Jump to content


Members (R1)
  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

131 Excellent

About Skywatcher

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

2,388 profile views
  1. If people stop quoting my posts and asking further questions of me then I don't have to reply. I am "repeating" or "expanding" not "crying." If people keep coming back and asking me for a further response what can I do??? eg see below lol FS9 has cirrus clouds and FS9 clouds have definition. They are not perfect but they are better than what can be seen in MSFS. Did you look at the video I quoted earlier??? You only need eye balls to see the clouds are blurry as heck. How can they be better than any other sim? They are the worst clouds I have ever seen in any sim to be honest.
  2. Look at the video in the OP's post below. 39 second mark is a good reference. It cannot be any more obvious how blurry, lacking total definition MSFS clouds are. On top of this there are no cirrus clouds it appears in this sim! What is realism to you? I keep trying to get across to people to look beyond the advertising. It's all there to see. The MSFS engine will create great clouds for the XBox kid to have armageddon-ish cloud conditions when he crashes his plane into his house. Myself, I want to use MSFS as a flight simulator and only ask for realistic, everyday clouds. MSFS clearly is not as capable of doing this as FS9. That's the truth from what we have seen so far and we have seen enough to make a definitive statement on it.
  3. Completely true. What part of the below breaches anything? It was not posted. Professional? No. Where's Robin??? lol
  4. Unfortunately I cannot reply to anything because unless I say "yes" or "fantastic" or "totally agree" the mods don't allow my post. lol
  5. I've said it a million times, I use it because it's the best overall sim imo. If there was something better, I'd be using it. I still expect to be using it after MSFS release.
  6. Correct. Still saying it, nothing has changed.
  7. Took out the second part because I don't think it referenced me. If it did, it was wrong. I have interest in MSFS and I am still holding out hope to be surprised. I know it won't be perfect and I know there is still time to make change where change is possible or at least put more focus on areas users may find of concern. You can bury your head in the sand and just say everything is great but it's not. I'm a realist and prefer to plan for what is ahead not make bad decisions based on wishful thinking. End of the day, who says I know anything, may be wrong on everything, make up your own mind.
  8. Would you feel better after you bought a new PC, the game, maybe spent up on the PMDG and then fired up your PC for the first time? I'll make some things up to change your mind again in future posts. Would you prefer that? I know I just want accurate information myself. People ask for explanations/examples and then jump on you for giving them. It may help make MSFS better. Saying nothing certainly won't.
  9. I'll explain a little further. Matching satellite data is one thing, matching something that does not exist is another. If the shadows have no detail, that area needs to be made up. How is this done? The software would look at the surrounding area and fill the shadow area using this information. In the shadows I showed earlier for example, that area will likely be filled with a green texture, grass or something like that. In this scene, the blend should work reasonably well as the surrounding textures are not that detailed. Now, in saying this, in real life those shadows may have rock faces hiding behind them. The software has no way to know this because the black area has zero detail. You won't get rocks there as in real life, you will likely get green something or the other. The more complex and detailed the surrounding textures are, the harder it will be for the software to remove those shadows without leaving clear evidence of removal. In places that have high detail, it may look a complete mess after shadow removal and people will have to manually retouch those areas. Overall, when you consider we are talking about a huge proportion of shadow areas that would exist in these photos across the entire planet, there will be massive amounts of bad looking shadow fixes that will remain untouched.
  10. You need to see statements they made 2 hours ago and they still will count for nothing. Where the gaming market will be in one or two years time nobody knows. Just like many businesses in the world right now, their predicted future's are very different to what their predictions were last month. MSFS potential success is no different. The economics are all changing. Games will have to be viable to continue after the Coronavirus affects are felt. Any statements made before today, or tomorrow, or in 2 weeks from now are irrelevant. There are no guarantees anything will be viable to continue into the future as it was expected a month ago. Business models will have to see what the future will be and then determine what products are viable moving into the new times. MSFS may no longer be viable for MS by that point. We will lose airlines for example. It's a certainty.
  11. Can't be done with realism. You can't replace what wasn't there in the first place, you have to make it up. To make things up for every shadow area across the planet, no method will have enough variety. The shadows areas will have to have some kind of generic look to them. Sometimes the match may be close to the surrounding textures and sometimes it may be way off. This part I am guessing as I don't know exactly how the shadow removal gets processed. I would imagine I am very close to correct. What may turn out to be a major issue for some users is if they have removed shadows from somewhere the user likes to fly regularly. If the user happens to notice an area that would've had a shadow and can see that it was removed, that area might bother them forever. Once you've seen it, you can't stop looking at it type of thing. If they don't like the look of the fix, even worse!
  12. You beat me to quoting him! I sure hope you weren't hoarding himmelhorse??? One or two decent people here, one or two I haven't figured out, one or two that may have some grumpy moments! Mods did well, I thought this thread was going to vanish a few hours ago but we've actually had some good discussion with opportunity to put across some thoughts on the new sim. Times won't be good. Has to be some relief somewhere.
  13. Thanks. Yes, I'm just trying to suggest MSFS will be expensive. How expensive people will accept for a game in one or two years time is anyone's guess. MS projected costings for MSFS add-ons may no longer apply in the future. People won't have money. People may not have jobs. High priced DLC's won't be an option for many. New PC's won't be an option for many to run the game, been posts here regarding this already. Projections for MSFS success a month ago likely won't apply at all in a year from now. Everything will likely have to be cheaper or it won't sell. Will the game still be viable enough and get enough sales? Past MS comments, statements are totally irrelevant from this point on.
  14. I'll add one more real concern. This isn't 2004 or 2006. With current events, looks like the future era will be like no other. The MSFS business model may need to be completely revamped if they have even thought this far. If this happens, will MSFS even be viable? Will that new PC, those early investments in add-ons all come crashing down on me 12 months later when MS pull the pin on MSFS? Let's look at the link below and look at the DLC's. Expand the list and scroll down to total cost. Before Coronavirus this makes you open your eyes. In future times, it may literally make you fly off your chair and through your roof! https://store.steampowered.com/app/24010/Train_Simulator_2020/
  15. If you look at the trees around the wheels, you will see the area where the trees a little beyond the wheels (moving up or right across the mountain) connect with the other trees. Completely different color and contrast from one photo to the other. To view something and see it accurately, you need to zoom to 100%. At 100% the bushes/trees look a mess to me. How they would look inside the cockpit at close range in flight, I would need MSFS on my machine. All the things I mentioned may result. Regarding shadows, it simply is not possible to remove and replace them with anything accurate across the entire global surface. To fix just that shadow area in the screenshot, someone would actually have to have a photo of that area to then composite it in. These sorts of things are not possible to fix in any realistic manner. Developers like Orbx could enhance areas like this with some fakey texture work but it will be time consuming, very little area will be covered due to time and they will charge a fortune for it. The clouds in general are absolutely without doubt blurry. They look horrendous imo and are probably the worst MSFS element for me. If for no other reason, the clouds alone will keep me from buying MSFS ignoring everything else.
  • Create New...