Clouds Edge Details and feeling

[SparxOne]

I've been hesitating to post this in the wishlist as i know the weather just made its first appearance with 2.7 and i know there still is a lot of work to be done to it, but not knowing what exactly is to come in the future, i thought it would be best to post it and have a clear conscience that hopefully ED can either realise it or let us know it's in the pipes

 

The weather does look really beautiful with 2.7, such an upgrade we got ! Not trying to deny that for sure, but small details like the one i'll talk about would be very welcome in the future hopefully. So here is what i'd wish to see in the future -->

 

I was hoping to see this much more noticeable, the distinction between the clouds edges and thin air, as much as some clouds IRL have a very fady kind of edge, some clouds can also have a very sharp edge kind of appearance, when flying around them it allows you to really have a feel of distance and have a clear sense of approaching it than flying through that edge or right next to it (Just like cloud surfing, you're really able to discern the edges of the cloud). With the current clouds, the closer you get to them, the blurrier they look and feels like you're "gradually" getting into light fog until you're actually deep in the cloud and it simply becomes all greyish around you (Heavy fog yet real since a cloud is actual fog we could say).

As i remember from my many experiences of flying through clouds IRL, there is really this distinction when approaching a cloud and suddenly passing in it, just looking at the wing of the plane you can almost feel the cloud, it's hard to describe this sense i'd love to see reproduced ingame but as of right now, to me it feels like you're inside a bubble of a few meters surrounding your plane and everything around that bubble just becomes greyish to let you know you're inside the cloud.

 

It's hard to find videos properly showing this sense and feel i'm trying to represent here but this is what i could find to help to a certain degree.

 

https://youtu.be/-tf16HdSncM <--- Cockpit view from a 737 kind of cloud surfing

https://youtu.be/JY4-D8qMtSc?t=436 <--- Cockpit view with a very clear exemple of sharp cloud edges and feel of approaching + passing through

https://youtu.be/DuMmXRSdOS4 <--- Cabin view of the proper sense and feel of being inside a cloud (No bubble around the plane, wing is fading in the cloud itself)

 

[Germane]

+1 Absolutely! Thats also my big problem with the new clouds. They are to "soft" and blurry. 

[Ala12Rv-watermanpc]

I agree with all, however, Im not sure it is possible with nowadays power to achieve very sharp edged clouds...hope to be wrong though.

[Germane]

I think it is no problem for the power. I think its more a question of the contrast and coloring. When I look at pictures from the other big sim with the M, it has sharp clouds.
I had also no problem if it costs performance. I mean thats the reason why we have graphic settings. At the moment are the differences betwen the settings not very big

[twistking]

15 minutes ago, Germane said:

I think it is no problem for the power. I think its more a question of the contrast and coloring. When I look at pictures from the other big sim with the M, it has sharp clouds.
I had also no problem if it costs performance. I mean thats the reason why we have graphic settings. At the moment are the differences betwen the settings not very big

i am relatively sure that its also question of performance. think of the blurriness as the clouds being low resolution in space (in all axis).

Edited April 19, 2021 by twistking

[Mizzy]

9 hours ago, Germane said:

+1 Absolutely! Thats also my big problem with the new clouds. They are to "soft" and blurry. 

It's computer system power or lack of why they are soft edged.

 

16 minutes ago, Germane said:

I think it is no problem for the power. I think its more a question of the contrast and coloring. When I look at pictures from the other big sim with the M, it has sharp clouds.
I had also no problem if it costs performance. I mean thats the reason why we have graphic settings. At the moment are the differences betwen the settings not very big

No, it's power of your computer to handle the detail of clouds, for example, on low setting the clouds are more rounded with less variety in shape (softer edge) and with ultra settings clouds have more definition. It's the latter that creates the FPS drop and increasing the definition would only bring people crying that their FPS has had a MASSIVE drop. You can't win on this but rest assured in 5 years time, the clouds will have significantly more definition (sharper). The other sim with clouds (can't mention MSFS) has the same problem and settings by the way.

[Germane]

Ah ok. So forget what I wrote ;). Nevertheless, I hope they are using the different settings to increase the graphic quality for people which are willing to pay for sharper clouds with a fps drop.

Edited April 19, 2021 by Germane

[SparxOne]

6 hours ago, Mizzy said:

No, it's power of your computer to handle the detail of clouds

 

If this was the only reason behind the added details or what i was wishing for in my initial post, i wish ED could still make it happen and let the people decide with their settings whether they want to sacrifice the FPS for the details or have standard cloud details for added FPS. 

DCS is a pretty hungry sim in terms of performance, with or without the new clouds, not everyone is able to run it maxed out, yet all those people don't specially come crying on the forum asking for the sim to be dumbed down in terms of details, they simply set their settings accordingly.

