Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

CPT.KRISTIAN

Which scenery type is the best?

Recommended Posts

Hi all the reader and all who are w8 for a nice flight simulator. Today i want to show you some types of scenery that can be used and which type would you like more and think it will be better for MS FLIGHT.Scenery Type 1:ftxk.jpgThis Is FTX AUSTRALIA This is like normal fsx terrain but changed texture for better quality and texture from satalite. With autogen based on the terrain.________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Scenery Type 2:2007-11-20_17-11-54-343.jpgThis is a satalite image scenery called photorealistic and its only the terrain with buildings on Note: NO AUTOGEN.___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________I would chose Scenery type one its look more realistic and it is the samer like Flytampa kai tak but with autogen.

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

What about a 3rd option of satellite imagery WITH scenery objects?Out of the two choices I would choose the first option for two reasons; Firstly I love autogen, it really makes the world for me since I am a low and slow flyer and secondly I think that satellite imagery looks too real when compared to everything else, it really emphasizes the artificial digital nature of the aircraft, objects etc. because the contrast between reality and simulation is too strong. So for me that kind of detracts from the immersion. It looks out of place. I believe this is mostly to do with the limitations of the 3D engine and it's ability to blend objects and aircraft with photo-real scenery convincingly, so given an improved engine I might change my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
What about a 3rd option of satellite imagery WITH scenery objects?Out of the two choices I would choose the first option for two reasons; Firstly I love autogen, it really makes the world for me since I am a low and slow flyer and secondly I think that satellite imagery looks too real when compared to everything else, it really emphasizes the artificial digital nature of the aircraft, objects etc. because the contrast between reality and simulation is too strong. So for me that kind of detracts from the immersion. It looks out of place. I believe this is mostly to do with the limitations of the 3D engine and it's ability to blend objects and aircraft with photo-real scenery convincingly, so given an improved engine I might change my mind.
I agree with you. The first option will give the world more realistic. if you look at the may pics of hawaii honolulu. This is like option 1 but i hope this is not a special scenery i hope we get many cities like this. And microsoft have to know something that when they make a scenery more detalied a little bit like a shop brand or a 3d parking car that giving the scenery a little bit more realistic scenery.I will give you an example and say to you what is the diffrent of this scenery and a normal.5vi2vedamftych6hmvd.jpg1.Scenery texture better quality.2.Quality of buildings / rendering.3.The road/street is very very detailed textured.4.Street lamp.5. 3D Cars with many textures. NOTE: fsx have only about 6 cars. MS FLIGHT need atleast 12.Ok all this points if MS add this to every place in the game scenery this will be amazing.The other thing is the wheater there is some wheater things that fsx never look at.
Look at this type of visibility this is not fog this is sand in the wheater.And they need to take a look at the Desert./// Kristian

Share this post


Link to post