Hi,Not sure if this was posed in the past, I just came across this video showing 3D city models via google maps.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaahKhvO_E4&feature=player_embedded#!Now if someone can figure a way to incorporate these google 3D city models into FSX, that's as real as it gets. :( Maybe someday, one could only hope.

Looking at the video (or even better, the demos on their website) surely is impressive. But be aware that there's a big difference if you just replay recorded reality or if you simulate (even a limited) one.In your current sim, you can alter winds, clouds, lighting, seasons and so on. And, because it is simulated, it does come close to the real thing (depending on the variables simulated) while the very nice looking replay application just shows you what was recorded on that day, at that time, at that one season. So it stays static while the sim shows you the actual reaction of a scene when you e. g. alter the daytime.So the simulator creates all circumstances and draws a picture while the replay .. just replays. If you haven't a current night recording, you will see day only. It would take infinite recordings to match up all the different circumstances of the real world, while the simulator generates them (in his calculating and capability envelope).So while you are getting amazed by the nice and realistic optics (of that one moment from the recording), you will soon discover that it isn't capable of replacing the sim because it doesn't simulate things at all. That also explains why it is relatively easy and lean when compared to the simulated approach and also explains some very nice framerates while your current sim might struggle here and there (because he takes into account where the sun is, where the shadows will be, how lights illuminate the scene and so on).See the hybrid approach of some devs (e. g. using real world recorded texture stuff and simulated autogen) as the best current and most likely upcoming solution. They record the seasonal textures and maybe night ones too and complete the rest with the simulated and real behaving stuff. You sometimes see the downsides of this approach when looking at some static shadows in the scene, but most of the time the impression is nice and somehow close to real.I think the Google app simulates night and daylight (different angles) too, on the "simulated" buildings. But the shadows of all the other stuff, the seasonal change and so on and other light sources as the ones from the sun aren't taken into account. So it's a fine tuned replay while the sim is a (replay-)fine tuned calculating app when looking at the photoreal+autogen stuff from some good devs.Imagine taking photos of you. One laughing, one serious, one weird looking. Those three circumstances would perfectly match your real world optics (despite the fact that you are 3D in real world) but all the different states in between laughing, serious and weird are lost and can't be shown then as no data exists. That's the replay downside, but the optics would be great.So the simulator would be the only thing taking care of this as we could force him to calculate a transition between those three states and get infinite numbers out of it, closely matching the real world face of yours but maybe never looking that good and being that lite on the system as the replay solution.