Anyone purchased this product yet? How are the frames? How does it compare to the Aerosoft Manhattan?

 

 

I have it. It is very impressive scenery. A little taxing on frames, but still runs smoothly on my machine. I have had some issues with segments of the scenery going white until I get to the spot. I've been under the weather for a couple of weeks so I haven't done any real checking into the problem. I got it on sale. It really is worthwhile  scenery. I have the Aerosoft Manhattan in FS2004. It is superior to that.

Very very tempting. I spent lots and lots of time tweaking FSX back in the day for Aerosofts ManhattanX but long ago gave up because of the floating buildings issue. If this scenery has nothing like that going on, then its pretty much a sure purchase.

Very very tempting. I spent lots and lots of time tweaking FSX back in the day for Aerosofts ManhattanX but long ago gave up because of the floating buildings issue. If this scenery has nothing like that going on, then its pretty much a sure purchase.

No that kind of issues.

My FPS are fine, but VAS is the issue.  The designer now has a medium resolution and a high resolution option for installing, but don't expect to combine the scenery with complex add-ons like PMDG because VAS will still run out.  Yet another reason FSX needed a 64-bit patch.

Luis points out the only issue I've come across so far when reading the reviews. The dreaded oom risk might even have gained weight with the new scenery. And there's no doubt that DD puts out great stuff and supports it well.

 

So maybe the only enjoyment then comes from using light planes to explore the detail but leaving the airliners out. :mellow: Showing some age.

Comparing the two is not exactly apples to apples. The Drzewiecki Designs attempts to model all of NYC, whereas Aerosoft's Manhattan X limits itself to the island of Manhattan. They use different approaches to model the many, many buildings and features of this urban area. The differences will be apparent soon. Which you prefer will depend on the purpose for which you intend to fly the area.

 

Manhattan X does a much better job of modeling individual buildings and 3D features. For instance, the WTC memorial in Manhattan X looks at any altitude, whether at 3 feet or 30,000. In Drzewiecki Designs the memorial looks a little better at altitude because it's photo real. But close to the surface it is a blurred 2D image as with most photo real scenery. While Manhattan X is limited to only Manhattan, I found it to be more appealing visually and accurate in color and details.

 

Drzewiecki Designs models the whole metropolitan area, not just Manhattan. Accurate buildings are visible everywhere. For overflying the area at 3,000 ft. and above it is very appealing. I saw no moving traffic in Drzewiecki Designs on the roads or water. The buildings are gray in appearance and details are blurred when close to them. I thought that The Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island look okay though the colors aren't as vivid as Aerosoft's Manhattan X’s depiction of the islands. There are 3D people on the Drzewiecki Designs version which made it look a bit more alive as it usually in in real life. Overall the area just didn't "pop" for me as it did for Aerosoft's Manhattan X.

 

I activated both in the scenery library placing Manhattan X above Drzewiecki Designs' New York City X. It seems to work to give Aerosoft's Manhattan X and the rest of the metro area with Drzewiecki Designs New York City X. For me, I like the advantages of having both products and will likely keep them both active. Aerosoft's Manhattan X is $24USD and Drzewiecki Designs New York X is $33USD. If flying NYC is really you're thing then $57USD is not too bad of a purchase considering the immense amount of work that had to be done to create these products. I give kudos to both companies for their work and effort. No matter which option you choose you shouldn't get that ripped off feeling that we all get sometimes from FSX purchases.

 

Finally, in the images below are a couple of comparison screen shots. The first is from Manhattan looking east towards Queens. Conversely, the second is taking from Queens looking west towards Manhattan.

 

 

 

 

 

This is an old subject, but I wonder if P3D handles these scenery's better now, than FSX could then.

I have both the Aerosoft Manhattan X and Drzewiecki Designs New York City X installed in FSX Acceleration SP2. Also, Aerosoft Manhattan for FS2004.

Aerosoft Manhattan X no issues so far. DD NYC X if installed with default (high Resolution) if gives me VAS and FSX closes due to OOM. Reinstalling the DD with "Lite Building and Ground" there is no VAS so far but very poor resolution. DD setup adds/changes to FSX.cfg a line TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=4096 which I think is one of the trouble making OOM killing the sim. I would be more than happy to learn how to transfer the updated WTC building from DD NYC X to Aerosoft Manhattan X. For right now, I had to deactivate DD to enjoy Manhattan X.

FSX needs 64-bit patch to make DD NYC X to work as expected.

6 hours ago, trisho0 said:

I have both the Aerosoft Manhattan X and Drzewiecki Designs New York City X installed in FSX Acceleration SP2. Also, Aerosoft Manhattan for FS2004.

Not sure the reason to did up an almost 4 year old thread since I'm sure the original posters have already made a decision on whether to purchase or not. Feel free to start a new discussion when multiple years have passed since a topic has started.