Disappointed with MegasceneryEarth San Francisco

[Guest sssummer]

Brian,Thank you for the detailed reply. I have ADE. I will need to get up to speed on using it. So far it seems like a pretty dynamic application. I haven't done much with scenery design for a couple of years now. My guess is that each of the individual polys will need to be flattened incrementally to smooth out the plateau around the affected airports. Please correct me if I am wrong.Keith

You are correct sir. The good news is that Dean is working on a new technique that blends the flattens into the mesh without the "cut out" method. Makes for very realistic airports without plateaus that blend seamlessly into the surrounding terrain. Neat stuff! :(

[arne rasmus 0]

my first post here, after being reading the forum for some years, just thought i had to comment on this one. Bought the san francisco scenery yesterday and I think its great. Covers a very large area, and as long as you got a proper system the tiles look crisp and clear. think actually it looks better than on the screenshots at pcaviator. I almost didnt buy this because of the original post here, but i am very glad i did, its really worth the $15.the bay area looks much better now than with utx and gex. cant wait for the rest of norcal to be released. Must say i'm also very happy with the socal megascenery x title, and think the quality in san francisco is just as good as socal. also looks very good with night lighting from utx. wasnt so impressed by the free redwood scenery that comes with san francisco. autogen has wrong colors, so works better without. but not so much difference from utx and gex, just a lot greener. about download speeds, buying from pcaviator optional download from megasceneryearth was available. I'm living in norway, and from pc aviator best speed was above 300kb pr second, from megasceneryearth it was around 95.-a.

[flyerkg 62]

the bay area looks much better now than with utx and gex. cant wait for the rest of norcal to be released. Must say i'm also very happy with the socal megascenery x title, and think the quality in san francisco is just as good as socal. also looks very good with night lighting from utx. -a.

I am glad to see at least one positive post on the San Francisco scenery. I am looking for anything that will be an improvement for the default scenery. Plus the low cost won't hurt... I actually would like to see this photoreal scenery spill down into the San Joaquin Valley to cover Fresno. Keith

[Guest ryebred]

my first post here, after being reading the forum for some years, just thought i had to comment on this one. Bought the san francisco scenery yesterday and I think its great. Covers a very large area, and as long as you got a proper system the tiles look crisp and clear. think actually it looks better than on the screenshots at pcaviator. I almost didnt buy this because of the original post here, but i am very glad i did, its really worth the $15.the bay area looks much better now than with utx and gex. cant wait for the rest of norcal to be released. Must say i'm also very happy with the socal megascenery x title, and think the quality in san francisco is just as good as socal. also looks very good with night lighting from utx. wasnt so impressed by the free redwood scenery that comes with san francisco. autogen has wrong colors, so works better without. but not so much difference from utx and gex, just a lot greener. about download speeds, buying from pcaviator optional download from megasceneryearth was available. I'm living in norway, and from pc aviator best speed was above 300kb pr second, from megasceneryearth it was around 95.-a.

Unless you live in the area and fly over it all the time you would never know whether or not it looks realistic and would probably be very happy with the look. The colors are wrong in a lot of areas, you get those color palette shifts also where one area is a bright green and the area adjacent to it is a dark green when it should be the same color. All of the East Bay hills are brown in the summer but in Megascenery Earth they are half brown and half green so it looks like some sections have summer textures and other sections have spring textures. Also there is duplicate airport images where the photo scenery doesn't match the FSX airport location. And all of the city textures are a washed out, bright white color. You mentioned the autogen in the redwood scenery and it is not correct in the San Francisco scenery either.Having said that, I think almost any photo scenery is better than the generated look you get from FSX, even with UTX and GEX. I had no problems with the Megascenery Earth downloads either like some others have had. I have a pretty good system also so my sharpness should be maxed. Intel i7 920, 6 GB triple channel DDR3 RAM and NVidia GTX 280 1 GB.However, in comparison to Megascenery X titles, the San Francisco offering is not even close. Socal is much better than San Francisco and looks comparable to what I see when I fly my Cessna over the area in the real world. They worked on Socal for over a year and their source was aerial imagery which is much nicer in my opinion than satellite imagery. They also spent a lot more money to produce their Megascenery X titles so it stands to reason those would be higher quality. I just wish that they stuck to the model that they have been executing for the last however many years.