Guys,recently I installed UK Photorealistc Sceneries in FS9, and you know what: I didn't like them in FS9 as it was with FS2002. I realized then I got addicted to FS9 autogen.Also I ordered 2 USA Megascenery issues, and what can I expect? The same waste lands on the final or take off?FS9 Autogen has its own problems covered here (I got rid of the default.xml like many) but it finally isnpired me. I won't buy any textures/sceneries anymore if they don't live with FS Autogen (even if they are enhanced by highres meshes).OR: there is only one alternative which I can gladly accept are sceneries like LAGO'S Venice and Florence that blend together land textures and 3D objects. USA Roads also sound to fit pretty well into this concept.Yes I knew I read before that Photorealistic sceneries had the best altitude to enjoy them, and it actually worked in FS2002, but I don't feel I would like to use them in FS9 anymore. Autogen does enlive the FS9 world, makes it feel populated.Your opinions or suggestions?Thank you.

If the object visiblity distance (default.xml) was fixed, I'd be enjoying autogen a lot more. As it is now, you only get box-shaped houses and trees, or deteroirating framerate if you choose to keep the default.xml objects. This has been going on for a year now. I'm surprised noone has found a way to fix this. I'd actually *pay* for an addon that replaced those objects with ones with proper view distances.It's definitely a trade-off.The lack of autogen doesn't bother me when I'm cruising at 2000 ft. or higher. I do miss autogen a little during landing. During take-off I'm too busy monitoring the flight and instruments to notice the scenery.Landing only takes a couple of minutes however. During the remaining 1+ hour I prefer the look of photoreal scenery. Also, there are many custom autogen sceneries for the England and Wales sceneries including one that populates most of south-western England with autogen trees. You can also use the Autogen Annotation Tool (FS2002 SDK) to manually add buildings and trees around airports (which is very it's most important since you fly low), or anywhere else where you want them.Also check out VFR Terrain. This is a super-accurate mesh, based off 5 meter source data displayed at LOD 10 in FS2004 and LOD11 in FS2002. It really adds a sense of depth to the photographic scenery and makes it look more 3d.The big advantage with photoreal sceneries is that they don't look artificial. no repeating texture tiles, roads that cross over buildings, end in nowhere etc. Also, you can easily spot real-life features like individual buildings, glaceirs, ponds...everything is there. When I was flying over Stuttgart using the Real Germany scenery, I could actually spot individual buildings, parks etc. that I visited when I was there a few years ago.Here are some shots from Real Germany I posted recently: http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...&mesg_id=144135You'll be happy to know that Megascenery does feature autogen. It uses some sort of algorithm to determine where to place houses and trees. It's not always perfect - buildings don't align with the underlying photographic buildings and sometimes trees grow in the middle of the road. It does however make the scenery more lifelike at 1500 feet and lower. Unfortunately, Megascenery uses satellite images, which do not look as good as the aerial images used for the European sceneries.