Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Manny

I don't understand Megascenery

Recommended Posts

I'm a Sim-Savvy user and so the first question I had was, What does this MegaSceneryEarth 2 add that I don't already have.

 

I sent Sim-Savvy an e-mail with the above question and the answer I received was: Water Masking.

 

If MSE2 does indeed include water masking then I'll definitely be picking it up, at least for the states where I do my VFR flying in real life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, great thread. I have always been an advocate for autogen on top of photoscenery and always felt i was pretty much alone on this, nice to know I am not.

As for what Meshman pointed out, yes, autogen is a very tedious job, so is creating water masks and normal masks, but these things bring photoscenery way above what you get without them (I know, i have done quite a bit myself). IMO Earthsimulations has the best photoreal products with their The Channel Isles series, high res photoreal, great water masking, seasons and autogen as well as custom objects.

http://earthsimulati...m/alderney.html

 

When i first heard that Sim Saavy was going to be working with the makers of megascenery I was thrilled thinking now the Sim Saavy product could have some commercial support behind it and it could be taken to the next level meanig better resolution, water masking and possible seasons and autogen, looks like that isn't going to be the case now, bummer!!

 

I have to agree, this is a complete copout, just another way of saying we don't want to take the effort. Even if it isn't, posting your personal "feelings" on autogen isn't going to help sell your product.

"We've eliminated custom autogen. We feel that photoscenery should be what it is and not "tainted" with artificial autogen scenery. MegaSceneryEarth simply looks better to fly with as photoreal textures only.


Best, Michael

KDFW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personnaly I don't like autogen and always turn it off when using photoscenery. I like scenery objects though because they are useful for VFR navigation. I realize that I am in the minority.

Add me to that minority as well. My rig runs so much better with it off anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'm hoping is they finish off the unfinished states first like Colorado and Utah :Praying:


Chris Strobel KSNA

original.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree, this is a complete copout, just another way of saying we don't want to take the effort. Even if it isn't, posting your personal "feelings" on autogen isn't going to help sell your product.

 

"We've eliminated custom autogen. We feel that photoscenery should be what it is and not "tainted" with artificial autogen scenery. MegaSceneryEarth simply looks better to fly with as photoreal textures only."

 

You are so right. Those personal "feelings" really aren't going to convince me. This statement is one of my pet peeves mentioned on a completely different photoscenery:

 

The VFR flights over these cities are mostly a day time affair anyway.

 

In what major city can this statement really be said about? One with no electricity I guess...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"In what major city can this statement really be said about? One with no electricity I guess..."

 

 

Well with 1200 hours in my rw logbook I logged 25 or so night total...guess not too important to me as I tend to use the sim the way I did rw-unless I want to fantasize...which I guess a sim is good for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just did a flight this evening from Colorado Springs to Greeley CO using Megascenery Earth scenery (until it runs out north of Denver). This is my home territory - skies I've flow countless hours over - and I have to say that the MS Earth representation here would be far, far poorer without autogen - and yes, MS Earth products have (well, had) autogen

 

O wow, I just went screaming down Hwy 82 from Aspen to Leadville in the Lancair Legacy. I'm so use to automatically shutting down autogen with MSX So Cal, but for giggles after reading your post cranked the autogen on to very dense with MSE Colorado and WOW! Trees look awesome! Like flying PNW in Orbx. Time to explore your state a little more in depth! Thanks for the heads up there mate :hi:


Chris Strobel KSNA

original.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too don't agree with this.

 

I was planning on purchasing more of their products after how much I love the MegaScenery X SoCal, but now, if it is going to be devoid of autogen, I don't want it.

 

You are confusing two things here. MegaScenery X SoCal is part of the MegaSceneryX line of products, while we are now talking about MegaSceneryEarth. Generally MSE is lower quality and includes all kinds of problems that MS sceneries don't have, such as clouds on the photoscenery and the like.

 

As for the autogen, if you want it for a more realistic depiction of the world, then you can hardly call the autogen in any MegaScenery product realistic. It's so sparse and completely misplaced that I for one wouldn't mind it going away! If you are going to put autogen on a photoscenery, at least place it realistically, not in such a random way so that houses seem to appear placed half on a road...


Benjamin van Soldt

Windows 10 64bit - i5-8600k @ 4.7GHz - ASRock Fatality K6 Z370 - EVGA GTX1070 SC 8GB VRAM - 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX @ 3200MHz - Samsung 960 Evo SSD M.2 NVMe 500GB - 2x Samsung 860 Evo SSD 1TB (P3Dv4/5 drive) - Seagate Barracuda 2TB 7200RPM - Seasonic FocusPlus Gold 750W - Noctua DH-15S - Fractal Design Focus G (White) Case

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Autogen gives you the feeling the world around is somehow more lively and not just a fake flat texture. For me take off, approach and landing are the most interesting stages of flight, and that's when you appreciate autogen / scenery objects the most. I've flown myself enough to have my own judgement.

 

Dirk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't get the marketing strategy here. I did get the Sim Saavy U.S. scenery figuring that it was costing me about $6.00 per state. The lack of water masking in the product is a major flaw. The failure to adjust colors between states is something I can live with. The absence of night textures is a major omission. I have not used it enough to see if there are seasonal differences, but I suspect there are not.

 

I liked the Sim Saavy product best in landlocked states like Utah, Nevada and Wyomig where the lack of water masking was not a real issue. It's not so bad in coastal states if one adjusts the camera angle and does not fly too much over the coast itself. Florida, however, may be a lost cause.

