How many screenshots of mountains, roads, cars and buildings do you want to see?

I am also not sure who you are asking this question to, but I will answer it.The screenshots so far have been of planes with XP9 scenery or night shots or very close to the ground shots of airport buildings or roads etc...They don't give a good impression of what the in-plane, in-air view is going to be like. That's what i want to see. Xplane for me is a good sim but the blurry textures and embedded in the ground autogen kills the immersion. The flight model aside, nice/realistic looking shorelines, cityscapes, and airports are just a big a part of suspending belief.

My reply was to strider. He complained there was very little to show lately. That's why I didn't quote him. My reply immediately followed his.They can't show you what the in-flight view will be like because it has been stated that no one person has all of x plane 10. When Austin puts all the pieces together, I'm sure some more screenshots will be made available. You are definitely correct in that realistic shorelines, etc... are a big part of suspending disbelief. However, I have yet to see (default) realistic looking shorelines in any MSFS title. Default FS9 coastlines look like broken glass. Thank the sim gods for software like Ultimate Terrain. If you want realistic looking shorelines in X Plane, there is plenty available and more being made.I think people need to forget the notion that X Plane needs to have ultra realistic scenery and aircraft in it at no cost to the simmer. I always see people asking for PMDG quality in X Plane...in the form of freeware. Amazing.Fly Tampa have made a great living out of making payware scenery for an otherwise unrealistic airport selection in FSX and FS9. Add to that some runways in FS9 and FSX are not even mapped correctly. Schiphol and Seattle just 2 of them off the top of my head.At its most detailed, FSGlobal offers something between 4 and 8GB of terrain updates. Real Scenery for X Plane is getting ready to release 92GB of scenery for just a section of the US. That's in addition to the already 70+GB of default terrain in x plane that, imo, looks even better than FSGlobal. In saying all this, RealScenery have a large amount of payware scenery that I think will more than satisfy your desire of suspension of disbelief.Feel free to see for yourself.http://simhq.com/for...ery_Enhanc.htmlhttp://forums.x-pilo...g12410#msg12410http://forums.x-pilo...g11769#msg11769BTW, that's only version 9. AND, I might add, there are more than 6 screenshots there. And I can safely say whatever you see in these V9 screenshots, it will look better in V10.Have a nice day!

Didn't austin specifically say that orthophotos like Real Scenery are on their way out? Your statement seems rather contradictory to what Austin's been promising.

Didn't austin specifically say that orthophotos like Real Scenery are on their way out? Your statement seems rather contradictory to what Austin's been promising.

Hi Veeray. Here's your answer:http://xplanescenery.blogspot.com/2010/10/orthophotos-are-not-going-away.htmlHappy flying.

If the orthophotos are placed reasonably well, it's easy (with the right editor) to throw 3d objects where they belong based on what you're seeing in the satellite imagery.I posted these for a different purpose but they show some super-rudimentary objects on top of TileProxy - which, unfortunately, kills autogen:http://www.turnerdesign.com/screenshots/The benefit of flying at 4500' and seeing what's really there is nice... in the daytime, at least. Airport objects, especially treelines and buildings, really help with immersion when departing/arriving, at least. I also place large generic objects here and there to replicate visual landmarks I use, such as a particular warehouse or high school or water tower.However, I personally feel that even with a GREAT autogen system, being able to make changes/additions to existing scenery - e.g. adding a small parking lot to a local airport - is pretty important. I use Instant Scenery 2 http://www.flight1.com/products.asp?product=instscen2 and basically, it's a really, really fast way to add objects. That said.... we don't really know what's in store with X-Plane 10 yet and I would love to see some stuff that may be being kept "under wraps" in an effort to avoid letting any competitive features be known until it's sorta too late to race to the release.FWIW I do actually fly, and I think autogen is great for things like forests and basically stuff that really does "generically fill" areas; however, unless houses / building follow roads, it pretty much blows the reality for me, mostly when flying in my own area.

