Isn't orbx already primarily photoreal, blended onto landclass?

 

Unfortunately, no.  Like most other vendors these days, their airports are mostly placed on top of photo and they have greatly expanded the included areas around those airports as you see in Palm Springs, but this is not the case in their regions which are still mostly landclass with a few photo areas in high interest places (glaciers in SAK, major mountains and suchlike).  It sounded as though SoCal was going to contain significant areas of photo in the CA desert (my interpretation, not anything explicitly claimed by Orbx) but while there is some, significant would be an overstatement.  The majority of the desert areas are still landclass - a bummer since the CA desert is a photo superstar and requires very little in terms of buildings and vegetation as there are few of either.

 

And then, of course, consider that their "Global" products consist of texture, landclass definitions and vector data - 100% landclass elements.

 

I would be HUGELY disappointed if a similar approach were taken on the regional level for this platform - and I think most of us would agree on this one.

 

Scott

Unfortunately, no.  Like most other vendors these days, their airports are mostly placed on top of photo and they have greatly expanded the included areas around those airports as you see in Palm Springs, but this is not the case in their regions which are still mostly landclass with a few photo areas in high interest places (glaciers in SAK, major mountains and suchlike). 

 

I will agree with you, except I think Ipacs has (fortuitously) set the stage beforehand by already providing the entire state of California and its surroundings as photoscenery. All Orbx might really have to do then is layer their own discrete photoscenery areas on top of that, for specific points of interest.

 

And I would be surprised if Drzewiecki design, Megascenery and other purveyors of photo-coverage didn't also raise their hands if it looks like there's an opportunity. (Just hope nobody tries to palm off any green-tinted shovelware.)

 

For me, I guess the greatest hurdle was seeing if Aerofly would even be given a fair hearing. Orbx has cracked open the door, and now we'll have to see.

 

I very much want an alternative to MS based sims.

 

 

For me, I guess the greatest hurdle was if Aerofly would even be given a fair hearing. Orbx has cracked open the door, and now we'll have to see.

 

And on that I would also agree.  Having a major vendor step in at this stage gives the platform a huge boost in cred and is hopefully the first domino in a chain with many more to come.

 

Scott

FTX landclass regions in AeroFly FS2 would be rubbish. We really do not want that. What we want is accurate autogen on photoscenery. Nothing less will do.

Total agreement.

KPSP is not a region. As I said the Orbx airport addons contain more and more photoreal. They began with adding a nearby mountain as photoreal and later on a compete village and so on. That KPSP video mainly shows a small area around the airport: the helicopter flies a long time but actually never leaves the vicinity of the airport. Maybe it has more photoreal outside of it, I don't know, but it would still only cover a small area compared to a region. A full region with photoreal would be a 100 GB download. At least. FTX Norway would take quite a few 100 GB (at a good resolution). I really doubt Orbx is going to do that. They would have to redo the entire region on a scale they never did before... while they say P3D will stay their main sim! AFS2 is a project on the side so I don't see this happening. A possibility would be completely new smaller regions, somewhere between the size of an airport and a (small) region. But whatever it will be, please don't let it be FSX scenery.

 

You typed; 'A full region with photoreal would be a 100 GB download. '

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

...and this is the exact reason, in anticipation of how great this sim can become...and very quickly so...is why I have dedicated an entire 1TB W.D. Velociraptor hard drive,for AeroFly FS2!  Frankly, Jeroen, I see greatness coming to this platform...in that it will be the only sim...to set it apart, that you can fly trans-continental, in high def photoreal, and SEE that favorite restaurant, down there on the coast of Maryland, for great Maryland Crab Cakes!   This is what I hope will happen to this sim. It will be a veritable, and truly NOVEL approach....a veritus, visual representation to the flight sim enthusiast, to make you feel, you have taken off from somewhere visually, and evidently real to your eyes...and have a destination over hundreds, to thousands of miles away, with the same visual expectation at the other end of the flight.

 

I do not need ultra-deep immersion cockpits to get me there. I need valid and properly rendered in-cockpit navigation instruments, and navaids for enroute.  I don't need air-conditioner pacs, heater fans, electric bus panels that mimic every switch to every sub-system. I do need the basics of control, navigation, and engine management.  This sim could be a spectacular, true REAL WORLD, visual representation of flight, that neither P3D, FSX, or XP can even try to deliver. Their graphics engines are not tuned to the already photoreal world-wide representation that IPACS have chosen as their tour-de-force. The AFSF2 modern 64 bit Graphics Engine plays big in this scenario.  Try to do this within ESP or XP, and you will crawl along (with the sim at Ultra High Settings, at 12-40 FPS max.

