FSX-MS For a VECTOR product purchase, 'ignorance' is not, 'bliss'....

[simmerhead 885]

Neither products are perfect. While UTX  might be better in some areas, the biggest problem with UTX is coverage. UTX Europe for instance does only include half of Europe. FTX Global Vector is Global, and as such the only product usable for those who fly outside UTX covered areas. There is still a long way to go before we have an accurate planet Earth model to fly over. Until then, ignorance is bliss.

[CrownCityMisfits 58]

Comparing screenshots of UTX vs Vector in the same exact area would help clarify some of the arguments here. I was hoping to learn something from this thread.

[sascha 314]

Comparing screenshots of UTX vs Vector in the same exact area would help clarify some of the arguments here. I was hoping to learn something from this thread.

Yes indeed, if anyone has both products and a couple of minutes, it would be great to have a couple of screenshots.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

For the places I fly (mainly in Canada); UTX Canada is so far beyond Vector it's embarrassing!! For road and trails on Vancouver Island, UTX Canada is beyond even FTX PNW. Want to follow the trail network in the Forbidden Plateau region? This can only be done using UTX Canada.

I know what you mean...when I reinstalled UTX-Canada...all terrain features came alive again.  After that, I just reinstalled all my UTX purchases.

[frosty777 0]

Some facts and pictures would be nice, just too much WOW!!!! in these personal findings and opinions.

 

Been many lately IMO, what´s the next big thing?

 

Default FSX???

 

[JSkorna 137]

Some facts and pictures would be nice, just too much WOW!!!! in these personal findings and opinions.

 

Been many lately IMO, what´s the next big thing?

 

Default FSX???

 

No, FS9 with some fantastic new stuff!

[scott967 62]

I can see for the US, where there is so much commercial and government vector data available, there isn't that much incentive to improve OSM. For other places, OSM may be the only realistic alternative.  I use OSM in my bicycle Garmin and it works fine, but that's mainly just road data which is probably easier to keep updated in the database.  The bigger thing about OSM is that it is constantly updated.

 

scott s.

.

[Boeing or not going 578]

I have not tried the new utx. What I didn't like about the original version is, too big a reliance on patches of photo textures for downtown areas, did not blend well with ftx global textures. Also, not a very good landclass outside of cities. Before Global textures I had all the Ground Environment textures, and my main problem with those were the city textures blended in too much with the surroundings. In desert cities like Vegas, everything was red/brown desert, even obvious large urban areas. Looking at Google Earth, the city of Vegas stands out with a lot of green and concrete. But UT and Ground Environment did not display that. I would like to see some screenshots of FTX Global textures with UTX v2.

 

Now my main complaint with Global is the lack of red desert in the American southwest, and relying on a less than accurate landclass product like Scenery Tech.

[ShawnG 1,823]

I would expect UTX to be more detailed, it uses only commercial data, is extensively tweaked by the team, and its been in development longer.  to be honest the first UTX generation was more accurate than global vector.  However, a few things need cleared up,  Global Vector uses OSM, but not exclusively.  Pilot's uses commercial data too where available in Global Vector, and my understanding is that the latest patch of NA was developed with commercial, not free.  also, as mentioned, UTX is only available for north america and 3/4 of Europe  for that coverage you will spend triple what vector costs for the entire earth.  and even though you can definitely say there is a difference,  there is not a night and day difference.  Vector is definitely holding its own.

 

hopefully UTX will continue doing what they do, I have their Alaska and Carribean packages and they are fantastic

[Boeing or not going 578]

UTX Alaska crippled my framerate, I could not fly in cities without turning everything down.

[Dirk98 354]

Can UTX US v2 reside peacefully now above Vector without FPS loss or other conflicts?

 

Thanks,

Dirk. 

[simmerhead 885]

UTX Alaska crippled my framerate, I could not fly in cities without turning everything down.

 

Happened to me too. Will be interresting to see how it performs in P3D when the 2.0 version comes along. Since I can fly in the Vancouver and Seattle area with more ease in P3D v2 using ORBX PNW and FSAddon Vancouver+ V3, I'm betting P3D will handle UTX Alaska better.

[SpeedBird4509 0]

Mitch is right, You Text 2.0 is amazing I love it.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

Can UTX US v2 reside peacefully now above Vector without FPS loss or other conflicts?

 

Thanks,

Dirk. 

If you have a UTX product, that sits above the four Vector 1.20 entries in the Scenery Lib, then they make Vector 1.20 inert.  Vector has no effect upon the action.  You don't have to uninstall it, in case you want to go back to only Vector running the show.  You'd only have to uninstall your UTX(s) products with the full-uninstall box clicked off, and after that, Vector would be as you had it before. All the options as to what you want to control vector data is totally in your control.  Nothing gets borked. As for an FPS 'hit'...yes there is, as there is now more items being displayed, that adds to the FPS cost to produce to the screen. If you can get 30 FPS or greater with Vector 1.20, then you will probably get 22-27 with UTX and all its features full bore.

Mitch is right, You Text 2.0 is amazing I love it.

Speed, did you mean 'You Text 2.0' to mean UTX USA v2.0?  I gather you did?....

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

I've no doubt that UTX USA uses better quality data than FTX Vector and is more customizable.

 

 

How do you know that it is more accurate? It seems like some people have just decided that this is true, when it's almost a certainty that the source data for both products are the same. The only thing that I can tell you is that any product that uses OSM data is going to have major discrepancies with reality. Neither UTX nor Vector use that dataset for NA. I still have UTX USA 1.0 installed in FSX and the only major advantage that I can see is that some coastlines and beaches are represented better than in Vector on (which I have installed on P3d). The change log proposed for Vector 1.25 will supposedly correct this (from the ORBX forums):

 

 

 

I'm currently working on Version 1.25 for VECTOR, which will include the following changes (this list will be expanded during the development process):

Corrected beaches in the US & Canada; beaches will be fixed so they fit to the coastline.

New beaches for the US and Canada: I have added a lot of beaches, especially in the US

Some coastline adjustments (having to do with intermittent water bodies) in Canada (St. Lawrence Stream) after user feedback

Much more detailed coastline and water bodies for Papua New Guinea

Much more detailed coastline for Malta

(more fixes to be announced)

Stay tuned!

Bernd

 

 

There's no question that UTX has improved landclass in urban areas, but that is not the purpose of FTX Global Vector. It is not a LC product. FTX Global LC is ORBX's LC product and they have only released LC for Europe so far.

 

And how is it "more customizable"? Both UTX USA 2.0 and FTX Global vector have very similar configuration programs.