Downgrading scenery complexity settings ain't gonna happen when I get my hands on a TrueEarth product.....but then I will not be trying to run it all at 4K resolution across three monitors

Edited April 28, 20188 yr by Christopher Low

I tried a flight form FlyTampa EHAM to Aerosoft EDDH Hamburg ORBX GEN, PMDG 747 in 4k and was surprised that it worked as well as it did, monitor set at 30hrz FPS locked 30, FFTE running, 

Edited April 28, 20188 yr by rjfry

38 minutes ago, rjfry said:

I tried a flight form FlyTampa EHAM to Aerosoft EDDH Hamburg ORBX GEN, PMDG 747 in 4k and was surprised that it worked as well as it did, monitor set at 30hrz FPS locked 30, FFTE running, 

No blurry ground textures? I ask, because you're running @ 4k. The same as myself.

Edited April 28, 20188 yr by Rockliffe

6 hours ago, yanfeng12342000 said:

Hi Jeroen, how does your previous home look? Is it real? Better with a comparison pic. 🙂

Haha, LOL, well. no, I am done with comparison pics and ruining my own pleasure. But the house I lived in in Groningen wasn't a 'rijtjeshuis' and it was in the centre of the city and CityScape does a better job than autogen. 😉 Obviously the house itself didn't look like the real thing but it came closer than what I saw in my current hometown.

4 hours ago, SpiritFlyer said:

Orbx is on new ground here.  One thing for certain, there is lots and lots of stuff!.That is good, yes? maybe... It is what it is, whatever it is. I think I like it... 😎

I also saw a lot of errors like a huge home-like building in an odd angle hovering above the water where there should be small 'flats'. I guess that if we report those things to Orbx some of them will be fixed. But yes, there IS a lot of stuff to be seen and the photoreal ground textures are a guarantee you will never ever see the same spot somewhere else like with landclass. If you simply FLY and don't go looking for errors the experience is great. It's better than any other regional scenery I've seen. Mistakes and all.

3 hours ago, GSalden said:

Here I am having a love/hate relationship with TE NL.

Me too. It's a mixed bag. But as I said, once you simply start flying it's pretty cool. We simmers tend to look at new scenery with a microscope, I know I do, but that's not how you should handle scenery like this. You have to fly over it and enjoy it. I myself am pretty amazed already that even at 3000 feet things look pretty awesome already.

I really do wonder though how those Orbx guys can get their smooth experience with all scenery sliders full right...

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

Downgrading scenery complexity settings ain't gonna happen when I get my hands on a TrueEarth product....

No, I'd also never do that. You can get enough performance out of it all by setting autogen lower, turning off shadows etc. If you are downgrading scenery complexity you will be missing all the bits that make it nice.

11 minutes ago, Rockliffe said:

No blurry ground textures?

Well, I do see ground textures loading nearby... and that's at 1980x1020 and my lowered settings. The are being loaded before I get there but it's not perfect, of course. But well, it never has been perfect in P3D for me so I am not complaining. When I simply look around me and not straight down things look great. Well, they also look great when looking down but you shouldn't fly too low in that case.

 

 

Edited April 28, 20188 yr by Guest

3 hours ago, GSalden said:

Here I am having a love/hate relationship with TE NL.

I am used to having AG set to Dense, water High , Cloud Shadows on and Terrain/Objects Receive Shadows.

With those settings I can fly everywere.

Now I also have to “downgrade” my settings. Either no shadows and water off to fly with AG Dense or AG to Normal with shadows/water over rural terrain or even sparse over a city like Amsterdam. Those lower AG settings still show a lot of AG.

If I now make a flight with “downgraded” settings from Amsterdam to another country , that other country has almost no AG compared to TE NL .

I already suggested to make a less dense AG set to start with , but I presume that that won’t happen.

So I am testing with other NL AG packages and using the NL2000 3D objects instead of the TE NL objects.

I probably will end up with either the new to release NL2000 V5 or TU NL photo real scenery + NL2000 3D objects + a less dense NL AG package.

That is a pity as I like the TU NL houses and trees a lot as they are placed very accurate and look very realistic.

If only Orbx would consider a less dense AG set or a set with the current  AG for rural terrain and an option to choose less dense AG for large cities.

JustMy2Cents

regards , Gerard

No Gerard, lets not level down to scenery designed for lesser hardware or 32bit sims.  The answer is to expand coverage of this type of scenery and fir people struggling to upgrade hardware over time.  If we only aim for the status quo we will never make progress to something better - all sims and scenery should be designed for next gen technology IMHO :D

No, I'd also never do that. You can get enough performance out of it all by setting autogen lower, turning off shadows etc. If you are downgrading scenery complexity you will be missing all the bits that make it nice.

