Jump to content

BiologicalNanobot

Members
  • Content Count

    389
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

423 Excellent

About BiologicalNanobot

  • Rank
    Member

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Thank you. I've noticed that they've had a single-day August sale once, I hope they do that one again. I will wait for now.
  2. Hi, I am a huge fan of 737 CL and it looks like IXEG 737 is the best 737 CL in any flight simulator. I've heard that it has several issues, but I really don't care at this point, all I want is a somewhat good 737 CL. However I don't have $75 (I live in Turkey and our currency is quite... weak / worthless, so even $75 is quite a lot for me) and most likely won't have for a while - I only have around $40-50, and I was curious if IXEG 737 ever gets discounted to that price before Black Friday. From what I've seen so far IXEG gets only discounted at Black Friday, which is still far away. Have IXEG 737 ever got discounted before Black Friday? Or should I wait until Black Friday? Thanks in advance.
  3. This is something I have been wondering too. I think it is because MSFS is viewed as the successor to P3D with the same add-on ecosystem (including PMDG, Leonardo, A2A etc.) while X-Plane is a separate simulator with its own add-on ecosystem.
  4. It seems like they only abandoned FSX and P3D. It is quite upsetting as I just recently switched to P3D from X-Plane. I really don't know why only P3D market is affected while X-Plane market is "holding up well", but it is what it is. I was quite excited for their upcoming A300 but now I definitely won't get it as it is quite likely that they won't update the A300 and simply leave it with (most likely many) release bugs. Their lack of updates to the BAe 146 for P3D also shows that, contrary to the X-Plane version which got so much more love.
  5. Is it... really that simple? Maybe I have been overthinking it by trying to divide a texture into several patches, using a convolutional neural network to classify patches and then use separate convolutional neural networks to fix them.
  6. I am perfectly fine for waiting as long as it takes for a polished release. Good luck and thanks a lot to you all beta testers, including Simbol and Rob.
  7. Exactly this. I can't even return to X-Plane since experiencing Enhanced Atmospherics, there is simply something beautiful about it.
  8. You can increase shoulder_strength, it is 0.22 by default but values up to 0.50 should give good-looking results.
  9. Hi, I made that mod, and it is not surprising that beta testers could not "figure this out" earlier - it is simply not their job and they don't have to have that very specific knowledge about graphics programming. About LM... It is not surprising that they went with ACES instead of Uncharted 2 - ACES tonemapper is industry standard, for a good reason, but it requires a good quality HDR input for output to look good. Prepar3D has been shifting towards physically based lighting equations more and more, which increases the "quality" of HDR input. Until the transition is complete, this workaround should be fine. Though even with a good quality HDR input, I still find ACES too hard and contrasty for flight simulators, but it really depends on artistic choices of the developer.
  10. It is because those scenes are hand-made, which is simply not possible for a flight simulator. As many other applications are only meant to be viewed from ground or low altitudes and not from FL380, it is possible to hand-place clouds for best visuals. However, the same is not the case for a flight simulator with fully dynamic weather - local cloud coverage, heights, etc. all have to be procedurally generated using noise or injected by a third-party weather add-on. Here are a few videos of trueSKY running in completely procedural mode: You will notice that these don't look much different than what P3D already looks like. While I understand your concerns, trueSKY is quite limited when clouds are generated entirely procedurally, so there isn't much LM can do, other than giving third party weather add-on developers the ability to "author" clouds with dynamic weather maps. If LM gives an ability to do that, cloud fidelity will increase drastically. @Damian Clark do you have any thoughts on that? It also has nothing to do with the way P3D has been built. Simul trueSKY is software-agnostic, so it can run in any environment. Lastly, even how cloud layers are placed have a drastic effect on visuals. Here are a few screenshots, I hand-placed cloud layers based on METAR to make them look the best: This is v5.1 HF1 and v5.2 clouds look even better. EA has an immense potential already, and it will get even better once LM gives third-party weather add-ons the ability to inject their weather maps.
  11. You have to have HDR enabled with EA, it is forced for a reason - atmospheric scattering calculations produce brightness values above SDR, so anything above SDR will be clipped to white.
  12. Yes, I have rain and snow both in EA and non-EA. As a note, if you have Active Sky P3D installed and trying to apply a manual weather preset from P3D's weather menu, precipitation won't be displayed - it's an Active Sky related issue, you have to create a custom weather region through Active Sky, not P3D's weather menu.
  13. The white haze is a visibility layer, so this is more of an issue with weather injection. Active Sky seems to put extremely thin visibility layers, which look weird. I hope following Active Sky updates will make this better. Either case, @mpo910, have you seen this before?
  14. I would say that it is not the case for trueSKY. Volumetric clouds are inherently limited in terms of detail and shape accuracy - there is nothing LM can do in this regard. In fact, I would add that P3D v5.2's implementation of trueSKY already does almost everything a good trueSKY implementation does. While I agree that EA is still far from perfect, P3D v5.2 is a massive step forward and developers & beta testers did a great job. I am sure next versions of P3D will improve EA even further, it just needs a few more tweaks and it will be really solid, considering limitations of trueSKY, or any volumetric cloud implementation.
  15. This is how trueSKY SDK works - trueSKY's code is propriatery and their shaders are shipped as binaries, so their code can not be accessed easily. However, code access to shaders is not needed - LM should expose trueSKY controls and provide weather add-ons an API for that purpose.
×
×
  • Create New...