X-Plane's "ugly" cloudscapes

[Murmur 3,941]

Not too bad uh? I'd say the best 3D/volumetric cumulonimbi I've seen so far in a flight simulator.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now, to conform to AVSIM rules on posting screenshots: to make X-Plane render clouds like these, go to the weather screen, then choose "set random and only semi-controlled weather patterns", and drag all the sliders to the right, except the last one ("randomness"). Then click on "Regenerate Weather Now!".

 

WARNING: if, after regenerating weather, the aircraft icon happens to be in a "red" (thunderstorm) area, click the "regenerate" button again, until there will be no red clouds under the aircraft icon. If you do not this, upon resuming the flight, the aircraft will be literally blown out of the sky (in my case, X-Plane actually even crashes).

 

Marco

 

[FIVE-BY-FIVE 453]

:clapping:  :drinks: nice awesome pics

[gizmosellsbunnys 106]

looks awesome

[Leen3131cs 107]

That looks reaaly good.

Tried it myself , amazing really thrilling.

These clouds are extreme beauties.

Leen

[MikeT707 1,181]

Those look great.

[FIVE-BY-FIVE 453]

i'm still alittle confused at the word "ugly" in the title of this thread :lol:   where's the ugly? 

[signmanbob 592]

i'm still alittle confused at the word "ugly" in the title of this thread :lol:   where's the ugly? 

 

 

I think that was just a "teaser" to get people to look at the thread 

[Leen3131cs 107]

More or less I think you are right.

 

There was a time many folks called everything in X-Plane UGLY.

These days we know better.

X-Plane is far from ugly.

[Arklight1 140]

What's even nicer is passing through the clouds and coming out on top. Looks amazing.

 

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[CrewF16 26]

I have been looking into X-10 again after trying to sell 9 in a garage sale and ending up giving it to Amvets. I have included some shots of FXS with AS2012. That is the only ad on I run. I like to keep it clean. Not trying to bash but from what I have seen from a Graphics standpoint I think FSX still has it. I tried to ask someone in another forum exactly why he loved X-Plane so much and got no response. I know it needs more Developers but all he said in his original post is it made use of his 64 bit system? I have seen elsewhere that the flight model is not that great. Maybe when we get a PMDG 737 or 777 in there with it's own FDE it would make a big difference.

 

Thanks,

Ron

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

[Murmur 3,941]

I have been looking into X-10 again after trying to sell 9 in a garage sale and ending up giving it to Amvets. I have included some shots of FXS with AS2012. That is the only ad on I run. I like to keep it clean. Not trying to bash but from what I have seen from a Graphics standpoint I think FSX still has it

 

Thanks for providing screenshots of FSX+AS2012. Everyone can compare the two and decide which is the best. :wink:

[CrewF16 26]

I am trying to figure out what makes an X Plane fan and whether or not I should be one. About the only AC I fly in FSX anymore are PMDG with their own FDE and Carenado when I want to take a short hop. There has to be something about this Sim can you explain? 

 

Thanks,

Ron

[Murmur 3,941]

Hi,

 

there are several things I like about X-Plane and several things I don't like. Overall, my subjective preference goes to X-Plane.

 

Scenery:

What I like: I think the rural/mountain areas are, on average, better depicted. Since the scenery is based on OSM, it depicts real streets and buildings. The depiction is still not perfect, but since OSM is continually expanding its coverage and since X-Plane scenery is updated in steps, it's going to improve in a steady manner. Even today, the default scenery is much better than it was when X-Plane 10 was released, one and a half years ago.

 

What I don't like: I don't like the lack of seasons, the lack of snow coverage, the limited visibility at high altitude. However lack of seasons is less of a factor for me now, since I think photorealistic scenery (widely available for X-Plane as freeware for a lot of areas) is superior to syntethic scenery.

Weather:

 

What I like: I like the fact that weather in X-Plane is actually dangerous for flight. You can fly inside an hurricane in FSX without consequences, but try flying in a thunderstorm in X-Plane and you'll be thrown out of the sky. I also like the depiction of certain cloud types, I think they look better than FSX clouds especially since they have a more volumetric feel to them.

 

What I don't like: I don't like the fact that cloud variety is less than in FSX. There are only a few cloud types and some of them are not so good-looking. I don't like the fog depiction, very poor. I also don't like the depiction of overcast, rain and snow on the ground.

 

Flight model:

 

What I like: You can find good and bad flight models both for X-Plane and FSX. It all depends on the aircraft designer. This being said, I subjectively prefer the feeling of X-Plane flight model. I like the fact that X-Plane flight model is more versatile, for example helicopter flight models are much better in X-Plane than in FSX (this is also the consensus at the hovercontrol.com forums). I like the fluidity of X-Plane instruments. There are FSX aircrafts with smooth instruments, but I think the X-Plane smoothness is still better.

 

What I don't like: The fact that the X-Plane flight model still has some significant flaws, e.g. the exaggerate torque roll for prop aircrafts, and some aspects of the post-stall/spin behaviour.

 

Ground physics:

 

What I like: I like the fact that the ground and water physics is more complex and potentially more realistic compared to FSX.

 

What I don't like: Just like the flight model, I don't like the fact that ground and water physics still have some flaws (ground: tires creep and have low friction; water: friction and drag is too low).

 

AI/ATC:

 

The default AI/ATC are less capable and more limited compared to FSX. This for me is not very important though, since with my PC I'd have too low FPS using AI traffic (both in X-Plane or FSX), so I don't use it.

 

 

Marco

 

[Longranger 148]

Well. I could try to describe what brought me to X-Plane 10.

Half a year before X-Plane 10 was released I decided that FSX was dead for me. I simply haqd too many OOM Situations with ingredients that were essential fro me.

I looked into X-Plane 9 and was npt impressed. To many 2D planes, the ground texture and so on.

 

When I got X-Plane 10 there were a lot of problems, but one detail really sold me: All the streets and watermarks were exactly where they should be and the ground profile reached was at least as good as in DSX with Add-Ons.

 

And the clouds were sometimes filling valleys and in other cases they streamed over the top,

The weather effects were in fact in the beginning much to strong and X-Plane had the tendency  to make to many storms. In the meantime their METAR handling have improved dramatically, the weather handling is very good. We no longer depend on the Autopilot in medium weather, OSM map fill the cities with more or less correct buildings. HD Mesh improved the terrain and in Germany there are now ICEs on the railway tracks. (thanks Uwe)

 

And an absolute FSX-Killer in my opinion:

Helicopters! They behave so much more realistic that it is another world. No wonder that there are so many Add-On helicopters available. And I didn't even mention that we are now on 64 bits so the original OOM problem of FSX can't happen anymore.

[Propane 16]

Looks are always debatable. In my opinion, the clouds in X-Plane look too artificial. Volumetric or not, they just look more like weird cotton balls to me. I'm comparing sims to what I see out of the cockpit window on a daily basis, in weather ranging from -35C to +40C, and no sim comes close if you do that to be fair. But some of my best sim experiences with clouds have been with the default FSX clouds and a weather engine addon. At times, those default textures are way more realistic and convincing than the artsy X-Plane balls of cotton or the photorealistic sharp edged REX textures.