Looks good but I'm only using Linux.

I fly around the swiss region with photoscenery in FSX - with autogen off and sometimes no AI.

 

Simply, using Aerofly reminds you just how dated the FSX engine is.

 

My FSX is pimped to the max with addons, and still gets 95% of my flying time. But if someone wants to make a next-gen sim that 3rd pd's can support - i'm in!

Photo Scenery with basic landmarks and autogen for airports is better approach. Mega Earth 2.0 scenery Ohio and Indiana it makes the place flyable with low and slow. Aerosoft can do it just right they will make mid range computer users like me happy. At 1000 or 2000 agl around with right approach photoreal is great.

Personally I think vector data is the past and photoscenery as it becomes more comprehensive is the future.

 

Reminds me of the late 1990's when I was a beta tester for a rw moving map company. At the time their display was vector graphics and their improvements was more and more vector data which of course always bogged the machine down more and more. A program called ozieexplorer came out which allowed you to scan rw aviation charts, "calibrate" them, and then use them to aviate with. I was even able to do approach charts. At the time the comments from users, and even the company were that vector charts were superior-clearer to read, much more flexible etc. -that is till the competition started taking the other approach. 12years later now just about every pilot has an iPad with a choice of about 12 different programs that display vfr, ifr,WAC, high altitude, and approach plates- all georeferenced. Displays of weather, terrain can be displayed on the live charts-the latest version of wingx x even highlights nearby runways on approach charts with warning colors.The vector chart while still largely used in cockpit displays has largely gone the way of the dinosaur.

 

I have always preferred a real world vs. a computer generated fake one. Aerofly used this approach with photorealistic Switzerland with the addition of some nice looking autogen buildings near the airports and trees thru out the scenery when below the tree line. Could there be more autogen-sure! My fantasy is that soon there will be a way to auto generate buildings, trees on photoscenery where they actually should be. Google cities already populates most of the worlds major cities with accurate buildings in their correct places.

 

In the area of the world I live now (the mountain west of the US) there simply is no way vector scenery could ever come close to the subtle colors and terrain.

 

Just as the the real charts replaces the vector in the 1990's lots will be reluctant to switch to a newer technology until its merits become overwhelming, but I believe it will happen and that if this is Aerofly's approach it is the future.

 

What I see in this software is a brilliant programmer who has looked at all flight sims, taken the ideas that work, and improve them. From the easy logical menus, to the automatic joystick setup, to the amazing graphics in both the scenery and cockpits, to the blowing flags etc.-I feel confident that this will be the future sim to watch.

 

The biggest one IMHO is opening it up to third party developers. Then the sim should be able to be custiomized by third party to be exactly the sim the end user wants-the main reason IMHO FS has been king for so mant years. There might even be a vector scenery add on. :lol

 

 

It all depends on where you're coming from. I started with Flight Unlimited 1/II/III, a little bit of Fly! etc. So for me when FS2002 came out, autogen was "new" technology replacing the flat and blurry photo-scenery.

 

Photo scenery is indeed the "real" world, but at the same time it's not. The real world isn't flat. You can keep increasing the resolution of the photos (while file size increases exponentially), but it will still be flat. Google has a massive team + volunteers that manually create and place 3D objects, but they've still only managed to cover major urban areas. In my home town of 150,000 people, there's a total of 4 3D objects. The rest is a barren wasteland.

 

One possible direction for photographic scenery to go is to switch from top-down projection to actual 3D projection combined with super high-resolution topographic data. This technology is used in Apple Maps (acquired from C3 Technologies) http://9to5mac.com/2011/10/29/apple-acquired-mind-blowing-3d-mapping-company-c3-technologies-looking-to-take-ios-maps-to-the-next-level/

 

This technology was used for a few years in the Swedish mapping service Hitta.se and included coverage of many urban areas where even trees and small buildings would register as 3D "objects". The automated process won't create perfect 3D buildings, but it's much less time consuming than creating every 3D object by hand and the placement and rough shape will be accurate, which it isn't with autogen.

Personally I'll take the "flat" because I am above it very quickly. As far as autogen, no matter how you cut it it always will look like sim city to me. Ok if you want to sim, but I want to sim reality. In the southwest US where I now live the autogen looks really bad, but photo scenery really conveys the subtlety and every rock.Different strokes for different folks.

Personally I'll take the "flat" because I am above it very quickly. As far as autogen, no matter how you cut it it always will look like sim city to me. Ok if you want to sim, but I want to sim reality. In the southwest US where I now live the autogen looks really bad, but photo scenery really conveys the subtlety and every rock.Different strokes for different folks.

 

Ya, but where's the winter textures?

 

Sorry guys, that was just for Geof, I know how much a fan he is of winter. Nothing to do with Aerofly at all, carry on.

 

Glen

Like to try out because low and slow flyer and FSX under the hook like 1980 Yugo or Citation in reliability looks good but poorly designed unreliable. . Xplane is like Toyota reliable nothing eye catching. Aeroffly can pull off a balance between performance, reliability, scenery it could have legs.

Nevermind, posted in wrong forum.