Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
texan1962

Which is better? ORBX or Blue Sky Scenery

Recommended Posts

Under 100 feet it would have to be ORBX. Photoscenery is not great that low.


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Down low, and at night, Orbx can't be beat. Photoscenery does look great from the flight levels. Orbx's upcoming OpenLC packages should reduce the awful repeating patterns in the default FSX landclass that are very apparent from high altitude.


Michael Faia

Banner_FS2Crew_Beta_Tester.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heya Tex, 

 

I have used BlueSky and they are pretty nice from up high. However, my preferred mode is tooling along in the Lancair Legacy and at anything lower than 4,000 ft Orbx is definitely superior, despite the popping autogen.

 

I used to be a UTX/GEX user, but now am completely Orbx-based. And as Michael pointed out, the upcoming Orbx landclass products should take care of the repeating patterns (and some can be truly awful looking!). Another product from Orbx, at least for the US, is the upcoming release of Vector 1.2. They changed from OSM to USGS data and the improvements in detail are just stunning. 

 

However, you can't beat the price for BlueSky!   :lol:

 

John


John Howell

Prepar3D V5, Windows 10 Pro, I7-9700K @ 4.6Ghz, EVGA GTX1080, 32GB Corsair Dominator 3200GHz, SanDisk Ultimate Pro 480GB SSD (OS), 2x Samsung 1TB 970 EVO M.2 (P3D), Corsair H80i V2 AIO Cooler, Fulcrum One Yoke, Samsung 34" 3440x1440 curved monitor, Honeycomb Bravo throttle quadrant, Thrustmaster TPR rudder pedals, Thrustmaster T1600M stick 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt about it...ORBX.

 

Doug


Intel 10700K @ 5.1Ghz, Asus Hero Maximus motherboard, Noctua NH-U12A cooler, Corsair Vengeance Pro 32GB 3200 MHz RAM, RTX 2060 Super GPU, Cooler Master HAF 932 Tower, Thermaltake 1000W Toughpower PSU, Windows 10 Professional 64-Bit, 100TB of disk storage. Klaatu barada nickto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's one of those things that comes down to personal preference.  I have quite a bit of BlueSky installed, but actually only use it for flying in areas where not having autogen isn't a really big deal.  That way, I find that it's more than acceptable down to 1000' or even 500' AGL.  Certain areas, such as Death Valley for example, absolutely beg to be represented as photoscenery.

 

That all said, I'm very much an Orbx fan as well, having all of their regions other than NZ and Ireland.  I do a good portion of my flying in Western Canada, and I couldn't imagine using photoscenery for forested areas.  Also, I don't think photoscenery is as vital when there's thick forest autogen.

 

I guess the good thing is that you can easily mix and match, since BlueSky is rather inexpensive. :lol:


Jim Stewart

Milviz Person.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get the FTX stuff and expand it: ORBX' KJAC combines landclass and large photoscenery elements (it's a 3 GB installer!). I added a couple of adjacent BSS tiles for Wyoming. Great for approaches and departures to/from the East.


What happened to AVSIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of California is Bluesky for me.  I do fly at the higher altitudes in big prop and jets!  When I feel like puttering around in a small plane like the Baron, I have Orbx freeware PNW which fits the bill.  There are Plenty of free Orbx sceneries to try at www. fullterrain.com


Charlie Aron

Awaiting the new Microsoft Flight Sim and the purchase of a new system.  Running a Chromebook for now! :cool:

                                     

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blue Sky Scenery is great for what it is, but I just don't get the same sense of immersion from any kind of photoscenery and especially at lower altitudes as others have stated.

 

For me the choice would definitely be ORBX.


Martin 

Sims: MSFS and X-plane 11

Home Airport: CYCW - Chilliwack, BC Canada

I7-4770K 16GB DDR3 2800 RAM, GTX1070TI 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another vote for Orbx - like comparing chalk and cheese really - Orbx and Bluesky do quite different things. Photoreal scenery like Blueskymore accurately portrays reality but the realism effect is often nullified at levels below 2000-3000ft where things become somewhat featureless and 2D, whereas Orbx gives you a more far realistic 3D effect particularly at low level. The only problem arises if you know an area well when you then have to reorientate your brain to accept the geographical innacuracies of Orbx!

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...