15 replies to this topic

[Mohammad]

In real life, when you're flying at 33,000 ft, the sky is pretty much nice, clean and clear. When the passenger looks below, he/she can usually see many miles of land and water but even if you didn't, looking straight should almost always be clear. FS2004 depicted that much better, in my opinion, than FSX.

Here's an example of a real life pic compared to FSX:

http://www.flickr.co...ado/5510924494/



Look at the height of the haze. It shouldn't be like this when you gain altitude. The higher up you go, the smaller the haze in the horizon should be. At cruising altitude, normally it's always nice, blue and crystal clear skies. It makes for a nice visual contrast especially if the visibility below is very poor that day, meaning when you're in cruising altitude you'll see a staggering quality in vision between 33,000 ft and below.

[162db]

FSX does have a feature to adjust visibility you know. Set it to unlimited and you'll have all the clear skies you want and piss poor frame rate to go along with it. Seriously though you're comparing apples to oranges. The color blending in FSX is seriously out dated. That said, haze and the altitude at which it extends to is variable upon geographic region. While it is true that haze should be reduced with increases in altitude, (this is due to the presence of less green house gases at higher altitudes) it is inaccurate to state that it should be crystal clear at cruising altitude. Due to the ever destabilizing ozone layer and increasing pollution, you would be surprised to see how high haze can be seen in some parts of the world.

Edited by 162db, 14 May 2011 - 07:08 PM.

[Mohammad]

Come on man, I tried setting visibility to unlimited on FSX and it still looks terrible. I've traveled across Europe, the Middle East and parts of North Africa and nowhere have the visibilities been that poor. It may not be crystal clear in some rare places but it certainly looks nothing like the cheap stuff FSX has to offer. It's actually a step backward from FS2004. Exceptions aside, the sky looks terrible at 33,000 ft in FSX and nothing like the real thing.

[BrandonF]

It's only a poorly made sky texture set that gives this strange look. That "haze" is actually part of the texture,

[Shamir]

Something cool would be that for once, clouds could block the sun light!

[SwitchFX]

Shamir, on May 25 2011, 02:08 PM, said:

Something cool would be that for once, clouds could block the sun light!

Eh? They already do.

Edited by SwitchFX, 26 May 2011 - 01:56 AM.

[-Dexter]

SwitchFX, on May 26 2011, 02:56 AM, said:

Eh? They already do.

I think he's referring to environments where big cloud shadows cast a bit of darkness over cities and towns.

[Jonay]

Does scenery (mesh - hills/mountians) cast shadows in the valleys in FSX during dawn/dusk?

[Daube]

Jonay, on May 27 2011, 08:58 AM, said:

Does scenery (mesh - hills/mountians) cast shadows in the valleys in FSX during dawn/dusk?

Yes, just like in FS9.
But those shadows only affects the terrain, not the objects on the terrain (scenery, autogen, or your aircraft). Those objects are still illuminated but the sun.
In Flight however, those objects will be "shadowed"

[SwitchFX]

-Dexter, on May 27 2011, 04:37 AM, said:

I think he's referring to environments where big cloud shadows cast a bit of darkness over cities and towns.

Example?

A small cloud pile in front of the sun in real life gives this effect and can shade an entire city block. If the issue is several dozen square miles, then it might be a major issue in graphical rendering.

[-Dexter]

SwitchFX, on May 29 2011, 05:46 AM, said:

Example?

A small cloud pile in front of the sun in real life gives this effect and can shade an entire city block. If the issue is several dozen square miles, then it might be a major issue in graphical rendering.

Something like this is what I'm referring to:

[higgi1fc]

or shadows of the airplane on the clouds as you fly around them...that'd be cool

[SwitchFX]

-Dexter, on May 30 2011, 12:31 PM, said:

Something like this is what I'm referring to:

The problem with what you're saying is sunlight isn't directly above the clouds and you can't measure a cloud's size on land because it's going to be smaller than it really is.

[Romario_]

I believe REX planned to do this?!

[Daube]

Indeed, but it looks like they gave up.
They never provided any additionnal info or news after showing the initial screenshots :/

[clum]

Was that preview not what actually turned out to be 'REXPlane"?