I think the biggest problem with this release is managing one's own expectations of what it can do without bespoke landclass. This product is the proverbial game of two halves, in that the custom landclass packages that will follow will sharpen some of these rough edges out, and for a very reasonable price, all things considered.

 

Overall I'd say FTXG is a winner accepting, as one always should with a breakthrough product, that this is Day One and there's a lot more to come from this package. It's a huge improvement over default, but not perfect. To be fair, Orbx has been exceptionally transparent about that.

 

I really wasn't expecting "miracles", and believe I have, and had, a pretty fair understanding and expectation of what FTX-G would provide and that OpenLC would be the next step in this ongoing improvement of FSX display scenery, and overall I think its an excellent start and a great upgrade, but with an issue apparently this pervasive (there is a growing list of "too green areas" on the ORBX forums), due to the shortcomings of the FSX base land class implementation, I think a few concrete examples of what you would see after install were in order - all the prelim screenshots didn't even hint at this initial shortcoming, and the vague references to FTX-G "not being magic" made on ORBX forums were a little thin on concrete details - but hey, I bought in and I like it, just hoping OpenLC will indeed clean it up some...

Let's see what OrbX comes up with in terms of the free updates, as well.  It is after all 24 hours after release.

Don't have a dog in this, but just to put things on a fair basis, FSX does in fact have special textures for this area, called North America Southwest, region C.  The area around grand canyon, has default landclass of 22 cool conifer forest, 40 Cool grass and shrubs, 47 Dry woody scrub, and 51 Semi-desert shrubs.  This landclass in turn uses texture set 24c, 9c, 51c, and 3c respectively (from scenery\world\texture), except in areas with steep slope there is landclass sloped substitution of 146 desert rock texture set 81c or 148 non-mountain rock texture set 80c.  So that is what FTX-G should be using, unless they have also supplied modified landclass, regions, or control file lclookup.bgl with terrain,cfg.

 

It would be helpful if user with knowledge of FSX landclass could advise exactly what FTX-G is doing in this area.

 

scott s.

.

molleh nice shots I would be happy with that but I too am seeing the green crap lol

So, I switched back momentarily to FSX default, and while this scenery won't win any awards, at least the color palate looks closer to the real world:

 

versus

 

 

Don't get me wrong, I am on board with FTX-G and waiting to see how it all turns out - just was taken back a bit that desert/dry/arid areas are getting the "green treatment"

They will fix any problem areas but nice to make them aware of it.

So, I switched back momentarily to FSX default, and while this scenery won't win any awards, at least the color palate looks closer to the real world:

 

versus

 

 

Don't get me wrong, I am on board with FTX-G and waiting to see how it all turns out - just was taken back a bit that desert/dry/arid areas are getting the "green treatment"

 

 

did you try the Ozx airport and photoscenery that includes Holger Mesh?  I just went there using it and I love it.

 

 

did you try the Ozx airport and photoscenery that includes Holger Mesh? I just went there using it and I love it.

 

Got it downloaded and getting ready to install it in conjunction with stuffing the FTX-G textures back in for the surrounding area - looking forward to seeing it!

Here is a few shots of Holger KGCN with GEX installed. Also one with only GEX. Using SceneryTech LC

Here is a few shots of Holger KGCN with GEX installed. Also one with only GEX. Using SceneryTech LC

 

Very nice indeed - that's what I am aiming for, those last 2 are aces!  :Applause:

Very nice indeed - that's what I am aiming for, those last 2 are aces!  :Applause:

I think GEX seems to do the dry areas better. But they fall down in the green areas like France and Germany. Spain North Africa and Middle East  looks great  with GEX.

Don't have a dog in this, but just to put things on a fair basis, FSX does in fact have special textures for this area, called North America Southwest, region C.  The area around grand canyon, has default landclass of 22 cool conifer forest, 40 Cool grass and shrubs, 47 Dry woody scrub, and 51 Semi-desert shrubs.  This landclass in turn uses texture set 24c, 9c, 51c, and 3c respectively (from scenery\world\texture), except in areas with steep slope there is landclass sloped substitution of 146 desert rock texture set 81c or 148 non-mountain rock texture set 80c.  So that is what FTX-G should be using, unless they have also supplied modified landclass, regions, or control file lclookup.bgl with terrain,cfg.

 

It would be helpful if user with knowledge of FSX landclass could advise exactly what FTX-G is doing in this area.

 

scott s.

.

 

You're right.  There is an FSX region just for this area, which means that specific textures particular to the Southwest U.S. can be called. 

 

ORBX should modify the landclass for this area to ensure that a more desert-like texture gets called, or modify the texture that's currently being called, that is, if doing this doesn't then mess up other parts of the world.  Modifying the landclass would seem to be the best solution here.  They did it for SE Asia so they could do it here and in a few other areas as well.

Man, all those shots make me glad Im using Blue Sky photo for the Grand Canyon and the Southwest....

 

http://www.blueskyscenery.com/AZ.html

 

 

 

 

 

By the way sometimes Scenerytech landclasses can cause unexpected results with FTX Global.

 

 

Grand Canyon with default landclass & FTX Global, horrible I know:

 

 

With Scenerytech, quite okay: 

 

In this case you can see custom Landclass working well with FTX Global improving things a lot.

 

But then with Scenerytech Asia, near Kabul, just horrible (compare to actual real life colours in the lower part of the picture:

 

 

 

Then without Scenerytech, with default landclass, quite okay:

 

 

 

Conclusion: Really the only solution for these green texture problems will be OpenLC packs that are designed to work perfectly with FTX Global and use just the right textures for different areas. Existing landclasses like Scenerytech might sometimes cause ugly results as they are designed to work with Default FSX & possibly GEX which have some of the textures with very different look.

 

And yeah sure for Grand Canyon photoreal is the way to go but this problem of course does exist in areas with no photoreal coverage too.

Man, all those shots make me glad Im using Blue Sky photo for the Grand Canyon and the Southwest....

 

http://www.blueskyscenery.com/AZ.html

 

GC1.jpg

 

GC2.jpg

Exactly!!! I wish that something like FTXG could be that one stop solution to getting great scenery everywhere. But, when you define great as being pictures like these where you are seeing what is actually there and that incredible range of colors that only nature can produce, FTXG just can't come anywhere close!!! It's not even in the same league as far as I'm concerned. I have been making photoreal scenery myself for the past 6 months or so now for Europe. I only have a small area complete and still have a long way to go. I was hoping maybe FTXG would look so good that I wouldn't care to continue the task of creating photo real. But, after seeing all the pics posted, for me photo real still is the only thing close to real!!! It still is the only scenery that can make you believe you are actually flying over the real thing. I have yet to see a user pic of FTXG that has blown me away the way pics like these have.

 

***Disclaimer - yes I know of the shortcomings of photo real too and there is always the argument the other way - that flat is not real. That it's only one season(I make two seasons though in mine, winter and summer), that it's taken at only one time in the day so shadows are off, etc. It's all how we each define what looks real.