 

Do this with AeroFly FS2, and run at possibly no lower than 80-90 FSP, when fleshed out much more than it is at early release.  That's what makes this all work, and WILL work...a graphics engine, that can be set, and designed to the task....

 

Yes...Jeroen, I say, bring those 100 GB downloads on...I made anticipated allowances just for this possible scenario.  I have the baseball field built...and only need the 3rdp or IPACS themselves to step out of the cornfield...and smash home-runs....  The corn stalks are rustling...and players are going to start showing up, in 6 months OR LESS! That's what I see happening. This sim will set itself apart, as a dedicated real-life viewmanship of taking a plane up, and over Terra.

 

John Venema, is nobody's fool. I think he sees the big 'pictcha' too, and wants to get in before anybody else to have you think a two word association as we do with ESP driven sims...Orbx/Aerofly FS2.  Yep...I feel this in the bones....and the proof to this assertion, is coming in June,or less....

 

 

I'm not at all so sure. I suspect it's going to be mid resolution coverage with "oasis" of higher resolution towns, cities, airports and points of interest. There are probably several ways of cutting down the size.



I would point out that so far, several states worth of scenery (including the country of switzerland) has come to just about 100gb altogether, so more than that for just one region seems an excessive estimate. Plus, I suspect being a "summer-sim" that wont have to include several different seasons of textures will also help keep sizes down.

 

Yes, that's true. Using lower res outside of airports is an option. Still... I'd LOVE to see high res (with autogen!!!) everywhere LOL!

 

 

 

 

This sim could be a spectacular, true REAL WORLD, visual representation of flight, that neither P3D, FSX, or XP can even try to deliver. Their graphics engines are not tuned to the already photoreal world-wide representation that IPACS have chosen as their tour-de-force. The AFSF2 modern 64 bit Graphics Engine plays big in this scenario. Try to do this within ESP or XP, and you will crawl along (with the sim at Ultra High Settings, at 12-40 FPS max.



Do this with AeroFly FS2, and run at possibly no lower than 80-90 FSP, when fleshed out much more than it is at early release. That's what makes this all work, and WILL work...a graphics engine, that can be set, and designed to the task....

 

I hear ya! And I can see this happening. As I said I am looking at AFS2 more and more for what I think it is intended to be: a sim that focuses on enjoying real world scenery and that's it. And I am fine with that. But it really needs to be photoreal all over the place, and (I am repeating myself :wink: ) if possible with only high res photoreal and 3D autogen and buildings EVERYWHERE. And o yes, handplaced trees too PLEASE.

 

BTW I don't think that 1 TB disk is going to cut it if you want the world in HIGH res photoreal. Seriously.

I've seen six terabyte drives out there, but they scare the crap out of me. What if you manage to fill one of those up and it goes bad, losing all that data?!

Yes, that's true. Using lower res outside of airports is an option. Still... I'd LOVE to see high res (with autogen!!!) everywhere LOL!

 

 

 

 

 

I hear ya! And I can see this happening. As I said I am looking at AFS2 more and more for what I think it is intended to be: a sim that focuses on enjoying real world scenery and that's it. And I am fine with that. But it really needs to be photoreal all over the place, and (I am repeating myself :wink: ) if possible with only high res photoreal and 3D autogen and buildings EVERYWHERE. And o yes, handplaced trees too PLEASE.

 

BTW I don't think that 1 TB disk is going to cut it if you want the world in HIGH res photoreal. Seriously.

Hi Jeroen,   hear ya...and I too, am settling in to 'label' the sim the best sim for the enthusiast that has more of a 'leaning' outside the cockpit, than inside. I would label myself as that.  My kind of sim'ming, is about 70 outside view, spot view to 30 staring at the instrument panel, and flipping switches, and pressing buttons.  I know that I would be that way in real life, and my friend Bob, the King Air pilot, HONESTLY...seemed to run at about that. Once everything was set up at cruise, and not in 'sterile' mode for TOD, descent, approach and landing, or rotation, climb, to cruise set up...he spent quite the time glancing down below the wing.  This was real world, from a well-established corporate pilot.

 

Yes, some would say that he was monitoring the x/y around the aircraft for collision avoidance...and of course he was...but if a pilot is (in this forum) going to be truthful...if they have a passenger in the cabin, they are going to carry on a conversation, and talk about current events, or about what they are flying over...etc,

 

That's what I like about this sim, Jeroen. It really allows me to 'emotionally' recreate those many times being taken up by him...and the er....how do you communicate this....the look and the real-world 'feel' of the situation.  