I also mean Autogen Density at maximum. If I have to run P3D with clear skies to get acceptable performance from TrueEarth with those settings, then that is what I will do!

57 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

No Gerard, lets not level down to scenery designed for lesser hardware or 32bit sims.  The answer is to expand coverage of this type of scenery and fir people struggling to upgrade hardware over time.  If we only aim for the status quo we will never make progress to something better - all sims and scenery should be designed for next gen technology IMHO 😄

Agreed.

25 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

 

 

I also mean Autogen Density at maximum. If I have to run P3D with clear skies to get acceptable performance from TrueEarth with those settings, then that is what I will do!

Hm, clever idea. I plan on using TrueEarth with Aerofly and that one doesn't have any weather at all. I will give this a try but I doubt if just removing clouds and weather will make up for the loss of fps that extremely dense autogen gives.

EDIT
Well LOL that didn't work out too good. With completely clear skies and visibility at 30 miles performance is still stick between 20 and 30 with autogen full right (and shadows etc. off or low as I described above). I did fly over Amsterdam though which is pretty heavy. I also loaded my regular default settings that work perfectly fine in FTX Norway and performance was around 20 dipping down to below 10. Horrible. My TrueEarth settings with no clouds works quite fine though.

I guess that in order to enjoy this scenery in all its glory I will have to wait for the Aerofly version. I am VERY curious to see if the wonderful performance of Aerofly will get hurt by all this detail. Until then I will have to fly with the lower settings. And maybe avoid the west but well, the country is very small so that doesn't leave too much room to fly in. (Smaller than I thought, I have to add: I always thought a 50 nm flight was a short hop but in the Netherlands that's a huge trip already! I never realised how flying through air compares to driving with a car...! A trip that seems huge in my country, let's say a 2 hour drive, is done in 30 minutes when flying! This means that if you want to see everything in the Netherlands you are done pretty quick! Never realised that. My bad.)

Edited April 28, 20188 yr by Guest

I would be more than happy with 20fps performance in P3D over extremely dense scenery. In fact, I think that flight simmers need to be able to deal with framerates at that level if they want next generation graphics and scenery density. In short, if I had a choice between 20fps with sliders full right, or 40fps with sliders in the mid range, I would take the 20fps every time.

Edited April 28, 20188 yr by Christopher Low

1 hour ago, J van E said:

really do wonder though how those Orbx guys can get their smooth experience with all scenery sliders full right...

I don't.  I'm getting 30+fps in all situations, with the entire scenery active and most P3D sliders maxed (apart from dynamic lighting and some shadows).  Use a monitor with the refresh rate matched to your locked fps for smoothness.

The trick is to use the right hardware, mine is a hex core 8700K o/c'ed to 5GHz with fast RAM and a 980Ti, with a 4k tv set to either 50 or 60 Hz.  I would do better with a 1080Ti especially in harsh weather conditions, but given the stupid prices of GPUs nowadays I'll have to wait 😛

13 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

I would be more than happy with 20fps performance in P3D over extremely dense scenery. In fact, I think that flight simmers need to be able to deal with framerates at that level if they want next generation graphics and scenery density. In short, if I had a choice between 20fps with sliders full right, or 40fps with sliders in the mid range, I would take the 20fps every time.

I wouldn't. That's spectacularly low expectations Chris.  You can have good fps and dense scenery and smoothness right now, you just need the right hardware and the right knowledge to get it working for you well.

Edited April 28, 20188 yr by kevinfirth

Hello everyone,

I have a question;  Has anyone already tried ORBX TE NL in combination with the airports (airports only) from NL2000? I really like ORBX TE NL but I think the airport (buildings at least) from NL2000 are really better!

Who had the opportunity to test the combination above and is willing to share the outcome of his or her test?

Thank you for sharing.

Maikel

Edited April 28, 20188 yr by mdevrindt

1 hour ago, kevinfirth said:

No Gerard, lets not level down to scenery designed for lesser hardware or 32bit sims.  The answer is to expand coverage of this type of scenery and fir people struggling to upgrade hardware over time.  If we only aim for the status quo we will never make progress to something better - all sims and scenery should be designed for next gen technology IMHO 😄

Imho more and more people are trying multi monitor view setups.That also should be taken in account. 

