Active sky for msfs

[Ray Proudfoot]

17 minutes ago, Craig Baillie said:

Indeed my CPU & associated hardware is several generations older than current technology and there’s plenty of life in it yet.

I wouldn't call an i9-10850 @ 5GHz / 3080Ti that old especially if you run at 1920*1080 and have little AIG Ai.

[Timm Rehberg]

On 4/26/2024 at 10:18 AM, Andrew Wilson said:

For me personally, I find it a small price to pay considering the enjoyment and value I derive from this community

My one and only answer to all the "FSL is very overpriced/expensive..." discussions.
Compared to the countless hours of fun and enjoyment I had in FSL*, the price is a joke  But much people dont see that.

*please make me have more in MSFS!

[stephen speak]

1 hour ago, Timm Rehberg said:

My one and only answer to all the "FSL is very overpriced/expensive..." discussions.
Compared to the countless hours of fun and enjoyment I had in FSL*, the price is a joke  But much people dont see that.

*please make me have more in MSFS!

overpriced/expensive?? you get what you pay for..there's others out there..a lot cheaper..but i can tell you for a desktop simulation you won't find better at any price..i have been a customer since the fsx..32bit days and how things have changed..you can now build a cockpit with the software full immersion with other add ons..i have recently considered jumping ship i admit..but will have to see how it goes

[stephen speak]

14 hours ago, Thiago Braun said:

Incorrect. It's truly astonishing that despite the prevalence of AI LLMs and the readily available correct information, such clearly erroneous conclusions continue to be spread.

In the context of flight simulation, this nonsense is usually shared by people who either have eye issues, or those that perhaps are not able/willing to run their programs in higher frequency rates for whatever reason.

I wonder if you have ever used TrackIR. The difference between lower/higher frame rates while panning is evident. I know because I used to jump between P3D and MSFS all the time.

Anyway, it's fine to enjoy simming at 30fps. However, it's important not to assume that others can't tolerate it and may actually prefer the smoothness of a 60+ fps experience. 

i don't have eye issues..i used to run mine at 70fps..it was getting a bit warm at that..so i reduced to 35fps..half of what it used to be..guess what no difference whatsoever..except the fact my computer will probably last a few years longer with absolutely no detrement on performance..oh and my information about the amount of information the eyes can recieve was given to me by an opthalmic surgeon i know

 

[Steve Prowse]

So back to the topic: has anyone tried AS for MSFS yet?  I know Andrew said  he is going to try it, I’m going to buy it today.

[peter kelberg]

5 hours ago, Steve Prowse said:

So back to the topic: has anyone tried AS for MSFS yet?  I know Andrew said  he is going to try it, I’m going to buy it today.

Been using  it  from  when it  first   came  out using  the  beta  version

[Thiago Braun]

20 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I’m not sure you accusing those who can live with 30fps are in some way talking nonsense or have eye issues.

No. I am saying that it is nonsense to affirm that it is impossible to notice the difference in fluidity in anything above 30 fps.

Unfortunately platforms based on ancient tech like P3D just won’t consistently give the users the possibility of experiencing that feeling in a consistent basis, hence the recommendations of locking monitors to 30Hz. 

8 hours ago, stephen speak said:

i don't have eye issues..i used to run mine at 70fps..it was getting a bit warm at that..so i reduced to 35fps..half of what it used to be..guess what no difference whatsoever..except the fact my computer will probably last a few years longer with absolutely no detrement on performance..oh and my information about the amount of information the eyes can recieve was given to me by an opthalmic surgeon i know

 

It does not matter what you can or cannot notice. You just can’t assume that others will experience content in the same way. The human eye/brain does not process “FPS”, but rather fluidity.

I won’t pollute the topic with studies and research about this, but unless the whole gaming market is crazy, higher refresh rate monitors are a thing because of a reason.

[stephen speak]

3 hours ago, Thiago Braun said:

No. I am saying that it is nonsense to affirm that it is impossible to notice the difference in fluidity in anything above 30 fps.

Unfortunately platforms based on ancient tech like P3D just won’t consistently give the users the possibility of experiencing that feeling in a consistent basis, hence the recommendations of locking monitors to 30Hz. 

It does not matter what you can or cannot notice. You just can’t assume that others will experience content in the same way. The human eye/brain does not process “FPS”, but rather fluidity.

I won’t pollute the topic with studies and research about this, but unless the whole gaming market is crazy, higher refresh rate monitors are a thing because of a reason.

Higher refresh rate monitors are there for a reason yes..to move along the frames at a decent refresh rate on the monitor so it doesn’t get choked up..it’s never about frame rates..it’s about the quality of the frames being produced..a good high spec graphics card like a 3090ti or something similar will obviously produce better quality images than a cheap gtx 270..but it’s the stuff around it that makes a difference as well..I like I said have had my frames set at 35 maximum for years and to absolutely no detriment to performance due to the quality of the frames produced 

[Thiago Braun]

3 hours ago, stephen speak said:

Higher refresh rate monitors are there for a reason yes..to move along the frames at a decent refresh rate on the monitor so it doesn’t get choked up..it’s never about frame rates..it’s about the quality of the frames being produced..a good high spec graphics card like a 3090ti or something similar will obviously produce better quality images than a cheap gtx 270..but it’s the stuff around it that makes a difference as well..I like I said have had my frames set at 35 maximum for years and to absolutely no detriment to performance due to the quality of the frames produced 

I'm not referring to image quality here, but rather the smoothness of motion. While 30 frames per second at 4K resolution may offer better visual clarity, it will inevitably feel less fluid in comparison to 60 fps at 720p. Anyway, this debate is as old as the internet. Happy that you enjoy simming at lower refresh rates. It is indeed better for the environment after all..

 

[stephen speak]

1 minute ago, Thiago Braun said:

I'm not referring to image quality here, but rather the smoothness of motion. While 30 frames per second at 4K resolution may offer better visual clarity, it will inevitably feel less fluid in comparison to 60 fps at 720p. Anyway, this debate is as old as the internet. Happy that you enjoy simming at lower refresh rates. It is indeed better for the environment after all..

 

What I find strange is I started this thread to inform people who didn’t have access to active sky that they now do..how the hell did it end up at frame rates??..it usually escalates to msfs v p3d ..and for once I’m not going anywhere near that..because that’s how threads get locked 

[David Arthur]

https://streamable.com/a758pf?src=player-page-share
 

Amazing 24 hour time lapse of Active Sky in action.