On the other hand, you gotta take into account the people with machines that can actually handle high details or higher ones. Why not allow them to have those added details if they were made possible ?

 

My point here is that nobody is forced to max out the sim settings if their computer can't handle it maxed out yet can handle it in medium settings, would be stupid of someone to come here and ask for the sim to be made lower details so he can play the sim maxed out on HIS medium machine.

Other thing that comes to my mind, don't forget the amount of people that also said they didn't loose any noticeable amount of FPS with 2.7 and their clouds set to Ultra, yet the amount of details we got coming from the old clouds clearly is MASSIVE.

 

[XPACT]

17 minutes ago, SparxOne said:

If this was the only reason behind the added details or what i was wishing for in my initial post, i wish ED could still make it happen and let the people decide with their settings whether they want to sacrifice the FPS for the details or have standard cloud details for added FPS. 

 

They could do this but you would be unable to join MP as it would give you drastic advantage. Clouds, especially when there is combat involved, must be the same for everyone (opaqueness and shape) and in sync. Precision of rendering is already defined from LOW to ULTRA and doesn't give much advantage to someone using lower quality preset.

 

I know many wouldn't care because after all DCS is played in SP mostly. So I am not against it but honestly think that new clouds are major thing in adding realism to the sim and I wouldn't ever fly without them.

 

25 minutes ago, SparxOne said:

Other thing that comes to my mind, don't forget the amount of people that also said they didn't loose any noticeable amount of FPS with 2.7 and their clouds set to Ultra, yet the amount of details we got coming from the old clouds clearly is MASSIVE.

 

This one is probably due to people having very strong GPUs and playing on lower resolutions (example RTX 3080 on 1440p monitor), their graphics cards weren't utilized to their maximum in the first place and were limited by CPU.

 

I for example feel the impact of new lighting and clouds, lost around 20 FPS both min and max with Vega 64. What I do know tho is that Vulkan if properly implemented will boost our frames much more than we lost now and there will even be room for much greater visual fidelity and will also help people with lower end CPUs due to reduced overhead. How I know that? GPU power draw is the key, currently my graphics card is using only 150 watts with 100% usage yet DX12 and Vulkan titles (even DX11) you can see that power draw go to 240W easily, that points out that DCS rendering engine is incapable of utilizing our GPUs fully, which is no news really it's old and in need of replacement and ED is working on it.

[Germane]

vor 7 Stunden schrieb XPACT:

 

They could do this but you would be unable to join MP as it would give you drastic advantage. Clouds, especially when there is combat involved, must be the same for everyone (opaqueness and shape) and in sync. Precision of rendering is already defined from LOW to ULTRA and doesn't give much advantage to someone using lower quality 

Nothing will change. The clouds have still the same shape. They have only more details. Quite the contrary, you have an advantage with lower details because the visibility is better due to the lack of details. 

vor 7 Stunden schrieb SparxOne:

 

If this was the only reason behind the added details or what i was wishing for in my initial post, i wish ED could still make it happen and let the people decide with their settings whether they want to sacrifice the FPS for the details or have standard cloud details for added FPS. 

DCS is a pretty hungry sim in terms of performance, with or without the new clouds, not everyone is able to run it maxed out, yet all those people don't specially come crying on the forum asking for the sim to be dumbed down in terms of details, they simply set their settings accordingly.

On the other hand, you gotta take into account the people with machines that can actually handle high details or higher ones. Why not allow them to have those added details if they were made possible ?

 

 

It is not only interesting for people with high end PCs. It is also a question of your priority. I think for a lot of players are the clouds in a flight sim more important than, for example, the shadows or grass. So you can decrease the one thing to increase the other. You have the coice.

Edited April 20, 2021 by Germane

[SparxOne]

14 hours ago, XPACT said:

They could do this but you would be unable to join MP as it would give you drastic advantage. Clouds, especially when there is combat involved, must be the same for everyone (opaqueness and shape) and in sync. Precision of rendering is already defined from LOW to ULTRA and doesn't give much advantage to someone using lower quality preset.

 

The reality is actually the opposite of what you're saying here, just like @Germane said, people usually set low settings to have less details and therefore much less obstructed view (Best exemple i've got under my hand would be this ->( https://youtu.be/YX1ltEqhWsc ).

And in any case, saying that the clouds should not be too detailed as to not give an advantage or disadvantage in PVP is really nonsense, sorry to say. Literally keeping the graphical potential the game could have for PVP balance, last thing i'd wanna hear coming from ED...

 

14 hours ago, XPACT said:

This one is probably due to people having very strong GPUs and playing on lower resolutions (example RTX 3080 on 1440p monitor), their graphics cards weren't utilized to their maximum in the first place and were limited by CPU.

