I'm loving Alaska more and more

[Guest]

I had to get used to Alaska a little. First I had to overcome some disappointments (mesh, basic airports, repetitive scenery) but the more I fly it, the more I love it.

 

First of all it's HUGE (compared to Hawaii): I am loving it more and more that I can fly on an on without ever seeing the same place twice or having to fly over a boring ocean again.

 

I love the amount of airports to take off from or fly to. I knew all the Hawaiin airports after a few days but I already forgotten which ones I have already visited in Alaska: there are so many!

 

I really love the diversity of the terrain: the rugged mountains, the smooth valleys, the forrests, the plains, those swamp-like places, the floating ice, it's different everytime. And then I have only been flying in spring mainly...! Doing it all again during autumn or winter will be a new experience one more!

 

I even fell in love with what I called 'repetitive scenery': it's not repetitive anymore: it's wide and endless and free. I love it! It's awesome! I find myself flying there more and more instead of only following valleys.

 

Since I bought Alaska I've only flown once in Hawaii: it looked great, of course, but I got claustrophobic: it's so freakin' small and there is too much ocean! I quickly went back to Alaska of which I probably have covered only a few percent by now. I will have fun with Alaska for months, I am sure, specially if MS finishes the Carbon Cub with VC and maybe add some new missions or jobs. I might even do the aerocaches over there! And who knows what else they have in store.

 

All in all I have to say Alaska is awesome. It's still getting better every day and it was worth every cent. It's a bargain. To everyone who is still stuck in Hawaii: do yourself a favor. Get Alaska.

[quadraspleen 7]

I second every word.

 

I love flying wilderness. Always have. it's why I buy ORBX products..

 

Alaska is very, very good. For a tenner, it is (and I've said this many times, and confirmed it myself over the last week) way better than the AK payware for its older brother. Way better. Period.

 

Missions, missions, missions, please

 

Well done MSGS for geting it out the door so cheaply

[Bobsk8 12,685]

What makes it even better is if someone has actually flown in Alaska in a real aircraft and then you realize how realistic it looks. I haven't been back to Hawaii either since I downloaded Alaska. There is too much to see in Alaska. Too many places to fly, not enough time.

 

Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2

[jcomm 5,927]

I'll catch up with you! as soon as I get back home and next to my rig :-)

I'll invest a lot on configuring GMap, but that database from FSX would really be great to have if I just knew where to download it from...

[Guest]

I'll catch up with you! as soon as I get back home and next to my rig :-)

I'll invest a lot on configuring GMap, but that database from FSX would really be great to have if I just knew where to download it from...

 

See the link in the opening post of this topic:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/379059-how-to-create-flightplans-in-plan-g-and-use-them-in-gmap/

[Simcees 10]

I have the same 'feelings' about this DLC. I mostly fly in summertime-conditions. Than I can enjoy the eternal-snow and green mountain-/valleyviews. They are great, especially with the sun/shadowing-effects. The details of the graphic stucture of e.g. the mountains are well done.

Looking forward to missions and/or aerocaches. In the meantime I make my own 'missions'. Sometimes following a specific road, or a railway or a valley. Sometimes visiting a town and walking around in it.

T.m.o more than in Hawaii, Alaska asks for some interactive objects (a few cars, a single train, a sailing boat??) as it is such a large country, so cold, so desolate and so spaceous. It looks a bit 'scary' to see no movement at all. But who knows in future DLC's??

[jp1018 0]

I agree with all you said. I hope they charge 5 bucks more for the deluxe cub, though.

[jcomm 5,927]

See the link in the opening post of this topic:

 

 

Roger that! Thx!

[LHookins 3,103]

I've noticed that Flight is something that has to be experienced. You can't get it from screen shots or reading about it. You have to go out there and actually fly a plane. Alaska is amazing, even with some of the FSX style terrain glitches. You quickly forget about these when flying.

