After all this talking (also in another topic) about MSE v2 (and posting that I don't like photoreal at all) I have to say I feel like giving one state (or part of it) a try LOL ^_^ Which state (or smaller region) really shows off what MSE v2 can do? I suppose that would be a region (v2!) with mountains and not too many cities...? Any suggestions? Just curious... ^_^ I won't mind spending a few bucks just to give it a try.

By far the best photoscenery i've seen or have the MegasceneryX 'SoCal' release. It's much, MUCH higher resolution than the v1 stuff I have. I love flying there but it just isn't big enough.

 

Is v2 anywhere near as good as SoCal?

I actually prefer the v1.0 sceneries, specifically California, Oregon, Washington ... they include some well placed AutoGen. But I have almost all of the V2.0 as well.

 

But if you think this hobby is expensive, try semi-pro auto racing for 12 years as a "hobby" ... that was a $5000/mo addiction ... finally got too old for it and my bank account is looking much better now

 

EDIT: Had gone thru the PPL process also and just didn't have enough time to maintain casual flying and keep my license up to date. My wife is now MUCH happier I spend way less on a "virtual" hobby ... it's all relative and I can appreciate the time the developers have put behind MSE.

I've been messing around with Flight Sim since the early days and to date I've spent nearly $10k on scenery, aircraft and utilities. That's going back at least 20 years. (I have a spreadsheet I add every new add-on to in order to keep track of what I bought and how much I've spent).

 

I have all of the MegaSceneryEarth, MegaSceneryX and now the MegaSceneryEarth 2.0 stuff as wall as every BlueSky/NewportScenery packages available. I live in San Diego so the west coast was my first buys and I've never looked back. The photoscenery way is the way to go for me.

 

I'll buy a package for a state and make a flight path to cover as much of the state as possible. I'll also download/buy airports along this flightpath and then have at it.

 

The way I see things is that I may never get to drive around these states and visit all of the different places and site...so I just fly it instead.

 

That especially goes for New Zealand/Australia (Orbx all the way).

Edited February 3, 201313 yr by DownDiver

I own both and haven't found a clear winner across the board. Orbx is fine for New Zaeland or western part of America where i have little chance to do real world flying. In those areas, if lakes, road and river as well as relief are present, then it is fine for pilotage. I like to have 3d vegetation and autogen when flying low and hopping from field to field. I prefer Orbx to photoreal in those scenarios of flight.

 

Photogen is good to add more recognizable feature on the ground like golf, cities but the landing and take-off are immersion killers for me.

 

One of the characteristics I like from photoscen is mountainous areas despictions. In socal for instance, the mountains are more realistic than GEX even at distance.

 

But you teased me with this thread. II plan to buy MCE for Maine as it is my entry state in USA. Bangor is my custom entry point most of the time. So could be interesting to fly from Quebec to Bangor, half of the flight in GEX and half photogen in similar type of sceneries. The Apalachian range, then forest, forest and some more forest with large lakes and settlements here and there. Both departure and arrival plains have plenty of cultivated fields.

 

I keep you posted after testing....

Is v2 anywhere near as good as SoCal?

 

No, but it's not bad. SoCal hits it's 'sweet spot' at about 2500 ft...where it looks very clear. MSE 2.0 seems to hit it's best at somewhere around 6000 ft. The colors aren't quite as good either...it's a bit bluish and darkish. Still, like I said, it's not bad. The screen shots they provide are pretty true.

 

Gregg

Photoscenery does cost $$$, but to water mask midwestern states like Wisconsin, Michigan would take me 20 years, and value my free time more. All get most midwest covered just want to buy IA, MN, ND, SD. Then get AZ, UT, NV, WY, MT for interior mountain west. Got OH, IN, IL, MI, WI, KY, TN mse v 2 so far. Get places I know that other developers wont bother with. Orbx does the same with with ga airports in fly over land in Australia, New Zeland, Northwest USA. Most payware is some European or Carribean Airports that are tourist attractions those never stand out like Orbx product does.

After all this talking (also in another topic) about MSE v2 (and posting that I don't like photoreal at all) I have to say I feel like giving one state (or part of it) a try LOL ^_^ Which state (or smaller region) really shows off what MSE v2 can do? I suppose that would be a region (v2!) with mountains and not too many cities...? Any suggestions? Just curious... ^_^ I won't mind spending a few bucks just to give it a try.

 

Although it's the package that the other 'ugly' thread (where the guy got seriously manhandled) was about, you could try Delaware... it was my first MSE package too, and at $9.95 is a no brainer for trying out. Or there is RI, which is a bit more varied, but even smaller! .... It was a no brainer for me as I was born and schooled in Dover, DE. :wink:

 

If a couple of Big Macs and large Fries is in budget, then spending $9.95 on photoreal scenery of a state (albeit a small one!) has to be worth it.

I posted this in another thread, it was mostly about FlightBeam's KSFO ... but it also shows the MSE 1.0 scenery for California (specifically the SF/Bay Area where I'm located real world).