Hi Guys,X-Plane is not dropping orthophoto support for third party packages. We have supported third party orthophoto packs in v9 and will continue to do so in v10; the formats that make this posssible in v9 will work in v10.X-Plane's default global scenery has never been based on an orthophoto approach...not in v8, not in v9, and it won't be in v10. There was never any chance that we would adopt orthophotos for global scenery. The global scenery has to cover the whole world and fit on a relatively small number of disks. Orthophotos are not compatible with these two goals. (At least, not at resolutions that users would want to fly over.) The global scenery will continue to use a series of techniques that are often referred to as "autogen", "land-class", etc. I will defer an in-depth discussion of how what X-Plane 8, 9 and 10 do with DSFs is similar or different to a traditional land-class/autogen system (e.g. FS X or X-Plane 7) until later...back to the mills for me.cheersben

Didn't austin specifically say that orthophotos like Real Scenery are on their way out? Your statement seems rather contradictory to what Austin's been promising.

I assume you consider your question answered?Have a nice day

"bsupnik""newbie"Ok, that's kinda funny.

FYI, I wasn't asking you. Maybe some of you should think about the statements you post before creating pure speculation. A question is a request for validation or truth. Regardless of another persons opinion on its quality.Poor question? Possibly. In your mind. Strider, who is not on the x plane development team, has his own idea on when X Plane is going to be finished. I know 2 developers who are working on it and I have a few other ideas on when it will be finished.By the way, poor opinion on your part. Think about what you're saying next time.

What do you want me to think about the next time I'm thinking about saying something ? Do you want me to think about the two developer friends you have ?? I've seen more in the MS Flight previews then I have in the X-Plane 10 previews; And MS Flight is still a year away, at least they have a simulated plane taking off from a simulated runway.Don't get me wrong, I would love to see X-Plane 10 sooner rather then later ! I hope it looks and performes better then FSX.

What do you want me to think about the next time I'm thinking about saying something ? Do you want me to think about the two developer friends you have ?? I've seen more in the MS Flight previews then I have in the X-Plane 10 previews; And MS Flight is still a year away, at least they have a simulated plane taking off from a simulated runway.Don't get me wrong, I would love to see X-Plane 10 sooner rather then later ! I hope it looks and performes better then FSX.

Not at all. What I would like is for people to stop guessing, speculating, assuming, etc... on details concerning XP10 when they don't even have XP9 and are purely guessing based on a handful of screenshots and a few notes made by 1 or 2 of the XP10 developers. Even the developers don't know when it will be finished, although they have an estimate based on the current workload. Can you see how silly it looks when someone who is into FSX, does not have X Plane, decides to come to an x plane forum and throw their opinions out there with absolutely no knowledge on the inner workings of X Plane. The 2 sims are completely different platforms and programs. So to come in here and say "X Plane will be released at such and such a date" with no knowledge of the programming involved and basing that opinion on a few screenshots looks extremely out of place. I've been following the PMDG 737 thread and the forum posters there are now fighting over a release date. I mean, seriously. I just don't understand how a person who simply is a customer can come to conclusions of release dates and then get involved in heated debates with complete strangers about those release dates. All this when not even PMDG know the release date.As for the MS Flight previews, could you please show me links to what you have seen. All I have seen so far is a bi plane doing a fly by in a rendered animation that lasted about 20 seconds, another video with the same bi plane and the 3rd video with the same bi plane taxiing in a sim that looks remarkably like FSX. Not one of these videos goes longer than about a minute. There have been at least 11 different aircraft shown that will be made for X Plane 10 in a video made by the author. Not to mention all the different screenshots of the different aircraft that are planned. As well as comparison screenshots between V9 aircraft and V10 aircraft.Why would you hope V10 performs better than FSX? V9 already does. Compare the gauge animation in XP9 to FSX. You might be surprised.

...