 

Hook

[scotchegg 4,186]

I just can't seem to get over the mesh problem unfortunately. I can see the textures are great and the autogen, lighting etc. is fantastic as we all know, but pretty soon the 'I'm there!' illusion gets broken by those rounded mountains. Really hope they improve it at some point, even as a paid upgrade.

 

On the other hand am getting so much out of Hawaii at the moment. Definitely the most realistic simming experience I've ever had. So much potential in this game, so much potential...

[Guest]

I've noticed that Flight is something that has to be experienced. You can't get it from screen shots or reading about it. You have to go out there and actually fly a plane.

 

+1

[Bobsk8 12,685]

I have the same 'feelings' about this DLC. I mostly fly in summertime-conditions. Than I can enjoy the eternal-snow and green mountain-/valleyviews. They are great, especially with the sun/shadowing-effects. The details of the graphic stucture of e.g. the mountains are well done.

Looking forward to missions and/or aerocaches. In the meantime I make my own 'missions'. Sometimes following a specific road, or a railway or a valley. Sometimes visiting a town and walking around in it.

T.m.o more than in Hawaii, Alaska asks for some interactive objects (a few cars, a single train, a sailing boat??) as it is such a large country, so cold, so desolate and so spaceous. It looks a bit 'scary' to see no movement at all. But who knows in future DLC's??

 

Unfortunately, if they start adding all kinds of interactive objects, they might wind up with the stutters and low frame rates that plague the older flight sims. I'll take the smooth motion and skip the eye candy, but that's just me.

[LHookins 3,103]

I just can't seem to get over the mesh problem unfortunately. I can see the textures are great and the autogen, lighting etc. is fantastic as we all know, but pretty soon the 'I'm there!' illusion gets broken by those rounded mountains.

 

Fly somewhere else. The mesh is not low resolution all over Alaska. In fact, there's much more high resolution than there is low. The low res mesh was one of the first things I noticed, and have been watching for. Most of the terrain is quite good.

 

I suspect the source data for the terrain is as good as it's going to get, and you can't hand-edit 600,000 square miles, unfortunately.

 

Hook

[Kengi 0]

Years ago I read a book about the construction of the ALCAN highway. There was a quote by one of the workers that stuck with me in the back of my mind and came to the front when I was in Alaska.

 

He said the terrain was "miles and miles of nothing but miles and miles".

 

When driving up to Fairbanks I got out of the car at a nice looking spot kind of high on an overlook and saw a marsh below extending out as far as the eye could see. I got my binoculars out to see what was beyond the marsh. What I saw was more of the same marsh as far as the binoculars could see.

 

At that moment I truly understood what it was to see miles and miles of nothing but miles and miles. The quote really came to life at that moment.

 

It's been about ten years since I was in Alaska, but that feeling came back to me again when flying in this game. The terrain may look repetitious at first glance, but you then spot the subtle variations which make it beautiful. Then it hits me just how far I've been flying and how much more of that marsh (or whatever) there is in all directions around me without a city or town anywhere to be found, and I start mumbling, in awe, miles and miles of nothing but miles and miles...

[Bobsk8 12,685]

Fly somewhere else. The mesh is not low resolution all over Alaska. In fact, there's much more high resolution than there is low. The low res mesh was one of the first things I noticed, and have been watching for. Most of the terrain is quite good.

 

I suspect the source data for the terrain is as good as it's going to get, and you can't hand-edit 600,000 square miles, unfortunately.

 

Hook

 

And to add in what I have said before, if you fly a RA in Alaska, you will notice that the real scenery looks pretty low res in many areas, just like it does in Flight.

 

Here is a shot over Anchorage coming into Merrill field from a C-172 I was flying at 1300 feet.

 

 

Same aircraft, heading to Whittier 2500 feet

 

 

Portage Glacier

 

 

 

 

 

I suppose they could have made the scenery in Flight look more striking, but then you could probably imagine the howls of outrage that it looked "artificial" compared to the real thing.