I guess its some automated process of building these sceneries, and there is no automated process than can make highly accurate sceneries, if you want it to match real world, you need to place all things by hand.

 

Yep, that is sadly the truth.

 

The landclass products offers mostly a placebo effect by adding more variety, but they don't significantly improve the geographic accuracy. For that you will need products like Ultimate Terrain, ORBX and DEX - which aren't perfect, but much much better.

I also use SceneryTech or XClass layered in with UTX for the US in non Orbx, non photo areas. Each seems to have strengths and weaknesses in certain areas, so like others I recommend getting both and switching as appropriate. One or the other is almost always better than just UTX in non-urban areas.

 

Scott

The truth is - UTX + SceneryTech + FTX Global = Nirvana. Can't wait.

Yes, not sure if they are very good value for Europe or the US, but they work great for less well covered areas like Africa and Asia. They get rid of much of the "desert" left by MS in those places. Can't wait to cover it with FTX Global and finally those places could become really interesting to fly.

 

The landclass products offers mostly a placebo effect by adding more variety, but they don't significantly improve the geographic accuracy.

 

I wouldn't call it a "placebo effect", as each of these landclass products do something and have noteable differences. All of them are, of course, approximations with limits. Some seem more subjectively correct in some areas, others in others. I consider UTX/GEX/plus additional landclass my 3rd tier scenery, behind Orbx and photo, but it's still better than default. UTX in particular makes huge improvements over default roads, rivers and so on.

 

scott

I wouldn't call it a "placebo effect", as each of these landclass products do something and have noteable differences. All of them are, of course, approximations with limits. Some seem more subjectively correct in some areas, others in others. I consider UTX/GEX/plus additional landclass my 3rd tier scenery, behind Orbx and photo, but it's still better than default. UTX in particular makes huge improvements over default roads, rivers and so on.

 

scott

 

Well I would call it "placebo" as they off more of a graphical upgrade than a geographical upgrade. Before I did extensive tests myself I had always taken peoples word for how good they were. Now I know differently, and of course I should know better than just take someones word for it. In fact, the default Prepar3D scenery is just as good, and even better in places, leaving these products obsolete.

 

UTX is as we all know not just a landclass product and are in a league of their own in terms of accuracy/coverage/price.

Well I would call it "placebo" as they off more of a graphical upgrade than a geographical upgrade

 

A placebo doesn't do anything. These do. Whether they do the right thing or not is another question. I've also looked at them extensively, in direct A/B/C comparisons. Each makes some areas I tested (and have flown IRL) subjectively better and some worse when used in conjuction with GEX and UTX. They're small enough, cheap enough and easy enough to deal with that I use them as an adjunct to other pieces. I am NOT gonzo over them, but they do offer some advantages in areas where you don't have other, more custom products.

 

Scott

Well, its not about what's subjectively better, but what's geographically more precise, and the fact is most landclass products are not precise enough.

A placebo doesn't do anything. These do. Whether they do the right thing or not is another question. I've also looked at them extensively, in direct A/B/C comparisons. Each makes some areas I tested (and have flown IRL) subjectively better and some worse when used in conjuction with GEX and UTX. They're small enough, cheap enough and easy enough to deal with that I use them as an adjunct to other pieces. I am NOT gonzo over them, but they do offer some advantages in areas where you don't have other, more custom products.

 

Scott

 

A placebo fools people into thinking it does something, when in fact it doesn't, apart from maybe the placebo effect.

 

They're small and chap alright, and as long as people are happy with them that's all that matters.

 

Fore those interested though, it is also nice to know what they do and don't. Seeing how differently XClass and SceneryTech are it makes me wonder if it is the source data and/or the processing of the data that limits them from being more accurate and consistent.

Well, its not about what's subjectively better, but what's geographically more precise, and the fact is most landclass products are not precise enough.

 

I'm sorta in the position here of arguing for something I'm not that fond of, but...

 

What do you mean "precise enough"? Precise enough for what? What are your expectations from a low-cost, large coverage landclass product?

 

I'd love to have all the areas I fly completely covered by super-accurate, hand optimized scenery. That's both expensive and not available in all areas. So, I compromise. My second choice is good photo - also potentially expensive and not available in all areas or lacking in specific quality issues and also compromised in other ways - seasons, night, low level quality, airport integration issues.. Another level of compromises. My third choice is more generic landclass, but hopefully still better than defaults. And so on... I don't expect these 3rd tier products to be incredibly precise, particularly at their price-points. If they help in some areas great. I think they do in some. Nothing more.

 

A placebo fools people into thinking it does something, when in fact it doesn't, apart from maybe the placebo effect.

 

And again, these landclass products really DO something. The issue is that they don't always do the right thing in the right place. That's not a placebo effect.

 

I completely agree that people should look to see how differently each can portray an area. I found it a very interesting exercise to do A/B/C comparisons between Scenerytech, Xclass and default (well, default/UTX) in areas I've extensively flown. Again, what I found was that in some areas Scenerytech was closer to what I know an area to be like, in some places Xclass was and in others none of the above. NONE of these get it perfect, or are right in all geographical regions, but they're easy to switch out and that's why I spent the few bucks to have 'em.

 

I'm certainly not recommending one or the other as any sort of cure-all or replacment for more precise solutions.

 

Scott

Its just a small talk :smile:

 

Anyhow, I think its better to have default than non precise scenery. I do not see reason to buy landclass scenery just to change look of region, no matter if its accurate or not.

 

I'm sorta in the position here of arguing for something I'm not that fond of, but...

 

What do you mean "precise enough"? Precise enough for what? What are your expectations from a low-cost, large coverage landclass product?

 

I expect them to be on par with or better than freeware landclass (Check out Norway Scenic X and Finland X for nice freeware products with excellent landclass). If you look at my review you can see that FSX, P3D, XClass, SceneryTech and Ultimate Terrain does different things with the exact same areas, and for each area I tested there was at least one product that did it justice. So realistically a landclass product should be able to be accurate consistently within the boundaries of the default landclass grid and texture selection.

 

You can't compare Fscene and Scenerytech. One is a ground replacement textures (and in a very low quality), second is a landclass definitions.

 

I always confuse Fscenery and UTX, although I have both.

 

Henri

I already have UTX Europe installed and just bought SceneryTech EU after reading this and some other threads suggesting SceneryTech will be a good mix together with UTX.

 

Have one question though right after starting the installation program for SceneryTech EU, there are two options I don't know if I should choose or not. They are:

 

'Install improved slope landclass (lclookup.bgl)'

'Installed tweaked heavy winter textures'

 

Reading in the doc for SceneryTech EU as I understand it these options/features are recommended but they also say they can mess up things for other addons you might have installed.

 

In short other addons I have installed are:

 

GEX

UTX

FS Genesis Mesh (and will be replaced with FS Global Ultimate next week)

AS2012 textures (but only clouds, sky and moon textures)

About 25 airport sceneries mostly from Aerosoft but also from FSDT, UK2000, FlyTampa, Eiresim, Scansim

 

Thanks in advance for any input if I should choose these options or not during the ScneryTech installation.

All info you need is here Richard http://www.simforums.com/forums/landclass-and-how-it-effects-what-you-see_topic24965&SID=2490190bd97c722fc2c668332zdz68141435185.html

 

Also take note on where to place in scenery Lib.