Side by side V3 and V4 screenshot - Dissappointed

[aceridgey 330]

Hi all,

V4

 

V3

 

Both with ORBX Global LC etc, i just think the vegetation and textures/colours look better in the V3 picture?

 

Alex

[JRBarrett 3,070]

Did you have Vector in the V3 shot? Since it's not yet available in V4 it will probably make a difference...

[SimonC 116]

To me the vegetation I've seen around, on my sim and on your shot of v4 looks weird. It looks way too bright green, different than I've seen in v3 and earlier.

[aceridgey 330]

No vector. 

 

I think it's due to the complex autogen being on. Looks better now 

[SimonC 116]

Ahhh, thank you!! That was it. Now my scenery again looks good. That was just terrible.

[FlyIce 354]

Based on the screenshots, V3 seems to be autogen at Max or Very Dense but the autogen density is certainly much lower in V4. Not a fair comparison?

[stripealipe 87]

They both look a little stark? Get those shadows working on the buildings etc and get it looking a little more dynamic. V4 def lets you bump things up a little more for the same processing power....

[aceridgey 330]

24 minutes ago, FlyIce said:

Based on the screenshots, V3 seems to be autogen at Max or Very Dense but the autogen density is certainly much lower in V4. Not a fair comparison?

Not sure where that came from as they're both on the same setting (V4 may be higher)

20 minutes ago, stripealipe said:

They both look a little stark? Get those shadows working on the buildings etc and get it looking a little more dynamic. V4 def lets you bump things up a little more for the same processing power....

Ok interesting.. Would you recommend Shadows receive on everything?

 

 

[stripealipe 87]

No, not on everything, but shadows on sim objects and buildings, both cast and receive, is a good starting point. Those stark buildings jutting up can do with some love with a little shading to help them blend in with the surroundings to give a nicer overall look :)

[virtualstuff 758]

14 minutes ago, aceridgey said:

Not sure where that came from as they're both on the same setting (V4 may be higher)

Ok interesting.. Would you recommend Shadows receive on everything?

 

 

Make sure when running FTX stuff to turn of dynamic 3d autogen ;-)

[bonchie 2,305]

In the first shot you may be running speed trees. That's why it's chopping down the autogen and looks weird.

[aceridgey 330]

20 minutes ago, stripealipe said:

No, not on everything, but shadows on sim objects and buildings, both cast and receive, is a good starting point. Those stark buildings jutting up can do with some love with a little shading to help them blend in with the surroundings to give a nicer overall look :)

Ok, looks better than the original with everything on, so i'll follow your suggestion and turn some off

16 minutes ago, awf said:

Make sure when running FTX stuff to turn of dynamic 3d autogen ;-)

That's exactly the setting which is causing the awful colouration and poor looking trees

[Hoang 108]

V4 is 64bit and "no OOM".

That's all I need. Others will be improved as time goes by. It won't get worse, it's just not as steady and stable as V3. When it does, I don't think anybody will use V3.

Hoang Le

 

[swiesma 625]

No OOM and scenery to the end of the horizon!

 

I don't really know what people expect from v4..... a whole new sim?

[WotanUK 289]

I think you can level the same complaints against P3Dv4 as people were against FSW, the visuals look identical, but it's also to be expected.  It would be difficult to tell the difference between FSX and P3Dv4.  With the 32-bit restrictions removed it's now up to companies like ORBX to start to improve the visuals.  

Having just installed P3Dv4 and then ORBX FTX, OpenLU Europe and England along with AS2016 it's starting to look pretty good, even with the default aircraft and airports i am now seeing close to 4Gb used.  The main thing is mentioned above by Stefan, LOD is now set on ultra, scenery all the way as far as i can see.