Sign in to follow this  
oqvist

Real or surreal (the pros and cons of photographic scenery)

Recommended Posts

I've been considering purchasing the Pacific Northwest Megascenery if it ever gets released (since it covers the area where I live), but I'm not sure if I really like flying around the satellite scenery. It just feels too much like you are flying over a photograph sometimes (I own the Southern California version). Also, the load times are a bit of a killer, and texture loading during flight can be problematic.For me, the default scenery with a few enhancements is more immersive, and the autogen gives a good sense of reality and speed at low altitude.With add-ons like the upcoming FSGenesis "Roads, Streams, Rails, Utilities", the default scenery gets overlaid with accurate VFR references. I also use the FSGenesis landclass, which gives me a pretty good representation of the urban sprawl in my flying areas.Add-on's like Holger's "US North Cascades Mountains and Northwest Washington Coast" provide accurate coastlines, lakes, rivers, streams, roads, railroads, and power lines over a small area. I understand that Holger is also working with FSGenesis now, and I'm hoping that they are going to be releasing accurate coastline data for large areas, since it makes a big difference. I have a hard time looking at those simple, pointy default coastlines after flying around Holger's scenery and the payware Orcas Island.So, I guess I prefer the surreal over the real.However ... that said, I keep looking at the screenshots of the England VFR scenery and it looks really good. If they ever come out with Ireland I'd probably buy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Minor correction to my post above ... Holger is working on a project for FSAddon, not FSGenesis ... I can't wait to see what he's been doing, as his scenery for the North Cascades is the best thing since sliced bread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you, Jimmy.It's just like you say, unless the photographic scenery has been enhanced with matching autogen as well, it's like flying over well, a photograph. It does get better as you get higher, but if you prefer to go low and slow, I think the landclass tiling/autogen combo gives a better feel for height and speed, and any repetitive patterns are less noticable when you are low.Best,Martijn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too agree with Jimmy. In addition to his points, I would also miss night lighting and seasonal textures. With the kind of addons he mentions and the default textures I certainly find it immersive. Incidenatally, for those who do like photoreal textures, I think the Visualflight textures for England are hard to beat. Just one other thing. I just bought VFR terrain from 'Visualflight'which is a combination of very detailed mesh (the most detailed available for MSFS) *and* accurate coastlines (for England), so accurate in fact, that it picks out harbours, piers and the like. In my view this really is a breathtaking addition.....as long as you fly over England though! best wishes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the only benefit of Photorealistic scenery is the higher frame rate really. But then if you go to fast it start to blur instead. But I found landclasses to be pretty repetitive at areas and that photorealistic scenery usually helps against. Though I do preferr landclasses and autogen instead.

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