was released and looks awesome!

https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipMc1FYDCUvIjb98BEpcxqU2zx8g632-jmhxWef37Nr0gdLOTzQRQP6aq9vcrY_Upw?key=SWlGbWxjZGZKeXdYZm42emZTOW5EM01SMElZM193

Looks great. Seems like the perfect place to try out the C172 in VR!

32 minutes ago, Colonel X said:

Looks great. Seems like the perfect place to try out the C172 in VR!

Please tell me about the performance. It looks absolutely aweseome, but i did read some reports regarding the performance.

Hard to image this rural area causes issues...

There are mega tons of objects...

This looks awsome !

And a whole area is covered, with amazing details apparently. Not bad for that price !

The Airfoillabs team has multiple talents !

Cheers,

Pascal

Where did you read reports of poor FPS performance?  

5 hours ago, Griphos said:

Where did you read reports of poor FPS performance?  

On Discord. And now i have the scenery and it´s the most demanding scenery i know. I think it´s because of the many static aircraft and objects. It looks fantastic but i only get 15 FPS.

I guess i have to manually remove the static aircraft with WED.

There does seem to be an awful lot of static scenery.  That's too bad to hear.  It looks lovely.  I wonder if the FPS is okay away from the airport.  I'd love to fly my ultralights along the river!

Let us know if removing the static aircraft brings it up to regular performance standards.

It's a difficult balancing act, to be sure, providing good detail while retaining performance.  But the way I use airports, the over-the-top detailing of the ground environment just makes no sense.  I don't walk around the airports.  I land at them.  I want them to look realistic, but it doesn't take a lot to do that.  In fact, I think ground textures and grass, etc, do much more for immersion than signs and vehicles in the parking lots.