**** Official Microsoft Flight Simulator Thread ****

I think my plane is a tad icey :p

CniFDtE.png
 
Ur round next said:
The modify option is blanked out for me maybe because i have the steam version..what also dont allow me to move it..do you know how i could sort this if possable ?
Click to expand...

Odd. If it's not the store version then yeah it won't be movable from there.

It's odd how you can't move it on Steam however. Are you Right Clicking from Library > Properties > Local Files > Move Install Folder? Or is that just not there?
 
davew said:
Odd. If it's not the store version then yeah it won't be movable from there.

It's odd how you can't move it on Steam however. Are you Right Clicking from Library > Properties > Local Files > Move Install Folder? Or is that just not there?
Click to expand...

When i downloaded from steam i had the option to install to what ever drive i wanted i chose my G drive and all it installed on there was the launcher the base game ended up on my C drive....As you said its odd i agree....I get to move the launcher in steam to a driffrent drive not the 120+ GB i want to move tho
 
Yevgeny said:
All I had to do is to land and come to a full stop.

Also doing Balkan’s bush trip and run out of fuel on leg 8.
You can’t do normal refuel, but there is an option for fuel and repair but it’s unassigned to any keys.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm ok, I think its because I didn't come to a full stop on the runway, I just carried on my taxi. Will try again later.
 
For those suffering with CTD try and set an aggressive fan profile for your GFX card using Afterburner or something similar.

I have reliably managed to reproduce and fix my own CTD issues by keeping the GFX card under 60 degrees. It may or may not work for you but is worth having a go as it is a straightforward potential fix.

I pretty much ramp the fans up to 100% right after 40 degrees to keep the thing cool. All overclocking is also disabled. I have a 1080ti.

Hope it helps someone.
 
I'm giving the jets a bit of a swerve until the PMDG 737-800 or equivalent release the A319/A321.

I remember bitterly toiling for hours with X Plane 11 with standard jets that wouldn't do what they were supposed to and all the other frustrations. Can't be bothered with that this time around.
 
Digital X said:
Morning flight near the Notre Dame De La Salette. I have it on Ultra but looking at the Aliasing on the wings, any ideas?
Click to expand...

Image quality looks ropey all over, like it's been up-sampled. That doesn't explain why the text is bad though, as far as I'm aware the UI is always rendered at native res.
 
chaparral said:
Have you tried signing out and then back into your xbox & Microsoft accounts

As doing this looks like it may of helped some people in this thread
https://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?324440-Press-Any-Key-To-start
Click to expand...


Well after all that, and even though I'd had it running fine for 3 days, it looks like it was because I was behind the curve on Windows Updates. I have now forced the update to 2004 and I'm now 2gb into the 90gb download. Here's hoping it is done by the time I'm finished with work today.
 
BriT said:
yeah the default airliners aren't great, they climb far to fast after takeoff and not much detail.
Click to expand...

There's already a free mod that is being worked on as we speak. Earlier iterations are available and its in its early days but its already made a load of switches operable and more of the aircraft systems pages are fleshed out (if not fully functioning with the correct data) - kinda like a zibo mod but for the A320 and will be continually updated. I'll try find the download link later.

In fact, the post above this one is likely the link to it.
 
Brun said:
Image quality looks ropey all over, like it's been up-sampled. That doesn't explain why the text is bad though, as far as I'm aware the UI is always rendered at native res.
Click to expand...

I’ve noticed this as well. It does look like the resolution of the game doesn’t match the monitor. Which is why I thought it was curious that the developer console shows the resolution set in the graphics menu (in my case 1920x1080) and then below that is another resolution which is closer to 2560x1440 and it is called something else that I’ve forgotten. The resolution scaling in my settings is set to 100, so it’s not that.

It got me thinking if the game is actually rendering more pixels than it is set to in the graphics menu. It would certainly explain why it requires so much GPU grunt to run at 1080p.

Edit: In developer options one resolution is called “Game” at 2496x1404 and “Post” is 1920x1080. I am set to 1920x1080 in the graphics options and 100 scaling. So this certainly suggests that the game is rendering at the “game” resolution. I’ll be really interested to see what Digital Foundry have to say in their tech analysis.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom