Scenery cost

[Q_flyer 766]

It's more important to me that I have accurate scenery to fly over, then tons of details while taxiing.

 

Excellent point :cool:

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

 

 

it's more important to me that I have accurate scenery to fly over, then tons of details while taxiing.

 

Seconded.

[IAF747 8]

Some really valid points brought up in this thread, but indeed patience is a virtue. Not just with scenery either; there's often great sales on most other addons as well.

 

I generally find that as pretty as the big payware airports are, I can do without them when there happens to be a half-decent freeware scenery available, or at the least, a realistic afcad that gives me a good approximation of taxiways and parking. I do have a few though, bought when on-sale. :lol:

 

I tend to skip out on the Orbx GA airports as well - I have the freeware ones on offer from them, and as pretty as they are, they are pretty demanding on the system. Considering that and the cost, I prefer to give them a miss. I find that the Orbx regions I have (PNW, PFJ, NRM, SAK) upgrade many of the default smaller airports to a very useable level anyways. Some of them are really quite good compared to FSX default.

 

For me, I would have to rank the importance of, and therefore value of, scenery as such:

 

Mesh, accurate roads & coastlines, landclass, textures, airports.

 

Therefore, payware addon airports tend to fall into last place - it's more important to me that I have accurate scenery to fly over, then tons of details while taxiing.

 

I differ. When flying big jets at airports you want realism. You want to close the doors on the aircraft, Ali to the engineer and cabin crew to secure all doors etc....pushback... Once in cruise there is only cloud watching with monitoring your FMC and A/P.

 

It is one reason Flytampa has done so well. I told them about Sydney YSSY and the magnificent approach from the North north west to land at YSSY. You get one of the best views of the CBD of Sydney (stunning to say the least) and to experience this on approach puts you right there in the action.

 

For example, EDDP (payware by Aerosoft) has an awesome runway. Seeing that detail from a payware cockpit really builds realism. There is a video someone produced of app and landing at EDDP. It looks so real I thought it was real.......

 

Fair enough if you like getting close to your ground scenery in flight, but that is usually for tour operators and crop sprayers. I guess everyone has a different taste for flying. No one is the same. I love flying props as well but not that close to the ground. The higher the better.

[Manny 1,293]

You need both.. a Balance

 

I agree, enroute is important. I now have FSAltitude for that..I wish, FSaltitude had slightly better resolution than what they currently have..

 

But then imagine landing in La Guardia Rwy13 flying over the Hudson with Aerosofts Manhatten to the right... Its fantastic!

 

I love FLy Tampas Kai Tak and Dubai all because of the approach scenery in all its detail and glory.

 

FLY TAMPA is #1 in my books.

 

Same with San Diego...I have a coup,e of addons for SanDiego, city and the few othes including Mega scnery So cal with autogen... its one of fav approaches.

[IAF747 8]

Flytampa is so good because they prepare all their bitmap files to the right ones where they will work with the video cards.

 

But they make huge amazing sceneries, now working on Sydney which will be amazing as YSSY approach you literally fly past the CBD......look at a video on YouTube of an approach to Sydney on one of the 16 left or right runways......check out the city views!!

[Manny 1,293]

is Fly Tampa going to give a Dubai treatment for Sydney including the city? Anyone knows?

 

Although I own Orbx Australia.. I don't fly in that part of the world...but if FT gives us a Dubai treatment, then I'd have to get all the OZ stuff from Orbx and NZ and vest n that part of the world... Hmmm... 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fb1AQ5hVV6k

[IAF747 8]

is Fly Tampa going to give a Dubai treatment for Sydney including the city? Anyone knows?

 

Although I own Orbx Australia.. I don't fly in that part of the world...but if FT gives us a Dubai treatment, then I'd have to get all the OZ stuff from Orbx and NZ and vest n that part of the world... Hmmm...

 

Yes I am 99.9% sure that it is based on the information I have to hand.

 

Mainly more so because I am the one that pushed for it.

 

If you have ever driven from the Airport to the city you will know how close it is. But it is a spectacular place to visit, when you fly in you see spectacular then you visit spectacular then you depart spectacular......even at night it is an awesome sight with all the lights! Just as long as you don't go in Earth Hour when all the greens and do gooders want to turn all the lights off for an hour.....

