Going to xplane could be a gamble, there is that similarity :) j/k!

Going to xplane could be a gamble, there is that similarity :) j/k!

Ok, now THAT'S a good one!

I have been wanting to take some video but I don't have fraps and xplane needs me to buy QT to use the built in one which I didnt want to do. So I fired it up on the imac and was able to record which was good. Too bad my mac doesn't have the controls that my simpit has so I dug downstairs and pulled out the saitek yoke.throttle. Blah, dont like them much and wasn't able to get good control yet but the video capture did work well. It didn't capture sound though? I did get one from a10 going, it does take a while to render the video which it does from a track file.. I wanted to see what night landings looked like in different sims as I liked the xplane ones.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnX5eDZEIZc

Because Las Vegas doesn't look right, you won't waste your money? I thought it was a FLIGHT simulator...Not a Las Vegas simulator. To each his own, I guess.

Yes, to each his own.I personally like flight simulation because of the experience of flight and the connection of that to real flight. That experience is heavily impacted positively or negatively by the scenery that surrounds me, otherwise I'd just fly in a blue bubble with clouds and be happy. Approaches are easily my favorite part of simming, not just because of workload of flying the aircraft, but because of suspension of disbelief I experience because of what is going on outside the windows. I'm sure XP10 will get this figured out eventually, adding landmarks and more ground textures, but until then this will be a big deal for a lot of people. I think Austin may of went the wrong direction with the plausible world idea instead of furthering his work on his old land class based scenery system. Time will tell.

Finally the video finished for the Grand Canyon...the first thing that is actually enjoyable about the sim and not a complete letdown graphically.  Cities aside, the landscaping isn't bad at all.  After I turned up the graphics texture quality to extreme, I lost a few FPS (not enough to get a good recording with) but the detail popped.  I'll have to wait until I get my new video cards.

Because Las Vegas doesn't look right, you won't waste your money?I thought it was a FLIGHT simulator...Not a Las Vegas simulator.To each his own, I guess.

Well the aeronautical chart seems to think those buildings on the strip are pretty important....It would seem that populating the xplane scenery with landmarks would be a great project for a payware developer. Perhaps a package that adds famous buildings, landmarks to the worldwide scenery.Seems like this aspect of xplane will be easily able to be fixed.

Well the aeronautical chart seems to think those buildings on the strip are pretty important....It would seem that populating the xplane scenery with landmarks would be a great project for a payware developer. Perhaps a package that adds famous buildings, landmarks to the worldwide scenery.Seems like this aspect of xplane will be easily able to be fixed.

I agree Geof, now's the time for developers to realize there is a necessity, and we all know that necessity is the mother of invention.

Well the aeronautical chart seems to think those buildings on the strip are pretty important....It would seem that populating the xplane scenery with landmarks would be a great project for a payware developer. Perhaps a package that adds famous buildings, landmarks to the worldwide scenery.Seems like this aspect of xplane will be easily able to be fixed.

Absolutely 100% agree. But, for me anyway, the lack of landmarks is hardly a deal breaker. I've been thinking of getting into heavy scenery myself. HUGE market for it now in X Plane 10. And MUCH easier than making aircraft.

Yep-should be easily solved. Again-would be nice if someone created an import utility from Google buildings that would import the entire cities for use on your computer-kinda like Tileproxy did.

Finally the video finished for the Grand Canyon...

700+kts through the Grand Canyon? You are nuts!That video does do a decent job of showing off the other side of XPlane 10 - the rural side. Without doubt, XP10 does a great job with the visuals and feeling of flight outside of the cities and towns!I'm holding out hope that the wizards at Laminar can fix the issues they have (*or that I say they have) with the populated parts of the globe, and I might just make the leap!

I think everyone is wishing for too much here... I'm afraid it's just XP-9 with that feeling it's not just right all over again. The scenery makes me feel I am not anywhere but in a game. It does remind me of FS98 or earlier. I guess I was expecting far more considering how big a product Austin has built here, but now I must admit I'm greatly disappointed as well.

As long as the zoning data can be changed to be more realistic, i think it has a chance. There are sources of data which put lot lines on places like Google Maps and Zillow.com where you know exactly where the property begins and ends. Bring that data as well as type of structure (single-family home, duplex, warehouse, commercial building, seaport structure) I think there is a good chance that XP10 can look amazing, given the right data to draw. The problem is that XP10's zoning algorithm is a blind guy trying to paint the next Van Gogh and he's deaf so you can't tell him what he's doing wrong. Give him the right direction, the right data, and we could have a masterpiece.I've been scouring all day trying to find sources of the right data, but short of asking where the data comes from on the other sites themselves (and getting a "like we're gonna tell you" reponse), the USGS and OSM data are about the only sources I can find, but I can't find one specific location for all data necessary. Maybe LR, with their corporate entity could yield better results or have more experience in looking for this sort of data. OSM data seems to have pretty good structure of data given the EU. The US shouldn't be a problem with the USGS GIS data, but places like Asia, Africa and Middle East are sparse as I can tell. Maybe Africa and the Middle East could use the existing algorithm where no data exists at all. Use a converter to convert and compile the Lot/Zoning data into a database from the various sources, then write a program that interprets the data for the auto-gen renderer.Making the auto-gen regionalized so that I can put mud huts in Middle East/Africa, wooden multi-story homes for northeast US, concrete block single story houses in the southeast with varieties of manufactured home parks, the reality could be bigger than we imagine. We just needed the right framework. I can see it in my mind. Hopefully Austin and his team can get this rolling once they squash the performance issues for the existing product.

I can see what my ideal FS looks like in my head too but I don't know who will deliver it or when. I can't see a big change soon, the simple reason being that LR obviously made a decision to not license any data and use only what is freely available for them to distribute. That turns out to be zero to reasonably good depending where you fly. Really, unless LR write a cheque and get some good worldwide data then we can't look to them, it's entirely out of their hands.

It would seem that populating the xplane scenery with landmarks would be a great project for a payware developer. Perhaps a package that adds famous buildings, landmarks to the worldwide scenery.

The Chicago scenery, including the night/street lighting as depicted in the video below, was originaly deleloped for v7 some six years ago, updated with the release of v8, works in v9 and if Laminar's claims for v10 compatibility with v9 can be relied on, it should work in v10 as well. The video contains a blend of clips of the Chicago scenery from v8 and v9.Granted it is dated, but ALL buildings, without exception, in that scenery were original, created and developed by Xpcities. Because of copyright issues raised by Laminar, none of X-planes original default autogen objects, buildings, etc. were used. Subsequently, the default or resident X-plane objects, buildings, etc. were allowed to be used but without any changes to them and thru referencing only.

Addendum: The copyright issues raised at the time were because the Chicago scenery was offered as payware. Licensing was mentioned as a possible solution; although when licensing was sought, it was in effect, denied. Needless to say, this resulted in significant reworking and delays in offering the payware product.

Because of copyright issues raised by Laminar, none of X-planes original default autogen objects, buildings, etc. were used.

Geez, the irony now given it seems third parties, including users, will have to do everything themselves.