With just one simple display I can set everything full right and stay above 30. Rural regions over 50. Incl water high , shadows etc..

But with a second view the franerate goes down by 25%. And with a third view a total of 40-45% compared to one view.

Just one view is not enough.

The future will be multiple views beside fast pc’s....

59 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

I don't.  I'm getting 30+fps in all situations, with the entire scenery active and most P3D sliders maxed (apart from dynamic lighting and some shadows).  Use a monitor with the refresh rate matched to your locked fps for smoothness.

The trick is to use the right hardware, mine is a hex core 8700K o/c'ed to 5GHz with fast RAM and a 980Ti, with a 4k tv set to either 50 or 60 Hz.  I would do better with a 1080Ti especially in harsh weather conditions, but given the stupid prices of GPUs nowadays I'll have to wait 😛

I wouldn't. That's spectacularly low expectations Chris.  You can have good fps and dense scenery and smoothness right now, you just need the right hardware and the right knowledge to get it working for you well.

Hm, wow... I have a i7 [email protected], 16 GB RAM that was top speeds some 4 years ago and a GTX1080. I can't get close to 30+fps in all situations no matter what (with scenery sliders full right). My monitor is also quite old and only likes 60 Hz so I can't lock it to that.

And no, 20 fps is a no go for me. Even 30 fps is on the edge and only feels smooth sometimes. Everything below 25 looks stuttering to my (!!!) eyes. Which is why I am looking forward to the Aerofly FS 2 version where 60 fps won't be a problem AT ALL. (I hope.)

BTW I just made a picture of my hometown for Orbx support, the infamous situation with the 'flats' over there and boy, I have to say that with autogen at Dense it looks BETTER than with Extremely dense autogen.

Extremely dense (part of the full screen picture):

Dense:

Too much autogen can make things look ugly...! With lesser autogen you see more of the original photoreal which sometimes can look better. (Take note this picture was taken at 1315 ft: for TrueEarth I advice to fly at 3.000 ft at least!)

Edited April 28, 20188 yr by Guest

Quote

I wouldn't. That's spectacularly low expectations Chris.  You can have good fps and dense scenery and smoothness right now, you just need the right hardware and the right knowledge to get it working for you well.

I didn't say that I wouldn't prefer higher framerates, Kevin! However, scenery detail means more to me than console style 60fps gameplay

Edited April 28, 20188 yr by Christopher Low

25 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

console style 60fps gameplay

Why do you call it console style gameplay? As if it is something bad or something for stupid teen gamers. 😜 Did you ever try Aerofly FS 2? 60 fps beats the hell out of 20 to 30 fps. The fluidity and smoothness that 60 (or 120) gives in Aerofly FS 2 makes the experience so much more life like and so much more real. Heck, even 30 to 40 fps in P3D doesn't feel real smooth to me: it still feels heavy and as if the sim is dragging things along. Flying with an fps of above 60 or above 120 is breathtaking and that alone makes things much more immersive already.

I just finished a flight in P3D with TrueEarth where fps was between 30 and 45 all the time but I seriously can't wait for the Aerofly FS 2 version because P3D simply feels sluggish in comparison. An fps of 20 in P3D is absolutely unacceptable for me: I seriously can't stand it. (Though I am happy for those who can. 😉 )

Edited April 28, 20188 yr by Guest

1 hour ago, J van E said:

Hm, wow... I have a i7 [email protected], 16 GB RAM that was top speeds some 4 years ago and a GTX1080. I can't get close to 30+fps in all situations no matter what (with scenery sliders full right). My monitor is also quite old and only likes 60 Hz so I can't lock it to that.

And no, 20 fps is a no go for me. Even 30 fps is on the edge and only feels smooth sometimes. Everything below 25 looks stuttering to my (!!!) eyes. Which is why I am looking forward to the Aerofly FS 2 version where 60 fps won't be a problem AT ALL. (I hope.)

BTW I just made a picture of my hometown for Orbx support, the infamous situation with the 'flats' over there and boy, I have to say that with autogen at Dense it looks BETTER than with Extremely dense autogen.

Extremely dense (part of the full screen picture):

Dense:

Too much autogen can make things look ugly...! With lesser autogen you see more of the original photoreal which sometimes can look better. (Take note this picture was taken at 1315 ft: for TrueEarth I advice to fly at 3.000 ft at least!)

I think you make a very good point here. Less can be more for autogens in photoreal situations, in which case autogens serve more as "make believe" than real things. The trick is to keep a balance.