 

I like very much XP and my Orbx-loaded FSX (DX10) and P3D.  Sure I do...but...having said that...I STILL have to 'make' mental allowances, because those farm and field textures, are graphically repeated...and that truly ruins the 'illusion' that you are travelling over terra-firma.   

 

AeroFly 2  allows for that solid illusion...you take off at Bakersfield, and head on down over Phoenix, to Tuscon.  In this sim, you really feel you have a flight progression.

 

So...I will 'label' its use for myself, as a most excellent VFR, or truly  VFR/IFR (which what it is...even with pre-release instrument panels) for you do have ILS and I had one situation, totally caught off-guard for...of a socked in fog approaching San Fran, coming around ,still out to sea, for the approach.   I didn't think it had that capability at this time...but it does...

 

About the 1TB....I probably will focus on North America, Central, and South America.  Also parts of Europe, but mostly from Alaska, down to the bottom tip of South America.  I can only imagine the  Andes in this sim..

 

I want to keep the benefits of having a sim running off a Velociraptor, and they only come in 1TB or lower capacity..and are getting harder to find, each and every day.

 

Cheers,

 

Ses

I've seen six terabyte drives out there, but they scare the crap out of me. What if you manage to fill one of those up and it goes bad, losing all that data?!

My solution then...would be to buy two of them...seriously, and have one as loaded and a back up, just unplugged from the power and the rail.....

 

Sitting in the case.

 

I most likely will see how it goes...and stop my purchases, at around 800 GB's, as you need at least 10 percent capacity clear for file maintenance.   This is going to be my 'specialty' sim, for the best VFR and rubber-necking, this side of the Pecos River, lol.   I'll carefully choose my area of operations, as per my capacity to install them.  Then...devil's advocate time...if it is such a blast...when they flesh out, and Orbx brings properties on-line..I might exactly go for a 6 TB drive (2)...and make do with not having it running on a Velop.  I'd get the W.D. Black (performance) Series..and that would be that...!   

 

Post Edit: "One thing for sure...this sim will be a most permanent installation on my system. Never going to un-install it.  A VFR, real world depiction, glory-fest"...

I haven't been as excited with expectation, for a RTM as I have with this sim, in the last 5 years!  There are general use/does all, pedal-bikes, and then there are Mountain bikes, for a specialty use. This will be my 'Mountain Bike' sim....LOL!  Yep....

 

Hey, IPAC team...Microsoft uses internal code-words for their projects in-house, and in Beta.  You can use;  MOUNTAIN BIKE,  as your covert project code, lol...yeah...it has that 'project-climb' aggressiveness in the name...rock solid, and will get you to the top of the mountain....and in style!

 

 

 

)

I have still not tested this simulator at a really detailed location like New York City (too busy enjoying landing approaches at dawn at the more remote Nevada and Arizona airports), but I can confirm that the framerate around Las Vegas city (with all detail settings at ULTRA) is super smooth with high altitude cirrus (but no cumulus). I will test it with 50% cumulus, and report back.

 

With respect to download sizes, I don't care how large they get. The more detail and resolution, the better! If I need a larger hard disk, then I will buy one. Bearing this in mind, the following is what I am looking for down the line in AeroFly FS2......

 

* Super detailed South Western USA region

* Consistent high resolution photoscenery terrain textures and mesh throughout

* ALL airports and airfields with customised buildings, markings and clutter

* Accurate placement (and density) tree and building autogen

* ALL important 3D landmarks (bridges/oil terminals/radio towers/water towers/fire lookout towers/wind turbines/marinas etc)

* Electricity pylon network with substations

* ATC system at least as good as the one in Flight Unlimited 3

* Realistic AI planes and flightplans

* Animated water

* Animated ships and boats

* Dynamic weather system (user selectable)

 

Shouldn't be too difficult

I have still not tested this simulator at a really detailed location like New York City (too busy enjoying landing approaches at dawn at the more remote Nevada and Arizona airports), but I can confirm that the framerate around Las Vegas city (with all detail settings at ULTRA) is super smooth with high altitude cirrus (but no cumulus). I will test it with 50% cumulus, and report back.

 

With respect to download sizes, I don't care how large they get. The more detail and resolution, the better! If I need a larger hard disk, then I will buy one. Bearing this in mind, the following is what I am looking for down the line in AeroFly FS2......