 

I for example feel the impact of new lighting and clouds, lost around 20 FPS both min and max with Vega 64. What I do know tho is that Vulkan if properly implemented will boost our frames much more than we lost now and there will even be room for much greater visual fidelity and will also help people with lower end CPUs due to reduced overhead. How I know that? GPU power draw is the key, currently my graphics card is using only 150 watts with 100% usage yet DX12 and Vulkan titles (even DX11) you can see that power draw go to 240W easily, that points out that DCS rendering engine is incapable of utilizing our GPUs fully, which is no news really it's old and in need of replacement and ED is working on it.

 

Don't want to jump into technical details here but i don't agree with a few things you say here. 

How can you talk for anyone about their hardware when there is no way to tell what they actually have, computers can literally have thousands of different builds. And guestimating peoples hardware from them saying they had no noticeable change in FPS is a bit of a voodoo thing 

 

Don't get your hopes up to quick, Vulkan coming to DCS was never said to be expected as a revolutionnary thing when it comes, i remember some official from ED actually saying it could very well not bring any significant FPS upgrade too, so as to calm the expectation around it.

 

Either way, i'm just here wishing for an upgrade of what we currently have, not trying to change the game to the worst, any better detail added to the game, whether it be from the clouds or literally anything else should be seen as a good thing no ? 

[XPACT]

Ok lets start

 

41 minutes ago, SparxOne said:

The reality is actually the opposite of what you're saying here, just like @Germane said, people usually set low settings to have less details and therefore much less obstructed view (Best exemple i've got under my hand would be this ->( https://youtu.be/YX1ltEqhWsc ).

 

As I understood we were talking here about having old clouds and someone having new ones in MP that is unacceptable, clouds off are a no go too because clouds are to flight sim equally important as terrain and water.

What I said is that difference between low and ultra of new clouds is not too big in overall visibility of something in the cloud, more so on low setting clouds are smudging around when you move the camera and look around making the game almost unplayable for me at least and giving you massive disadvantage. There could be some advantage to low versus ultra but it's currently not in a state like in some games where you indeed can turn off vegetation and have massive advantage...

 

41 minutes ago, SparxOne said:

How can you talk for anyone about their hardware when there is no way to tell what they actually have, computers can literally have thousands of different builds. And guestimating peoples hardware from them saying they had no noticeable change in FPS is a bit of a voodoo thing

 

Call me magician, but I've seen too much DxDiags around here that I know for sure flight simmers have above average hardware of course there are people playing with mid range stuff and that is fine, after all my GPU is in current times considered very mid range but I am not willing to pay 3x MSRP for newer ones now...

But back on track, what I said in that comment is assumption after all and I could be wrong, but it is known that with current generation of GPUs it is very hard to max them out in the DCS without usage of VR and that is a fact.

 

41 minutes ago, SparxOne said:

Don't get your hopes up to quick, Vulkan coming to DCS was never said to be expected as a revolutionnary thing when it comes, i remember some official from ED actually saying it could very well not bring any significant FPS upgrade too, so as to calm the expectation around it.

 

Well since I know thing or two about different rendering/computational APIs, I must disagree. We are talking future here. DX11 and Vulkan or DX12 for that matter is like comparing Fiat500 and Formula 1, both can finish a lap but khmm... Functions that are available, variable rate shading, massively reduced CPU overhead are just some things that by itself guarantee massive FPS difference in open world simulators like this which rely on massive amounts of both CPU (usually single core) and GPU computation, of course that is if implemented correctly, especially with older AMD architectures that have huge computational power and were never good in DX11 to begin with. But most importantly Vulkan greatly expands possibilities regarding graphical fidelity that can be achieved with current hardware that is made with Vulkan and DX12 in mind, real time raytracing for example which is the future of rendering reflections, shadows and global illumination, but what is also important in my opinion is that Vulkan integration allows game to be available on Linux/other operating systems one day, considering how Windows development is going I wouldn't be surprised if it loses massive user base in the years to come but that is still far away for now.

Edited April 20, 2021 by XPACT
typos

[Germane]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb XPACT:

Ok lets start

 

 

As I understood we were talking here about having old clouds and someone having new ones in MP that is unacceptable, clouds off are a no go too because clouds are to flight sim equally important as terrain and water.

What I said is that difference between low and ultra of new clouds is not too big in overall visibility of something in the cloud, more so on low setting clouds are smudging around when you move the camera and look around making the game almost unplayable for me at least and giving you massive disadvantage. There could be some advantage to low versus ultra but it's currently not in a state like in some games where you indeed can turn off vegetation and have massive advantage...

 

 

  

No no, we are just talking about more detailed clouds  They have still the same shape for everyone and are still synchronized...they should just be less blurry. So you have absolutly no disadvantage with lower settings. 