 

To be quite honest, I really balked at the $300 price. I was not aware of the water masking problems. I was not aware that it did not include night textures. The reviews of the product lead me to believe that there would be more included than I actually received. I would not call it out and out fraud, but it was pretty close to the line. I certainly was deceived. I clearly was cheated. Had the product been properly described, and had the reviewers been honest, I probably would not have purchased it. (I would note that the demo area was over Colorado, a landlocked state where the water masking problems would not be apparent.)

 

It seems that this new product is fixing the problems with water masking, which will be nice for coastal states. However, in doing so, they are jacking up the price by a factor of three or four. This just strikes me as the wrong way to go. Also I am rather miffed at having been sold an incomplete and defective product, then being expected to re-purchase it again at a much higher price.

 

As I understand it, Sim Saavy's sales basically sucked. He reported like zero sales for the X\Plane version when it was first released. To me, the problem was obvious. He had a defective product which was grossly overpriced. People like me, who have more money than common sense, might buy it. But all but the most dedicated flight simmers are going to balk at paying this much for this scenery. Expecting $1000 to $2000 for a product which previously cost $300 is really pushing things. Especially when the $300 product did not sell well.

 

I actually think it would make more sense to lower the price. I suspect that if the product were priced in the $50 to $100 range, and was available as a download (to avoid the cost of buying a hard drive) it probablly would sell much better. At this price range, it becomes competative with GEX and UTX.

 

But at the $1000 plus price point, GEX does not look so bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ust seems it is how you define "reality" on a flat screen computer. A "feeling" of reality with its limitations, or "actual" reality with its limitations...

 

"Actual" reality? Sorry, you lost me. As I mentioned in a previous post, just because it's a photo doesn't make it "actual". Either way, it's an attempt to represent reality. Where I think we'd agree is that each has tradeoffs. Where we seem to disagree is in our opinions on how those tradeoffs balance out. I don't think the balance always works in favor of one or the other, and in my case even depends on the mood I'm in and, of course, quite literally the time of year or day.

 

In the specific images and angles you presented (which were pure photo vs FSX, which isn't really the issue here) quite honestly I would've voted for none of the above. :-) But then these are worst case kinds of angles for just about anything in the sim.

 

I sent Sim-Savvy an e-mail with the above question and the answer I received was: Water Masking.

 

Ah, well that's good to know, thanks!

 

Time to explore your state a little more in depth! Thanks for the heads up there mate

 

Outstanding! Glad you enjoyed it.

 

 

Generally MSE is lower quality and includes all kinds of problems that MS sceneries don't have, such as clouds on the photoscenery and the like.

 

I think perhaps a better way of putting that is that the quality is more variable. As I've cautiously been delving into the MS Earth products I've found that some of the areas are quite good.

 

Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what is confusing. Generic textures with generic autogen can convey a "feeling " of reality but it isn't real-the buildings, trees, terrain most possibly do not reflect true reality-especially in the Western US. With photoscenery you are seeing reality-every rock,swimming pool, road look ( not roads that look like someone drew lines over the scenery) and sublty of terrain will be there. True when close to the ground the immersion won't be there but now with the higher resolution available that usually vanishes 100-200 ft. Above the ground. I think my rw compare on the screen shot forum show this, and two of them are from ground level, low altitude where photoscenery can look worst.

 

When I first moved to my new area I decided to take a vfr flight in the sim to get familiar. With the generic textures I was lost fairly soon even though there are plenty of good checkpoints. When I loaded the photoscenery I tookoff-headed for the mountain with all the rocks on it-easily located the road I wanted to follow not only due to its subte looks but due to the big chicken farm. Went further by finding actual stores, tennis courts and rw pools I knw from the ground...and then there was my house..

 

With that in mind-the generics with great scenery that combines some photorealistic like pnw can look great. If I had my way only I'd take photorealistic with autogen trees only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just seems it is how you define "reality" on a flat screen computer. A "feeling" of reality with its limitations, or "actual" reality with its limitations...

http://forum.avsim.n...togen-compares/

 

While i appreciate your passion and RW experience, your comparison shots "Rw View of housing area:" is a perfect example of how we see things differently. You say "Simsavvy from ground level-again at ground level photoscenery should be at worst-yet every house/swimming pool/tree where they should be" yet all I see is a blurred blob of color on the terrain that is meant to represent the 3d objects, huge difference to me. Unless I am familiar with the neighborhhod, then autogen buildings and trees somewhat accurately placed on top of the photoreal would be more convincing to my eyes.

 

The great thing about having is autogen is that it can be turned off and everyone wins

 

With that in mind-the generics with great scenery that combines some photorealistic like pnw can look great. If I had my way only I'd take photorealistic with autogen trees only.

 

Can't you turn down the buildings with the CFG line tweak that limits the amount of autogen items per tile and have mainly trees


Best, Michael

KDFW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how this got 'round to generic textures vs photo textures as it was the Megascenery autogen announcement that had some of us reacting. I completely agree that photo scenery is particularly well-suited to much of the SW US. Nevertheless, it's still a representation, not "real", and the difference manifests itself in many ways depending on the area, the view, the time, the season and the photo sets used to make that representation. What we prefer (and why) is a whole 'nother thing.

 

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on some of this, or we'll just end up going in circles. :-)

 

Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...