Aglos77

Optimizing a game is not downgrading it, you are confusing things. It means making the game run better with the exact same graphics settings. I have a 3060 and 16 GB of RAM, so I do not need them to lower texture quality or degrade the LOD for everyone else. That is what graphics settings are for, so I can do it myself, and 2024 has always run fine for me in terms of performance.

What's not normal is that they don't let players choose their own settings. I don't think it would be that hard to allow PC players to access more powerful settings, but with every patch, we seem to be taking a step backward.

It turns out my problems were caused byas is almost always the case—new Nvidia drivers and an error with Vulkan.

I've made an effort to support these guys—I've been using their free products for years. There's been a big improvement in the LEMU/LEAL area, although the buildings don't look much like those in the Mediterranean region. Still, when flying over it, it looks great and works perfectly with my orthophotos from Here Maps.

I've been getting kicked out of the desktop a few times lately, and I suspect it's due to a lack of RAM—which add-on is it? I also have 16 GB of RAM, but honestly, I haven't gotten around to looking into it; I don't have time for this stuff—I have way too many other games to play. Asking for more than 16 GB of RAM right now is like shooting yourself in the foot. We all know the problems with the AI bubble, and that’s here to stay. Unless video game developers start optimizing resources, they’re going to make the crisis they’re already in even worse—not everyone is willing to spend more than $500 just on RAM.

Is it really worth spending this money on a civilian simulator?

Thank you Pe11e !!

I'm a little short on budget... could someone take some screenshots for me from LEMU? That area, despite having OSM coverage, has always looked bad in SimHeaven, with hardly any buildings, just like the city of Alicante. I want to see if I should make the investment or stick with the free version. Thanks

Global Forest has been causing FPS issues for a long time, so if you've removed it, you might see a significant FPS boost there.

I've said this more than once here. I'm not against early access or beta releases, as long as the developer clearly states the status of the software at launch and, of course, sets a price that reflects that, DCS model for example. But unfortunately, certain developers are still determined to release early access products without warning and at full price, and this isn't just a one-time occurrence, every release is the same. I'm sorry, but I can't defend this kind of development model, which is so opaque and unethical toward consumer, especially when there's no right to a refund.

MD80 Leonardo A2A comanche Embraer Praetor

That's why I try to shop outside the Microsoft Store whenever I can.

If you have plenty of free space on your computer, it’s silly not to use it after all, streaming constantly writes to your computer and shortens the lifespan of your storage SSD devices, and anyone who’s been using MFS since the beginning knows that Azure servers have caused occasional problems on more than one occasion. I have cheap HDs for North American and European orthos for X-Plane 12, and I wouldn’t trade them for anything in the world. If you’re retired or are lucky enough to have a lot of free time, I suppose it doesn’t matter. Personally, between work and family, I have very little free time, and few things annoy me more than having some free time on a Sunday morning like today and not being able to play because of software problemas or connection issues. Another thing that really bothers me about MFS, and its update policy and the Marketplace streaming, which is essentially the same thing, is that it forces you to update both the simulator and the add-ons without being able to roll back those updates if problems arise.

Don't get me wrong updates are always welcome. There will be bugs, but I find it curious to see these patches when you have supposedly professional testers who have been giving you feedback foe, I imagine quite some time now. I don't even consider playing on Easy mode; I like a challenging simulation.

I don't mean to offend anyone, but updates like this make me wonder what good all that self-l promotion is for many developers who use real pilots as testers and then, weeks or months later, have to patch the flight model. 🤔

We'll just have to see if the computer blows up, as is usually the case with this company's products.

If you're looking for the best fidelity in this particular simulator, in my opinion, it's FSlabs and Leonardo; that said, nothing comes close to the Hotstart CL650 (again, this is just my personal opinion).

It's a strange combination—Toliss on X-Plane is an outstanding developer. Aerosoft has been selling hot air for years; that's why I haven't bought it, although if you want a high-fidelity A340 and don't have X-Plane, you have no other choice. On Airliners for Microsoft, Leonardo and Fénix are the best in my book when it comes to taking care of their products.

That's the problem I know people who consult it for serious matters and don't realize that it makes things up. Anyone who trusts this technology right now doesn't know what they're doing; it needs to mature a lot more I've seen it fail even at simple math calculations.

Ask the same question to three different AIs, and you’ll get three different answers and all three answers will almost certainly be lies. I don’t know if AI is going to destroy us as a species or not, but I don’t think it will be necessary we’re already doing a fine job of destroying ourselves by consuming all the planet’s resources at an unsustainable rate. The only thing missing was AI, which consumes resources as if there were no tomorrow.

Of course, monitor image quality and resolution matter, but so do your settings and the area you're flying in. It's easy for me to notice because I only fly the A2A Comanche in MFS; I usually fly much more VFR with the XP12 and my orthos generated with Ortho4XP that's where I really notice the downgrade from SU4 to SU5.

I live in Alicante, Spain, so I know a thing or two about the heat, and I can tell you that normally, a well built computer isn't going to suffer any more just because it's 34 degrees that's a typical summer day here. During heat waves, the temperature goes up much higher, but I've never had to stop gaming or working on a computer in the 40 or so years I've been gaming on a PC.

There are tons of add-ons with issues, including extremely expensive products from prestigious brands. For example, I went over a year without being able to use PMDG’s DC6 until someone on Avsim told me a trick involving developer mode. Then there are other well-known developers here who constantly release alphas and need dozens of patches just to get their products to work reasonably well, or who release products they know will malfunction because they rely on the simulator’s default systems which they know aren’t right and don’t even bother to develop and customize those systems themselves. Someone said we’re living in a golden age of simulation, but I increasingly feel like I have a second job as a software tester one that, instead of making me money, actually costs me money.

Since the last SU, I've had several crashes with MFS, so there might be an issue. I've had 7- and 8-hour sessions with XP12, which is more demanding on my hardware, without any problems, so I'm ruling out issues with my computer.