Maybe when we all have 1 petabyte solid state drives and 50 terrabyte removable discs will we have circa 2006 Google earth orthophotos for the whole world.http://www.gearthblo...dup_google.html

Not at all. What I would like is for people to stop guessing, speculating, assuming, etc... on details concerning XP10 when they don't even have XP9 and are purely guessing based on a handful of screenshots and a few notes made by 1 or 2 of the XP10 developers. Even the developers don't know when it will be finished, although they have an estimate based on the current workload. Can you see how silly it looks when someone who is into FSX, does not have X Plane, decides to come to an x plane forum and throw their opinions out there with absolutely no knowledge on the inner workings of X Plane. The 2 sims are completely different platforms and programs. So to come in here and say "X Plane will be released at such and such a date" with no knowledge of the programming involved and basing that opinion on a few screenshots looks extremely out of place. I've been following the PMDG 737 thread and the forum posters there are now fighting over a release date. I mean, seriously. I just don't understand how a person who simply is a customer can come to conclusions of release dates and then get involved in heated debates with complete strangers about those release dates. All this when not even PMDG know the release date.As for the MS Flight previews, could you please show me links to what you have seen. All I have seen so far is a bi plane doing a fly by in a rendered animation that lasted about 20 seconds, another video with the same bi plane and the 3rd video with the same bi plane taxiing in a sim that looks remarkably like FSX. Not one of these videos goes longer than about a minute. There have been at least 11 different aircraft shown that will be made for X Plane 10 in a video made by the author. Not to mention all the different screenshots of the different aircraft that are planned. As well as comparison screenshots between V9 aircraft and V10 aircraft.

In general I agree with you, a couple of things though. (and I do have XP9) There are some things that can be discerned from the info and screen shots shown. Most of the default aircraft, looks very good, with the exception of the 747-400. I hope that gets fixed before release. Scenery wise, from ground level, it looks very good, especially the airport lighting (Assuming that is an in game shot). You can also garner, from Austin's own statements, that it will still be limited to 20 AI aircraft. I haven't seen anything or heard anything about whether the visibility limitation will be lifted in XP10. As for the estimates of release, realistically being a Software Engineer myself, I can't see how it could be ready for release by December, if it hasn't been assembled and put through integration testing yet? Maybe a Beta release, but if that is Austin's plan, I don't think that's a very good idea. As we've sen with the FSX release, first impressions last. Ace's made the mistake as activating the jetways for AI aircraft by default, as well as allowing scenery density settings to surpass the capabilities of the systems of the day, resulting with the users being greeted with a slide show. Even demonstrating by disabling the jetway feature for AI aircraft, improved performance, and with the more powerful systems available now, many still won't try it again, because of their first experience with it. If XP10 is released as an early Beta and has the inevitable bugs that such a release usually results in, it may be difficult change people's first impressions, even after the problems are solved. True even a full RTM release, can and probably will still have bugs, but hopefully at that stage they would be less serious.

Why would you hope V10 performs better than FSX? V9 already does. Compare the gauge animation in XP9 to FSX. You might be surprised.

I have to disagree with you there. XP9 does not perform better on my system than FSX when used with comparable detailed aircraft. That's with XP9 rendering less area with it's limited 25nm visibility and it's limited number of AI aircraft. FSX renders hundreds of AI aircraft, and up to 175nm. Only when FSX is used with more complex and detailed aircraft, than anything X-Plane has currently, does XP9 perform better. Here's an example. This is the Overland 747 which is comparable to the XP9 default 747-400, 9 (and it even has a VC) sitting at runway 25R at KLAX. FSX has detailed airport scenery, XP9 does notX-Plane-9FSXMy system is an E6850 4GB memory, and a 9800GTX card. Both sims are set with clear skies, maximum visibility and no AI.

Does FSX even have AI aircraft? I know Austin has 20, but that's surely better than 0. Last time I checked the state of traffic objects was maintained by the ATC waypoint system, not based on reflection of it's own physics model or characteristics.

Does FSX even have AI aircraft? I know Austin has 20, but that's surely better than 0. Last time I checked the state of traffic objects was maintained by the ATC waypoint system, not based on reflection of it's own physics model or characteristics.

Default it uses the default aircraft and a few made for AI, and has a fair amount, it is though capable of supporting hundreds of AI aircraft, as is done with packages like WOAI (Which uses the same method as default AI), and payware packages like UT2, My Traffic X and Traffic X, which has there own way of injecting AI aircraft into the sim. I use WOAI and sometimes UT2 (When I record for youtube, because the recording software I use GameCam, doesn't like FS9 modeled aircraft which WOAI traffic uses).Edit: BTW, didn't you and I go through this already in the "XP10 news from Austin" thread?