Agree, FSX with good add-ons is not bad at all and since we are use to good add-ons we will need to compare Flight add-ons with FSX add-ons.

Wow, these pictures look quite unbelievable. Which scenery add-on is this? Thanks!

http://www.megascenery.com/MegaSceneryXHawaii.htm + REX and DX10. Here some more... Now check these one out... not Hawaii but somewhere in Europe....

but why the heck would they show us add-ons? That's just asking for trouble

Let me tell you something, if Hawaii as we see it from Flight including the main airport is default I expect the rest of the Flight's world to look as good as Hawaii does, I mean default is default right, and if this is the case who in hell will need add-ons to cover it, not me, so why a marketstore?

MS have included small "enhanced" areas in most versions of MS Flight. I agree with Jamie that it is extremely unlikely that the released screenshots are from a third party addon, so the chances are quite high that Hawaii is an "enhanced" scenery area in MS Flight. That being the case, the "standard" default airports probably do not look quite as good, although I would be surprised if the terrain textures and mesh are any different.

That being the case, the "standard" default airports probably do not look quite as good, although I would be surprised if the terrain textures and mesh are any different.

I agree that the other default airports may not look as good. I'm not sure what you mean by "I would be surprised if the terrain textures and mesh are any different." My personal opinion is that most, if not all textures from FSX will be redone/replaced in Flight. Some of them are just plain bad and need to not be used anymore. And mesh data....this will probably be new since the team did say that the scenery and terrain will be enhanced. (Just look at the coastlines and mountains, or example. Much sharper.) Let me know if I misunderstood what you meant.

I agree that the other default airports may not look as good. I'm not sure what you mean by "I would be surprised if the terrain textures and mesh are any different." My personal opinion is that most, if not all textures from FSX will be redone/replaced in Flight. Some of them are just plain bad and need to not be used anymore. And mesh data....this will probably be new since the team did say that the scenery and terrain will be enhanced. (Just look at the coastlines and mountains, or example. Much sharper.) Let me know if I misunderstood what you meant.

The problem with FSX default scenery wasn't the textures, it was the land class. Replace that with the FSG, Cloud9 or other 3rd party land class, and it looked much better.

The problem with FSX in most areas are the textures, the landclass, the mesh, the roads, the coastlines and the lakes and rivers. This is why Orbx scenery is so popular for FSX; they fix all of these shortcomings. Regards, Mike Mann

I've always thought photoscenery looks fake, flat, and terrible. But to each his own.

I've always thought photoscenery looks fake, flat, and terrible. But to each his own.

The last set of pictures I posted above are photoscenery, do they look flat to you, look at the last one, here a couple more, if the dev. add buildings and trees you can't go wrong with photoscenery cause it's the real deal, I mean if Flight1 can position all the houses where they are suppose to be as they did with some of their city how can you go wrong?. I know I know, the flaps....was just playing around, I was comming way to fast and I did not want to fly in circle....lol

I'm not sure what you mean by "I would be surprised if the terrain textures and mesh are any different."

I mean that I would be surprised if the terrain textures and mesh in areas other than Hawaii are any different to those that we can see in the MS Flight Hawaii screenshots!

I mean that I would be surprised if the terrain textures and mesh in areas other than Hawaii are any different to those that we can see in the MS Flight Hawaii screenshots!

Oh, ok...that makes sense. I agree that the textures will be the same, but the terrain itself can't really be, otherwise the US might be covered by water or something.

The last set of pictures I posted above are photoscenery, do they look flat to you, look at the last one, here a couple more, if the dev. add buildings and trees you can't go wrong with photoscenery cause it's the real deal, I mean if Flight1 can position all the houses where they are suppose to be as they did with some of their city how can you go wrong?.

I felt photosceneries were flat too. But yours look very different with all those buildings and trees. I always thought if the photoscenaries come with correct buildings etc they'll be the closest thing to the real world.

I looked at MegasceneryX Hawaii site you gave and their screenshots are flat too, with no houses and trees visible, only some city skyscrapers. Did you use some extra add-on to get those trees and buildings or they're all from MegaSceneryX Hawaii? Also, it seems you have another photoscenery for European regions?

Thanks!

Yang

Megascenery only with sliders maxed out DX10, as far as the Europe scenery I have to be honest cause I don't remember where it's from, these are old pics but I'll find out what scenery it is, I don't remember if it's free scenery....I think it is, it's a part of Italy. I also remember that the Italian goverment was ( 2 > 3 years ago) suppose to release some photoscenery (on a 500GB hard drive) to pilots for real training or something like that and that was not available to the regular folks (public), I know the project was delayed, I have a good friend in Italy who's a PC-12 pilot so I will send him an e-mail today to see how far or complete the project is, I'm getting one for sure, it's always nice to have connections....

How good photo scenery looks depends alot on the aerial photography itself. Photographs with clear sharp shadows tend to project more of a 3-D look then photographs taken on an overcast day with little or no shadows. When using Tileproxy to pull aerial photographs from services like Bing Maps, the quality can vary widely, with some much better than others. Megascenery is definitely top shelf. This is MegasceneryX for the Dallas/Fort Worth area: If you are not familiar with an area, then default scenery may do just fine. But, i commute past this spot nearly every weekday, and to look down and see not only the Texas shaped rock garden, but the trees planted in front of it just made me go "Wow!" My computer can barely, barely, handle FSX. But this flight, complete with traffic on the highways below and a pair of falcons or eagles riding the thermals below when I flew over Joe Pool lake was an amazing and immersive experience. I can only imagine what Flight will be like if you hardware can handle it. -James EDIT: If you look at the screenshots closely, Megascenery also adds just enough default scenery objects so that everything doesn't look flat when you are flying low or at the airport. That helps maintain the 3-D feel; wish Tileproxy could do the same, but it can't.

The last set of pictures I posted above are photoscenery, do they look flat to you, look at the last one, here a couple more, if the dev. add buildings and trees you can't go wrong with photoscenery cause it's the real deal, I mean if Flight1 can position all the houses where they are suppose to be as they did with some of their city how can you go wrong?. I know I know, the flaps....was just playing around, I was comming way to fast and I did not want to fly in circle....lol

Yeah they do. Not literally flat. Obviously they fit over mesh, but the resolution/stretching/distortion of photoscenery gives a flat odd look to me because ultimately it is flat. It's flat pictures stretched over mesh. Done right with autogen hand placed (Orbx) it can work but to hand design the entire world like that would never happen.

Congratulations, alainneedle1 !!!!that's amazing!!!!!like a photo!!!!very good!!!!!!!