OK, I have been going back and forth with this topic and I think it's time to ask for some advice.

I started collecting the ORBX scenery sets and although there is a slight framerate hit on my system compared to the default scenery, it is quite impressive. I have also heard a lot about MegaScenery Earth and see that they are putting out each state at quite a fast rate. My biggest complaint with ORBX is that I will be too old to see my monitor by the time they complete the whole U.S, and they started in the West and I live in Pennsylvania.

 

What I also like about ORBX is that all seasons are covered and quite nicely with subtle changes. My biggest complaint with MegaScenery is that there is only one season. I live in the Northeast and we have 4 seasons, and unless you always fly in Texas, California, or Florida, I can't see paying for all those states and having to see green all year round while it is snowing heavily and 20 deg. F outside my home. I like the idea of having the same weather in FSX that I have in the real world.  (It would be nice if they could create some utility that would alter texture colors at the right times of the year for certain states if that's possible.)

 

There seems to be pros and cons with both choices. I also read in a post above that flying the PMDG NGX over the MegaScenery with more than one state active causes problems with something called VAS and that only one state should be active at a time. Also that any flying under 2000 ft is too blurry.  Any advice will be greatly appreciated whether I continue with ORBX or begin MS.  Thanks.  Tom

Orbx looks better.

 

Megascenery is real.

 

Depends what you're after. Me, i'm a photoscenery fan, but i do enjoy a bit of orbx when i'm in a low and slow mood.

 

Suggest trying some sort of photoscenery - eg the nl2000 freeware - if you dont know what this type of product is about.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Heya Flaps, 

 

   My understanding is that the main distinction between MegaScenery and Orbx is photorealistic versus autogen. MS looks really good from high up, but "flattens" as you get close. Orbx, on the other hand, looks *really* good up close (i.e., GA aircraft @ 5,000 or below).

 

   Personally, I don't like photorealism - I much prefer the 3D look of autogen, but then again, I fly low and slow. And I am a confirmed Orbx fanboi...  

 

JKH

Photoscenery looks like crap below about 3,000AGL.

Considering my favorite parts of a flight are the climbout and approach, I just can't be immersed by flat, usually dull looking, non-dynamic scenery.

I much prefer the 3d look of Orbx and while you can't go see your house per say, road placement and landclass are spot on so true VFR is easily doable.

Also, ORBX New England Maritimes looks like the next US scenery after Northern California. I'm hoping they start working their way down the Atlantic coast after that.

I also read in a post above that flying the PMDG NGX over the MegaScenery with more than one state active causes problems with something called VAS and that only one state should be active at a time.

I think it only becomes a problem if you have ALOT of them active. I've done flights in the NGX from Florida to New York and Chicago with all states enroute active with no VAS issues. If you have 30+ active then you might have problems.

Orbx is good,and I got a lot of it, but I do like to know that what is under me is real.  That is part of the fascination for me, so I do like MegaScenery v.2 very much.

They are having a 30% off sale through this weekend, so just bought Nevada and Wyoming.  I may go back and get the Dakotas before it's over. 

Apples and oranges, really... Orbx is landclass scenery with autogen and it gives the best impression of reality, it sometimes makes you feel you are really there (though sometimes totally NOT!), while MSE is photoreal and it gives you reality but completely flat and completely frozen in time. I personally never have the idea I am really there: I always get the idea I am flying above Google Maps.

I prefer Orbx but I would prefer photoreal Orbx. The scenery from Earth Simulations for instance is what I would prefer but those regions are WAY too small and it will cost too much money and hard disk space to get larger regions done like that. Unfortunately. But well, FSX is ALL about compromise and for me Orbx offers the best compromise right now. Specially when flying GA (low and slow).

At 1500 agl Mega scenery looks fine and does not take a hit on fps hit like Orbx scenery can do. Seasons maybe a downside, but with i5 and i7 overclocking to max not necessary. Autogen most times looks off and is crappy. Orbx and MSE should compliment each other think most Orbx items look good

At 1500 agl Mega scenery looks fine

 

It may look fine to you but to me MSE (or any photoreal) doesn't even look fine at 4500 ft... You will STILL see a city is completely FLAT! It just looks odd no matter what. When you circle around a city you should see everything change because you are looking at the other side of buildings and things are hidden behind each other or suddely come into vision. With photoreal none of this happens: no matter where you are around the city, you will see the exact same picture which is completely unrealistic. Add to that the odd perspective you see when you look at things from the 'wrong' angle (any angle that was not the angle the pictures were taken from) and you end up with something I just can't get used to, even though I LOVE the fact that what you see is what's really there (well, at least when the pictures were taken). 

 

Of course this is all very subjective and personal because some can't stand scenery like Orbx and even like photoreal during landing.

 

Don't get me wrong: I am not saying Orbx (or any other land class addon) is perfect: the autogen sometimes sticks out horribly and I absolutely hate it how city textures are suddenly cut off or how roads go right through houses... but in the end the overall feeling of being there I get above Orbx scenery makes it my favorite. We still got a long long long long way to go though before I will be entirely happy with a flight sim...

Thanks for the advice guys. You all have some valid and interesting points. I think I may get just Florida to satisfy my curiosity  since it is mostly flat anyway and probably looks the same in any season. Other than that I will probably continue with ORBX hoping they eventually get to my area.  Tom

I tried both and my conclusion is definite. Don't spend your hard-earned cash on MegaScenery. It's not even nearly as immersive as orbx. You're flying above some mesh and textures. No buildings, no traffic and it looks crappy from low altitudes. Orbx is just MILES, miles ahead.

I prefer Orbx but I would prefer photoreal Orbx.

 

No joke.  I keep toying with the idea of trying to put Orbx .agn files with MSEII.  I use Instant Scenery to add trees and buildings to photoreal...it is amazing how much easier it is to get a sense for your altitude when you have trees for perspective.  So, as much as I absolutely love photoreal, I can't deal with barren, flat cities and land.  While Orbx looks incredibly boring above 10,000, at least the landings aren't weird.

It is of course purely a personal thing. However, for me, I find it  a very easy choice. I prefer Orbx wherever I fly GA, but Megascenery and/or photoscenery is great when flying over deserts and mountains with little or no autogen, or when flying up high in the NGX or similar.

Have both - like both - use both.  Both have advantages - both have disadvantages (water-masking in MSE2 comes to mind).   I can get stunning immersion with both.  You can add detailed cities and airports to work with MSE2.  Las Vegas, Miami and Los Angeles come to mind.  I combine MSE and MSE2 to get added autogen and night textures.  I use Orbx in areas I do not have "photoreal". 

 

Funny, both products use photoreal scenery just that Orbx tiles theirs (and adds autogen and night textures).   You can fly realistically with Orbx 100% of the time of day and all seasons.  You can only realistically fly MSE  one season and only 25% of the day, as you lose dawn, dusk and night textures.

 

I  would grab one state in MSE2 and then grab the freeware area for Orbx, like their PNW trial area and you can come to your own conclusions.  Or get a state where you already have add-ons you can apply.  I would double-think Florida unless that is your home state.  Flat?  It is VERY flat as you may know.  I would grab a state that reveals MSE in a better light, say Colorado or Utah.