At first I didn't think I was going to contribute to this topic. I've been very happy with Alaska so far. I have Ultimate Alaska X and GEX installed in FSX and I honestly think Flight looks better. But...

 

Seriously, Microsoft?!?! You had to bring back the "Tatooine" ground textures!?!? Sitka in May:

 

 

 

I know these are supposed to represent either dry, brown grass or just dirt covered hills, but they just aren't convincing. In FSX the use of these textures made California look like Tatooine. And now, apparently there are sand dunes on the coast of Alaska. I'm not graphic artist, so I don't know exactly what they should have done instead (different texture pattern, different use of colors, bump mapping, autogen, etc...). I'm sure they could do better than this, though, if they tried.

 

OK. That rant was kind of a half-joke. Like I said, I'm very happy with Alaska. But it was half serious too. Those brown hills are ugly.

 

I think those mountains in the background looks like the default brown desert areas in FSX. Does it look like that in real life? Is it suppose to be desert in Alaska?

What it to improve or it buggy, from my point of view :

 

- Some places have very low or bad res. texturing. (i.e Aleutians look a bit like some big cakes, I went to see pics (never been there), They don't look like cupcakes.

-Map was not very good with Hawaïi, now it's almost unusable, and if you use it it's PITA. The team MUST find a better way of navigating in the Alaska's UI.

- Some ground airports textures are just awful (look at Hood lake), it seems that only Sitka got nice ground textures !

- Autogen (particularly tree placements) is not finished, as many airstrips (even hard tarmac ones) have 25m tall trees surrounding the whole airport. YOU DON'T WANT TO PERFORM A NIGHT APPROACH (I tried :D ). And if I'm right, night in Alaska can be a very long & common, thing !

- Wherever you land, you have a brown smoke from tires. Not only on RWY.

- No new missions !! What a pity !

- No jobs in the water landing places !!??

- Buggy swiffty cockpitless plane...

- Some places, specially mountains in winter snow, are lowering my FPS to "poor" and "definitely not enought", no fragmentation needed, and when I changed the season, no more problem. I have like 30+ fps everywhere else.

 

Besides those points and maybe later some more, I think Alaska is "good enought" to keep me waiting for... Well, who knows, but don't use too much time getting me there !

 

Well, that said, light are just amazing in DLC Alaska, even if the scenery seems a bit quick done. There is a bit of Alaska's groove for what I know of it :P

I'm going to have to add performance now. Flight in Alaska is worse then FSX by a lot.. Set heavy storms or any heavy cloud cover weather and welcome to 10FPS land w/ your graphics settings maxed out.. Ridiculous..

I'm going to have to add performance now. Flight in Alaska is worse then FSX by a lot.. Set heavy storms or any heavy cloud cover weather and welcome to 10FPS land w/ your graphics settings maxed out.. Ridiculous..

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/378097-flight-cfg-tweaks-and-performance/

 

Try turning Scenery Quality down to High and see if that helps. If that does, maybe you can help narrow down the individual setting...

http://forum.avsim.n...nd-performance/

 

Try turning Scenery Quality down to High and see if that helps. If that does, maybe you can help narrow down the individual setting...

 

I refuse to dumb down settings on a game that is already a completely dumbed down version of its predecessor. It's Microsoft ESP Lite and Alaska is making it drag its knuckles when you dare add some heavy weather to it.