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

Impressive vid.  If they do the same treatment they did in Hong Kong, I'm in.

[tttocs 301]

 

 

Therefore, payware addon airports tend to fall into last place - it's more important to me that I have accurate scenery to fly over, then tons of details while taxiing.

 

I appreciate what you're saying, but it's not so hard and fast for me.

 

The other day, I flew IFR from KORS (Orcas Island, WA) to KSFF (Felts in Spokane WA) in the piston Duke.  Orbx territory all the way, so good scenery, and a payware airport at each end, in this case both Orbx as well.  The flight was mostly IMC or above the deck, so about the only time I saw my expensive scenery was at each end.  Having to fly from Generics-ville airport to Generics-ville airprt takes away from the experience for me.  Add in the fact that I'm a cold'n'dark to cold'n'dark person and the airport suddenly becomes more important - if you fly complete flights, you spend a fair bit of time at airports.  If you're a tube guy - even more so.  In this specific case, it was all about the destinations being good, as en-route was mostly about clouds.  I'll also confess to being a bit of an airport junky IRL.  The atmosphere of a good airport is a big part of aviation for me.

 

On the other hand, a route flown shortly before that in a Cessna 210 was VFR pilotage using sectionals and local knowledge (no navaids or GPS, thanks, though I did watch the terrain page on the RXP 530 for fun) from KSBS (Steamboat Springs, CO) to KSAF (Santa Fe, NM), taking a winding route over passes and up and down mountain valleys with MS Earth v2 CO and NM.  The airports were generic (and a bit depressing as a consequence) but the majority of the flight was amazing and good scenery quality was critical to the way the en-route part of the flight was conducted.

 

So which do I think is most important - regional scenery or airports?  Yes.  :rolleyes:

 

Indeed patience and time have helped round out the ever-expanding collection.

 

Scott

[z06z33 763]

I appreciate what you're saying, but it's not so hard and fast for me.

 

The other day, I flew IFR from KORS (Orcas Island, WA) to KSFF (Felts in Spokane WA) in the piston Duke.  Orbx territory all the way, so good scenery, and a payware airport at each end, in this case both Orbx as well.  The flight was mostly IMC or above the deck, so about the only time I saw my expensive scenery was at each end.  Having to fly from Generics-ville airport to Generics-ville airprt takes away from the experience for me.  Add in the fact that I'm a cold'n'dark to cold'n'dark person and the airport suddenly becomes more important - if you fly complete flights, you spend a fair bit of time at airports.  If you're a tube guy - even more so.  In this specific case, it was all about the destinations being good, as en-route was mostly about clouds.  I'll also confess to being a bit of an airport junky IRL.  The atmosphere of a good airport is a big part of aviation for me.

 

On the other hand, a route flown shortly before that in a Cessna 210 was VFR pilotage using sectionals and local knowledge (no navaids or GPS, thanks, though I did watch the terrain page on the RXP 530 for fun) from KSBS (Steamboat Springs, CO) to KSAF (Santa Fe, NM), taking a winding route over passes and up and down mountain valleys with MS Earth v2 CO and NM.  The airports were generic (and a bit depressing as a consequence) but the majority of the flight was amazing and good scenery quality was critical to the way the en-route part of the flight was conducted.

 

So which do I think is most important - regional scenery or airports?  Yes.  :rolleyes:

 

Indeed patience and time have helped round out the ever-expanding collection.

 

Scott

quite true I don't like flying to stock airports at all! luckly all my GA flying is in and around the PNW so Orbx covers it all and FTX has done a good job of upgrading airports and then I also have the demo of instant scenery and make alot of scenry using orbx objects (For Personal use only)

[Jimmy RFR 406]

 

 

So which do I think is most important - regional scenery or airports? Yes. :rolleyes:

 

Well put!

 

I do agree that it depends on what you're flying as well as where you're flying to.  For small little airfields, Orbx has done a very fine job in sprucing up all the default strips in the regions they cover - I find them quite adequate for the most part, and in some cases they do an extremely fine job of representing the airfield.  However, for bigger airports I can agree that you do need something over pure default - they can be pretty depressing otherwise!