Edited April 21, 2021 by Germane

[Mav783]

I agree totally with this post. What i see is needed :

 

- More sharped edges and details overall, even with the small clouds (really they are too blurry, it's almost ugly sometimes)

- More colors maybe? (shades of cold and hot grays) that will give dimension to shapes

- More clear exposed parts (enlightned) and more darker self shadow-casted parts (must be little more darker ... clouds are too "flat", it need to be more "naturally" contrasted trought shadows casting and self shadow casting [it's already done but not enought and deserve more precision).

 

- I can add here that the clouds are too "flat and uncolored" and stay almost white-gray when the sun is really low, it give a wrong constrat/colors comparated to the ground enlightment (but about that ED is aware and it is a WIP ! They are working on it).

 

Anyway, clouds is adding so much on DCS, even with this first version. It give sens to IFR, strategy and immersion...Big thanks ED

Edited April 22, 2021 by Mav783

[Mav783]

Hey i maybe have a issue ?

 

I said on my last post that clouds are very "flat" and grey when the sun is low, and it must be much darker in shadow casted parts, lighty in exposed parts etc...And it is a knowed "issue" from ED (it was in the changelog). But...

I did see this screen recently and it is really good ! :

The question is to know if this screenshot was taken from the 2.7 that we have or not (it look like no). But maybe did i miss something in my graphical settings ?

In case of, i ask XD

 

ED 2.7 :

 

I don't have at all the same result (i tried different time and preset, and can not get the same)... XD :
For sure it is maybe just because our clouds are less advanced that the ED internal version (for sure even). But maybe i missed something.

 

Thanks !

 

EDIT :

 

Ok i did see multiple video online, i think this is "normal" !  

ED have probably a more advanced version. Anyway, clouds are already great, and will be greater.

Edited May 10, 2021 by Mav783

[Germane]

Am 7.5.2021 um 04:25 schrieb Mav783:

Hey i maybe have a issue ?

 

I said on my last post that clouds are very "flat" and grey when the sun is low, and it must be much darker in shadow casted parts, lighty in exposed parts etc...And it is a knowed "issue" from ED (it was in the changelog). But...

I did see this screen recently and it is really good ! :

The question is to know if this screenshot was taken from the 2.7 that we have or not (it look like no). But maybe did i miss something in my graphical settings ?

In case of, i ask XD

 

ED 2.7 :

 

I don't have at all the same result (i tried different time and preset, and can not get the same)... XD :
For sure it is maybe just because our clouds are less advanced that the ED internal version (for sure even). But maybe i missed something.

 

Thanks !

 

EDIT :

 

Ok i did see multiple video online, i think this is "normal" !  

ED have probably a more advanced version. Anyway, clouds are already great, and will be greater.

 

Yes, I think ED has a version with higher settings. But the question is still there why they dont give us also the opportunity....

[Mav783]

What opportunity ?

Anyway, theire clouds lighting and shadowing seem much better with them, but maybe it's not stable enought to release it even on the OB. I d'ont know :s

They also said it in the changelog : they are aware that the rendering is not that good and are working on.

Edited May 19, 2021 by Mav783

[Germane]

I dont know but I think they want to release a less performance hungry version

Edited May 19, 2021 by Germane

[wilbur81]

On 5/6/2021 at 9:25 PM, Mav783 said:

Hey i maybe have a issue ?

 

I said on my last post that clouds are very "flat" and grey when the sun is low, and it must be much darker in shadow casted parts, lighty in exposed parts etc...And it is a knowed "issue" from ED (it was in the changelog). But...

I did see this screen recently and it is really good ! :

The question is to know if this screenshot was taken from the 2.7 that we have or not (it look like no). But maybe did i miss something in my graphical settings ?

In case of, i ask XD

 

ED 2.7 :

 

I don't have at all the same result (i tried different time and preset, and can not get the same)... XD :
For sure it is maybe just because our clouds are less advanced that the ED internal version (for sure even). But maybe i missed something.

 

Thanks !

 

EDIT :

 

Ok i did see multiple video online, i think this is "normal" !  

ED have probably a more advanced version. Anyway, clouds are already great, and will be greater.

 

Agreed. I think the new clouds actually look REALLY bad at sunset or other low sun conditions. Your comparison screen is a helpful contrast.

[Bob1943]

Quote

On 4/21/2021 at 5:13 PM, Mav783 said:

I agree totally with this post. What i see is needed :

 

- More sharped edges and details overall, even with the small clouds (really they are too blurry, it's almost ugly sometimes)

- More colors maybe? (shades of cold and hot grays) that will give dimension to shapes

- More clear exposed parts (enlightned) and more darker self shadow-casted parts (must be little more darker ... clouds are too "flat", it need to be more "naturally" contrasted trought shadows casting and self shadow casting [it's already done but not enought and deserve more precision).

 

 

Agree with the above quote.

[Germane]

Any news to this topic ED? Is with the introduction of dynamic weather, also an adjustment of the cloud display planned?