Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest

OpenLC demo comparison screenshots (both with FTXG) [CAUTION: LARGE IMAGES]

Recommended Posts

I can't remember having seen any OpenLC demo comparison screenshots so here is one comparison. When you follow various forums you might have noticed not everyone er... knows (or is convinced) that landclass does make a huge difference to FTXG. Well, here is Riga Intl. airport from the top, with FTXG but without the OpenLC demo landclass. Quite repetitive, isn't it? And let's not even mention the realism... (Just search for Riga Intl. on Google maps for the real deal: it doesn't even come close!).

 

9391480293_0d22e5b11f_o.jpg

 

And here is the exact same view but now WITH the OpenLC demo landclass. That looks a LOT better AND more realistic!

 

9391481483_e9fe417675_o.jpg

 

Here is the difference as you would see it out of a plane. Without OpenLC:

 

9391479741_065556a327_o.jpg

 

And with OpenLC.

 

9394252906_5c60e3bbe6_o.jpg

 

In short: OpenLC will be great. wink.png

Share this post


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

I'm guessing you're talking about some of my posts recently where I have raised the issue of too green "desert" textures used in the southwest United States?  Maybe not, but I'll comment anyway.

 

I've been flightsimming since 1985, and I can assure you that I know a lot about how Microsoft Flight Simulator works.  I've used all the landclass products on the market, and I've made some of my own custom landclass for small areas around where I live.  I've also made or modified several airport AFCADs over the years.  I do know a little bit about FSX scenery and landclass.

 

You are correct that landclass can make a huge difference in FSX.  However, textures are just as important.  You can have the most accurate landclass ever developed, but if the textures it calls aren't right, then the result won't look good.  The opposite is also true, i.e. you can have the most beautiful and accurate texture palette, but it won't do a lot of good without decent landclass to apply the right textures in the right places.

 

The bottom line is that it takes both good landclass and good textures to get really good-looking scenery in FSX.  I'm extremely happy that ORBX is providing FTX Global, openLC, its smaller regional scenery, etc.  I have their Australia packs and love them.  I'm also confident that the openLC for North America will make the U.S. Southwest look a lot more realistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


You are correct that landclass can make a huge difference in FSX. However, textures are just as important. You can have the most accurate landclass ever developed, but if the textures it calls aren't right, then the result won't look good. The opposite is also true, i.e. you can have the most beautiful and accurate texture palette, but it won't do a lot of good without decent landclass to apply the right textures in the right places.

 

I don't have the product but, in fairness, my guess is that FSX shared textures in many places and the side effect is that places that should not have been arid were arid.  When Orbx made their decisions to straiten out some things they got caught with the choice to make arid areas look arid or to make places that should not be arid less arid.  Looks like they chose the latter at the expense of the 'greens'  I do suspect that the LC project will fix it...at least it may. 

 

My only issue now is that I have a sick feeling in my stomach after reading all the threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing you're talking about some of my posts recently where I have raised the issue of too green "desert" textures used in the southwest United States? Maybe not, but I'll comment anyway.

 

No, that was not the case because I understand your problem and I also think it has to do with what Gregg said. I posted elsewhere that Orbx defenitely and clearly (and most often luckily) changed some textures rather drastically. I know this because my home country, the Netherlands, looked like Southern England with FSX default textures while with the FTXG and the SAME landclass it now actually looks (a lot more) like it should! Completely differend kinds of fields! Great! But the problem of course is that various textures are used in various locations so while this changed solved the problem in the Netherlands, it might well have caused a new problem elsewhere.

 

Apart from that... it IS of course very possible that Orbx made a mistake while editing one of many files... Who knows they accidently switched the files for 'your' region. On the other hand: the post from JV about the DX10 problem makes it clear that when a mistake has been made, they don't mind telling us...

 

Anyway, my post wasn't made with you in my mind but with those people who don't know anything about landclass. ^_^ (I haven't read so many posts about landclass in my life as I did the last few weeks, I think... :P )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, big difference it makes without the OpenLC. I'm looking forward to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using a number of 3rd party landclass at the moment and Global blows me away, looking forward to OpenLC as they become available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who makes a good LC for the Asia Region since UTX doesn't cover it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting comparison shots! Thanks Jeroen.

Wow, what a difference...bring those expectant files on...

 

+1 on the 'thanks'!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites