Concodroid

I can still hear the ringing of "It's a GAME, not a sim" in my head. I saw some pretty wild justifications for that too, ranging from xplane's faa certification to the user interface being too nice to use. I'm glad they've gone away, it's a lot nicer around the flight sim parts these days.

Actually... As it was recorded on (presumably) high-quality film, it would be... high quality. Take this movie, for example: Grand Prix - 1966. To me, this looks better than quite a few modern movies, and that's saying something. Something like that happened with 90's TV shows that recorded on film - they were preserved, and can be enjoyed in high quality today, as film had a resolution of something approximating 6k, but not really, as each and every single silver halide crystal that makes up film was a different size Essentially, it was analogue downscaling.

I know that game devs have the right to remove gameplay from youtube - some companies, famously nintendo, fiercely pursue legal action (DMCA takedowns) on their soundtracks (for example). But gameplay is fine - it's news if a company decides to take action against a youtuber. I can't remember it ever happening, and the reason is - like other said here - it's free advertising. It doesn't matter how much gameplay it is - by virtue of being an interactive medium, games aren't like video, you get different enjoyment out of playing it versus watching it. Especially since watching games being played makes you now want to play it. Even games that specifically request to not record gameplay - like Getting Over It, for example - don't pursue legal action, as it would a) result in less popularity and b) result in an absolute PR nightmare. Tl:dr: Can they? Yes. Will they? No.

Well we have FSR, unless I misunderstood your meaning

This isn't directed at you, but this topic again? The people working on developing these expansions are not usually the same people who would fix the weather. You wouldn't ask a modeler, for example, to program ATC logic.

I said the only other issue, the other referring to what you just said

I saw the title and knew immediately where things would go in this thread. This isn't OP's fault, of course, but it's quite tiring at this point. I think I remember why I left Avsim now, it seems there's no real middle ground lol

The only other issue is old mods. This is why, for example, Kerbal Space Program players run old installs, so they can use old mods.

Oh, absolutely. They need to take more time with their updates, especially with a 'stable' release like SU4.

Fair enough, and I can see where you're coming from. All we've done is yell at them for a year, and that's worked, so why stop?

Many. Not pure posts, no, but the replies.

Brilliant idea! Now, we have the same volume no matter the size of the problem and we make the developers feel horrible!

Yeah, it really isn't hard to do that. What? What do geopolitical relationships from 200 years ago have to do with a flight simulation forum being a bit toxic? I'm sure there's an analogy to be made, but that one specifically doesn't make sense... to me, at least

I'm getting kinda annoyed at Avsim by this point, which is saying something, because I rarely, if ever, ever get annoyed at anything - seriously. I'm not calling out anyone specific here. There is only one group with criticism that is really valid - the ones experiencing constant CTDs*. Texture popping can be ignored, excessive brightness can be fixed temporarily with both AMD and NVIDIA settings, and volumetric clouds... well, how long have we played FSX and XP? That, and as I (probably) and many others (definitely) said, a hotfix would be on the way. It's not like Asobo ever ignored our complaints. I want to be clear here - I'm not saying don't complain about these issues. How else will they get fixed? But the way in which the complaints were made... Here's an example - and not just in Avsim, it was the subreddit and the FS2020 forums. The clouds were a valid complaint, but people were crying "Asobo downgraded PC for the Xbox crowd!" when they had no proof if it was intentional or not - and it turned out it wasn't! Well, sort of. Volumetric lighting is probably responsible for the clouds issue, where they looked cartoonish. It's probably also why it looked fine at certain times of the day and in different areas. However, it is still possible that they did downgrade the clouds to improve performance. I just want to make this note here so I'm not seen as praising the solution before anyone's seen if it's worked or not. Also, this line - "Attempted improvements to the cloud appearance introduced an overexposure of the world." Either they were trying to improve the appearance even further, or compensate for a downgrade. We don't know. Then there was the texture popping. Same story, people crying foul with no proof if it was intentional or not, and this one seems kinda obvious in hindsight (but it's understandable why none of us thought of this before they told us). And as an added bonus, and . Yes, Asobo needs better Quality Control. They need to have a much larger beta testing pool. I've said this since I knew how few people got into the alpha testing. But while they sort their stuff out, admittedly more than a year after release, be a bit nicer to them. There is no need for some of the stuff we've seen in the discussions, which is exactly what gives avsim a bad name. You should still point out flaws when there are flaws, bugs when there are bugs, etc. But be a bit more respectful. As for this update specifically, really not a surprise. I knew they'd fix it. Hopefully, they take a bit more time to really iron the bugs out. We don't want them to rush it.

Oh, I see, you meant game-specific settings. Yeah, I thought you meant monitor settings, as in using the buttons to change brightness, contrast, and saturation (or global settings).