 

A quick slideshow:

 

http://photos.robainscough.com/FullScreenSlideShow.aspx?gallery=3572338&mt=Photo

 

Rob

Started with Ohio because its got lots of midsize cities and farmland between it to give good variety. Then Indiana that looked even better to me and then Kentucky to form Ohio river Valley. I am building things like riverboat casino in Evansville, and skyscapers for it now. Using Zmodeler to build it then convert it over in gmax and get into FSX.

For RI, I have the Flightscenery Zone01 (KPVD and few other local airports) reasonably working in FSX. The autogens for the KVPD area is very good so not going to mess that with a photscenery.

 

And I have FT KBOS and Aerosofts Manhattan, KJFK to fly to from KPVD.... I don't have any airport scenery for CT, so I got the MSE 2 for CT (for enroute), Photoscenery without autogens is ok for enroute.

 

I may get Texas for enroute flying..and I already have the MS Dallas and KDFW airport. Need more airport scenery/cities for Texas.

 

I'd like to have something good for NJ and NY around Manhattan.. just those parts.. not the entire state.

 

I just bought the MS 2 RI.. I am going to see if I can merge the photoscenery with the autogen from FlightZone01. Hmmm..I don't think I can.

After all this talking (also in another topic) about MSE v2 (and posting that I don't like photoreal at all) I have to say I feel like giving one state (or part of it) a try LOL ^_^ Which state (or smaller region) really shows off what MSE v2 can do? I suppose that would be a region (v2!) with mountains and not too many cities...? Any suggestions? Just curious... ^_^ I won't mind spending a few bucks just to give it a try.

 

I'd suggest either Vermont or New Hampshire... They have a mix of mountains and some flats, and both states are full 50cm/pixel throughout (some other states have parts which are 1m/pixel and others with a few sections that are 2m/pixel. Delware i believe is 1m/pixel throughout, so states like New Hampshire and Vermont (and many of the other newer titles) are mostly 50cm/pixel for the clearest and sharpest experience... But why I suggest VT or NH is that these are smaller in size, and hence, cheaper in price, but have the quality of scenery you can expect from most of the states in the range.

I've heard no one complain about the prices of Orbx regions. In fact most think they are rather cheap compared to the prices of their airport addons. Still, if you want to have the entire US in Orbx quality (again providing they would offer it all) it would cost you hundreds and hundreds and hundreds dollars also! See? You are simply looking at it the wrong way. ^_^

 

I think a lot depends on what you want to do. For someone who wants to do GA in a limited area, the MegaScenery makes some sense. You just buy one or two states.

 

For someone wanting to fly a tubeliner from Miami to Seattle, not so much. There are less expensive alternatives. For example FS Altitude would seem to be a much less expensive option for these people. At most, they would need a higher resolution for the beginning and end of the trip. But for the journey between at FL36, high resolution just seems like expensive overkill.

I have almost all of the V2 stuff and I'm totally impressed. It's going to be difficult for me to stop buying them all. I like the State of Illinois the best as I usually fly the Chicago to St Louis flight. North Carolina looks impressive too and I now can do MegaScenery Earth V2 scenery flights from Reagan National to Charlotte. So far, PC Aviator has offered me several discounts and I received a 25% discount for most of January that I could use as many times as I wanted. I took advantage of this discount and it was like buying two and getting one free. I think it looks great without autogen and I would leave autogen with flying in the PNW with Orbx/FTX scenery. There are a lot of buildings in the Chicago area that came with the scenery. I swear, coming down for a landing and looking out the pilot window or a wing-view looks very realistic even at 1000 feet.

 

The biggest downside of this scenery IMHO is the installation. Everything must be done manually so that, if you download 16 1GB plus files, you have to first extract each one then manually run 16 setup programs. Once completed, you have to manually place it in the Scenery Library. It would be nice if they had a setup program that would install all 16 files at once and then place an entry into the Scenery Library. Once totally installed, I then delete all of the extracted setup programs and leave the zipped files to save space.

 

If you have the FSDT KORD and run the default weather program with a PMDG aircraft, you will have 12-25 fps while on KORD. After takeoff, the fps increase and I get 45-46 fps flying to KSTL (St Louis). I have payware scenery at St Louis but the fps usually stay above 20. I'm completely happy with this as the sim appears to be fluid and I see little or no stuttering. I also have ProATC-X, XPAX, GSX, AES, and AI Smooth running in the background. I had AS2012 running but saw some freezes and they went away whenever AS2012 was not running. Think it was a simconnect issue or a conflict with ProATC-X. In any case, it's great stuff and I'll probably be buying the rest as it is released.

 

Here I am over Springfield, Illinois (at FL240) making a turn for catching the STAR into St Louis....

 

 

Best regards,

Jim

Wow! ........ that is a fantastic screenshot Jim.... If I've ever seen any screenshot of MegaScenery that demonstrates to people why some of us get so excited about these products, it's that one.

 

It is hard to distinguish that pic from a real photo taken from a real airplane!

 

I fly over nothing but MegaScenery. It's an absolute necessity for me.