 

* Super detailed South Western USA region

* Consistent high resolution photoscenery terrain textures and mesh throughout

* ALL airports and airfields with customised buildings, markings and clutter

* Accurate placement (and density) tree and building autogen

* ALL important 3D landmarks (bridges/oil terminals/radio towers/water towers/fire lookout towers/wind turbines/marinas etc)

* Electricity pylon network with substations

* ATC system at least as good as the one in Flight Unlimited 3

* Realistic AI planes and flightplans

* Animated water

* Animated ships and boats

* Dynamic weather system (user selectable)

 

Shouldn't be too difficult

I'm with you Chris in all of the above...and when it does come down to it...depending on what is made available...if it is high rez....yeah...I will buy whatever storage I need to house it all. That is for certain.  I don't usually fly in  Asia...but...and this is the beauty and difference of this sim. BECAUSE it will be what is there in real life...and be interesting and a learning experience...I might just buy the whole world in high res.  That is the main outstanding feature of this sim platform, that is not feasible at present in my other installed sims.  This is a huge magnet....and my resolve is made of iron....

Has anybody else felt this way...or observed, exactly how real the 'sunshine' looks in this sim.  Where ever the sun plays across the surfaces of the aircraft, or inside the cockpit...or for that fact...looking out to the horizon, the haze...that is there...you know it is there...but you CAN look through and past it, towards the mountains upon the horizon.  I am presently in a flight between Phoenix and McCarran, and never mind, the scenery is just mind blowing...over the virtual Grand Canyon, but with this sim....it is the total sum of its parts, that is contributing to the view, that you are truly, really, there...in that seat...watching the warm sunlight splash across the instrument panel...and dang...LOOKS SO REAL, in doing it.

 

I'm finding more and more, that there is so much rendering power in our graphic cards, that you are not even seeing in the ESP engine.  No matter what FPS horsepower your card can deliver... the ESP engine, doesn't give you 'sunlight' its feel...and this is so hard to try and to communicate in words...but it is the 'look' that makes you, actually 'feel' the heat.  The vision cues are there...

 

...anyway, back to the flight...about 289 NM's away from an approach into Sin City, aboard an America West B737-500....and this one flight alone...was worth every penny of the early-release purchase price.  This flight, can not be duplicated anywhere else....not on your life!  You ARE flying over the Grand Canyon, and then, left behind your wings....H.S.!

The ESP engine could have looked so much more realistic if only LM had bothered to fine tune the lighting and shaders in Prepar3D.

The ESP engine could have looked so much more realistic if only LM had bothered to fine tune the lighting and shaders in Prepar3D.

 

I should think LM are more bothered about flight realism than pretty scenery. After all, below is a pic from a real full motion Type 7 (aka Level D) simulator, and those clouds make the clouds in an 8 bit Super Mario console game from 1990 look realistic in comparison :-)

 

I should think LM are more bothered about flight realism than pretty scenery. After all, below is a pic from a real full motion Type 7 (aka Level D) simulator, and those clouds make the clouds in an 8 bit Super Mario console game from 1990 look realistic in comparison :-)

 

I know what you mean, but desktop simulation is a completely different ballgame. There's no submarine or avatar in that level D sim either  

 

Looking at the changelogs in Prepar3D since v1.0 graphics have been one of the major areas of improvement. 

I should think LM are more bothered about flight realism than pretty scenery.

Well... I have to disagree. We are at version 3.5 (or so) now and sooner or later version 4 will be there. Now, tell me, in all the years that LM has been working on it, how many improvements had to do with flight realism and how many improvements had to do with pretty scenery (graphics)...? To keep it nice I'd say 99% of the improvements had to do with scenery (non pop-up autogen, cloud shadows, ground shadows, lighting, reflections, performance improvements, etc.) and well... let's say 1% concerned flight realism. Although I have to say it could well be zero because I have no idea what LM has done in that regard. So I wonder where you got your idea from. The ONLY improvements in realism that P3D offer come from 3rd party developers.

 

I am not saying this is a bad thing. But you could say that even though AFS2 is VERY basic when it comes to systems, iPacs did more for systems in AFS2 then LM did in P3D. (LR is the boss here of course with XP.)

The ESP engine could have looked so much more realistic if only LM had bothered to fine tune the lighting and shaders in Prepar3D.

Speaking of lighting... thats the change on XPlane that helped finally push it over the line into acceptability for me. Before, (XP10) the lighting always felt like stark white neon, and it was just wrong. (I made one or two posts about it over the years)

 

Xplane11 lighting is much more "sun-like," and the additional atmospheric scattering completes the "sell"

 

It also brings out the coloring of the buildings, revealing reds, browns, etc that was all washed into a dead "grey" by the previous lighting.

 

Such a difference by such a basic change....

 

And I think Aerofly (and Outerra) got it right straight out of the box.

 

Now about that landclass........