What is it that appealed to you Jeroen?

 

 

I'm a sucker for nice graphics.  :wink: The new lighting system absolutely rocks (those reflections! and how the beacon lights reflect on the ground and everything around it!) and the interface and options look great too (pretty accessible). I already am very interested in how XP renders the terrain (the technique is a lot better than FSX/P3D but unfortunately the textures aren't that good): I am sick and tired of things loading in a circle around my plane and also hate those roads cutting through houses). I also like the amount of default planes to play with though I probably end up using one or two mostly. The Cessna looks very promising. 

 

And apart from all that it is kinda nice to have something new to play with.  :wink: XP11 will give me a lot more fun for the money than one or two new airports for P3D will.

 

 

Could you tell us which Norwegian source for the photoimagery you used?

 

 

Yes, please! 

P3D user here.  I'm really looking forward to XP11, a bit to my amazement. I'm a flight simmer as much for the technology aspect of it as the flying (going back to the days when MS used Flight Simulator to showcase PC technology), and XP11 looks to be a nice new toy. XP10 frustrated me with the configuration difficulty, but the XP11 interface looks really nice. 

Like XP11 interface and the busy airport stuff. I just hope, and it's long overdue, a comparable traffic AI program to FSX/P3D like MyTraffic, Ultimate Traffic will be done by a third party. 

Er... I am confused once more.  :wink: So this means that Norway Pro is W2XP (???) scenery (only autogen?) and if I download it I don't get the ground textures with it...? I have to create those myself, no matter what, using Ortho4XP...? And since photoimagery is hard to get legally I may not get the same textures as you do, maybe none at all, and even if I did I would have to take care of things like saturation etc. myself... Bummer. For a short while I thought XP scenery turned out to be easy to get a hold on but now I lost hope again. 

 

Sorry for posting off topic newbie questions in this topic...  :wink: Or does your Norway Pro come with instructions how to get the exact same photoreal?

 

BTW I had a longer look at the video from Belynz and I am DEFINITELY going to get XP11. With or without Norway.

Jeroen is spot on with his reply, I feel the same way....

World Traffic is much comparable to UT2 or Mytraffic (I'd say even better for models and graphics of AI planes) but much more difficult to set. Same for X-Life.

What does lack is the coverage of airports regarding ground routes, let's say AFCAD definitions of FSX, but I guess the more people install XP the faster devs will jump on as they smell new money: I'm quite confident we'll have easier package to set like in FSX. And WT3 will permit AI movements based on apt.dat file like X-Life.

Is there an easy to use VATSIM interface like Vpilot for xplane or does it still use the clunky xsquawkbox. Not that that is anything to do with XP itself.

Last few posts just illustrates the diverse opinions of FS users. You can never please everyone.

 

Ain't it the truth.

 

Me, I usually avoid orthophoto-based scenery because I like the dynamic lighting effects of sunlight on landclass terrain and autogen buildings at different times of day, especially near dawn and dusk. I don't like seeing blurry and "squashed" buildings when flying low. Orthophoto scenery can also have jarring color transitions around airports, where the builder has used their own photo terrain underlying the airport. Custom airports seem to fit better on default landclass terrain because that's what the builder can assume as a default when blending into the scenery.

 

So, just personal opinion there about scenery preferences. What we all want is "plausible" scenery, and we're coming at it from different directions (and altitudes!). 

Ain't it the truth.

 

Me, I usually avoid orthophoto-based scenery because I like the dynamic lighting effects of sunlight on landclass terrain and autogen buildings at different times of day, especially near dawn and dusk. I don't like seeing blurry and "squashed" buildings when flying low. Orthophoto scenery can also have jarring color transitions around airports, where the builder has used their own photo terrain underlying the airport. Custom airports seem to fit better on default landclass terrain because that's what the builder can assume as a default when blending into the scenery.

 

So, just personal opinion there about scenery preferences. What we all want is "plausible" scenery, and we're coming at it from different directions (and altitudes!). 

 

With a proper overlay you shouldn't see squashed buildings.

Something I've noticed after watching some of these beta previews is what a difference it makes to see window reflections on the external views of the aircraft. It's just a small part of the plane (especially on airliners), but the windscreen reflections add so much to the realism of the various aircraft models. 

 

I'm also impressed by the brighter look of scenery in mid-day sunlight on a clear day. Previous versions of the sim have always had a somewhat dark and muddy look at mid-day, and that's gone now.

 

Ideally, it would be nice to see some variation between really intense sunlight in the tropics vs. softer sun at far northern and southern latitudes, due to the light going through thicker atmosphere. I don't know if the sim does that, but even if it doesn't, this is a big improvement in the look of sunlight. 

 

I think the day (and dusk) lighting has improved a lot, now it's closer to the lighting of Outerra.

 

And probably it can be further improved with art controls tweaks.

I think the day (and dusk) lighting has improved a lot, now it's closer to the lighting of Outerra.

 

And probably it can be further improved with art controls tweaks.

hope data ref editor plugin is working out of the box

hope data ref editor plugin is working out of the box

Oh yeah, the most important tool for me! ;-)

Oh yeah, the most important tool for me! ;-)

well Mik i remember it was your video on data ref editor which i watched on you tube (schmeichel75) to tune xp10 data refs at that time! Thanks:)

well Mik i remember it was your video on data ref editor which i watched on you tube (schmeichel75) to tune xp10 data refs at that time! Thanks:)

Oh, wow! ;-)

Thanks a lot, buddy!

I remember very vividly how I was totally amazed (and I mean TOTALLY) when I saw what XPX could deliver, visually. I am pretty sure, there'll be some fantastic things happening during the lifespan of XP11!