Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

40 Neutral

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm delighted to see the system specs released, and as it's something people often clamour for, I see it as a big announcement. It great to see confirmed that you won't need a beast of a rig to see the sim with good fidelity and performance.
  2. I'm not sure it looks better, and is obviously not legal, but, it's not that far behind. There are only two main things really: terrain resolution is very limiled in 2004, and there is very limited shadowing options. Other than that, and yes, a few other things (mainly down to third parties) these sixteen years or so, have not gained us that much.
  3. Very nice. Despite the shortcomings many are talking about, I may well go for it. It's been over a year since I had P3D installed on my PC, but I have a ton of stuff for it, so I will certainly be keeping an eye on it's progress.
  4. Could you at least try to be a little enthusiastic please? typical miserable Avsimmer 🤣 I'll try it later. b3 was good, so you better be right 😉
  5. The CFG to see what we can start tweaking 😆 Seriously though, I'd like to see some more shots or vid of the oceans in action under rough conditions. What my home area looks like.
  6. Looking very good, and quite X-Plane like actually, which is a compliment. If they can get cloud shadows going, it will look a whole lot better still.
  7. These are really great, and shows how far we have not come.
  8. It's not, and that would be unreasonable, and show very poor optimisation, considering the amount of VRAM most users have.
  9. I don't find it strange at all sadly. Rob A sure made it look very pretty in that video he put out, but he obviously knew it's severe shortcomings. I only trust end users who pay for the product, and not beta testers, who have to display loyalty to the thing they represent, or feel obliged due to their position. Disclosure – I've been there and felt/done that, but no more.
  10. And maybe it does, as up till now I've always applied xVision before running any new version, so I have not seen a default XP for some time. 11.50 absolutey does not have that brown/yellow taint XP was known for, and no one could call realistic. Something has changed somewhere down the line, which is welcome, as we can't tweak shaders now. I would like the ability to lower the haze further than you can, but it's been the same for years, so I see no hope, other than using data refs, or other mods. For the most part I like a fair bit of haze, so it not a major thing.
  11. Great shots. Obviously a lot of work has gone into making them look the way they do, but it is an art form in itself. More please.
  12. I have to disagree as well, sorry. Default XP coloration and general atmospherics absolutely do not resemble real life, at least in most cases. XP has always has always had a strange washed-out look and an odd yellow tint, that some polluted areas of the world may have, but overall it is not how the world really looks, whether you're a pilot or not. Xvision, and other apps could be overused, but for the most part they made XP look far more realistic, with some subtle changes. 11.5b3 does seem to have lost most of the odd tint however, so I'm not hankering so much for xVision, and it is certainly running very well, even on my old 1060 6GB, pegging 60fps over Orbx TE in rural areas. Lots more testing to do, but so far so good.
  13. Super shots, showing how good FSX can look. And I agree about the water colouration in V5 looking way off, and FSX looking better color wise.
  • Create New...