the VC compare to the external light becaue Xplane 12 doesn't account for light bouncing of the material and lighting up the VC. Also you eyes does adapt between very bright and darker area depending on where you look so it's a really hard thing to simulate. I think LR needs a lot of work regarding their lighting in the VC to try to make what that would look like if they are trying to simulator Ray Tracing look. I hope this helps.

I think a lot of word not allowed are really upset at MSFS working really hard to improved the flight model because there is a point where all the other flight sim will become irrelevant and all the hard earn money they spend on it will be worthless. We are already seen IniBuild jumpship. I don't think this is the the last one who will do so.

I've been around AVSIM for more than 10 years. I do have to say that X-plane community have always been more sensitive about criticism than other sims. It just a fact. I think they are trying to preach about the quality of it's flight model but like many among us, we are not happy about the performance to visual ratio we get in XP. This has been an issue for as far as I've been using XP (since XP10). I am uncertain whether LR has the capacity or the technical know how to get the CPU Core Bottleneck that has been plaguing their engine for so long. Austin seems to be so focus on the FM that he forgot that they also need to improved perf. XP12 , so far, has better visual than XP11 but still very much lack behind in performance. It's still barely use 2 or 3 threads while flying. If you try an aircraft like the Q4XP, don't expect anything more than 30fps on the ground and maybe 40fps during flight, if you are lucky. In the meantime, my cpu and gpu are sitting there doing nothing. So. LR need to wake up and fix this. This on Ben to improved. So far, I am not impressed

This FAA certification being thrown as the ultimate "Your sim sucks more than mine" is tiresome., if you like Xplane so much, Go play it. If P3D is used for training, I am pretty sure MSFS could also be used in the same commercial fashion is MS wanted too.

maybe your case doesn't have a good enough airflow or it's time to re-paste your CPU.

I live in Vancouver. All the building are the wrong shape and colors in XP12. This is the issue with any autogen. You get generic random buildi g. Yes simheaven helps with fixing what LR didn't do but it feels very dated. The object are using non pbr texture and they just look flat and out of place. As good as the lighting has improved., the scenery is not matching the quality level. It is still beta so I will give them a chance to fix thus. BTW, night lighting is still the same as XP11. Also a letdown. I am guessing they will fix later

5800x3d / 3080Ti / 3440x1440p / max graphic settings on all screenshot It is sad that it is still very raw at this stage of development. I am not asking for MSFS level of graphic but at least give me frame. Also none of the building have any shadow. We are far from 2022 standard. I was label a hater for showing my finding. All I want is a bit better perf and some more building in metro area. This is not asking for too much.

sounds like you didn't read the installation and did not execute the batch file in the library. You can't blame LR for everything.

https://simheaven.com/simdownloads/x-world-america/ I did a before and after here. Watch out for your FPS, it will tank a bit

I hate the MS store as much of anyone but the OP issues does not happen to everyone and I was able to fix it for many users in the past.

I am only showing this as a person being as fair as possible. I spent an significant amount of time trying to make look the best I can. unfortunately, Performance issue has been plaguing Xplane for a very long time. Way before XP12, I know they have done some progress but there is a lot of it left to go. I really hope Ben managed to squeeze a lot more our of high end pc.

I did my best to recreate the best possible picture I can on XP12 using Orthos and SimHeaven X-Europe vs Stock MSFS. This was taken at EDDB. Notice , I get almost 3 times the frame in MSFS.

a lot if it is subjective sure but let's not get into the flight model discussion because I think both side don't have enough intricate knowledge on both side and it always turn into this troll fest of nonsense. I think both simulator offers very similar and good flight models. If you prefer xplane, go for it. There is nothing wrong with that. If you don't see the difference between autogen and AI build scenery, good for you. I wish I was like that. I just can't unsee it anymore. This is why we have choices.

I think that point is valid if you do it outside of metro area where you can say, this is not exactly the same but if you move to around KLAX or KJFK. this is where the differences start to grown exponentially. Also I know that wherever I want to fly , I don't have to spend 4 hours doing ortho for the tile before hand. I find the whole ordeal limiting in a sense that once you have ortho in one area, you feel force to only fly there. I did the whole pacific coast in my XP11 and it all I would end up flying.

I can show you example how really far X-europe is to the scenery MSFS generate. It's extremely far. It's not like Ortho is bad but it just can't and as good SimHeaven addons is , it just a series of autogen asset that repeats everywhere. It's an improvement over the base sim for sure but it doesn't make it "real" or close. Hey, you like it. good for you. The title of this thread is isn't realistic and I think it's pretty clear there is some huge limitation with the ortho + autogen method.

I can show you example how really far X-europe is to the scenery MSFS generate. It's extremely far. It's not like Ortho is bad but it just can't and as much as SimHeaven addons is , it just a series of autogen asset that repeats everywhre. It's an improvement over the base sim for sure but it doesn't make it "real" or close. Hey, you like it. good for you. The title of this thread is isn't realistic and I think it's pretty clear there is some huge limitation with the ortho + autogen method.

it doesn't at all. Not every remotely close but it's "good enough" for some Please don't try to compare , this is not even a fair fight and this will turn into another MSFS trolls are here to tell cause trouble. Please don't. You think Ortho is good enough for you...fine but don't even try to compare it to way the competition generate scenery because it is not.

I am trying to say that , it still need a lot of work in terms of lighting. Even if it's an improvement over XP11, it's easy to hide all the things it does bad. Like the example I gave you, I didn't take this. Someone else did. It's just to show you that, yes under specific condition, XP12 will look great but it's far from being everywhere all of the time. If you want I can show you at night screenshot I took and you can see how one is still very much unchanged from XP11 compare to the competitor. We are here to talk about how realistic XP12 looks.

I took this one from Reddit. So please don't hate me but even if you can get good screenshot of XP12 in specific condition. Other condition are absolutely dreadful

FSR 1.0 will make everything blurry. Many complains on this already. This is the part when LR should have been the time to improved their engine by adding Motion Vectoring and implement at least FSR 2.0. Which is a much better upscaling technique than FSR 1.0. Also it would add TAA.

I am still concern about Ben comments on performance, Issue is not GPU, We are freaking CPU core bottleneck since XP11 days. This is what we want LR to fix. If it takes too long for the CPU to prepare the frame to send the draw instruction to the GPU, your FPS will be limited and your GPU will be barely used. I got twice as much FPS in MSFS with so much more fidelity. I really hope Ben has some magic trick and free up some CPU cycle and spread the load across for thread so that we can finally experience XP12 like it was meant to be experienced.

This is a known bug that has been plaguing MSFS since SU5. There have been attempt to fix in SU10 Beta but it's not 100% resolve.

yes and no. It looks to me like DusselDorf is not very optimized and you get CPU bottleneck here more than you should. You can see your GPU is only 41% usage which means the CPU can't keep up enough to drive the GPU. If you get the same FPS in other area, I would think it would be possible that your issue is with your system. Make sure you don't have AIG mod messing with your FPS also.

understatement of the year.