Has Anybody notice the inaccurate landclass in FSX Demo?Look at these pictures:The first picture is from Saint Kitts in FSX Demothe others are from the same location taken by google earth.Notice the difference: Fsx suggests that the area is arid ,dry rock and desert with some greens from there to there. Not exactly my idea for a caribbean tropical paradise.The actual photos form Google earth show the real thing as it should be.I wonder what kind of source data have such inaccuaracies for certain regions in the world.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/154065.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/154066.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/154067.jpg

Please consider the amount of required data.FSX Demo (unpacked and installed) has 660 MB Scenery.FSX (final) will come on two DVD = 9 GB.The Nasa Worldwind Project (similar to Google Earth but simpler) needs around 20 Terabyte just for the LandSat 7 image set with 15 m resolution - without any aerial photos like Google Earth has.20 TB = 20,000 GB = 4500 DVD (!)I dont know how much storage the Google Earth images need, but in certain US cities the resolution goes down to 25 cm. If you double the resolution, the size quadruples. 25 cm is 60 times the resolution of 15 m Landsat 7, which means the storage size should be 60^2 times 20 TB = 72,000 TB = 72,000,000 GB = 16 millions DVD (!!)Even with the upcoming 50 GB HD-DVDs or Blueray-DVDs you would need to rent a big truck to carry your FlightSim home, if you want images like those on Google Earth. Exercise to the reader:- Calculate the prize for blank HD-DVD media required.- Calculate the time required to install that monster.According to TDragger, the demo has only about 1-2 % of the full tile set used to stitch together the scenery from landclass info. I bet they drastically simplified the mapping of landclass info to scenery tile, so that the demo still fits on a CD.However it would be nifty, if FS 10 (or maybe 11) would be able to download the required scenery while you fly. So i consider it very interesting, that MS had a job offer last year where they were looking for someone to "integrate MS FS and MSN Virtual Earth" ...

The talk is about landclass and the standard scenery texture set. There is no size difference between an inaccurate Landclass.bgl and an accurate Landclass.bglThe landclass textures referenced are wrong for the area.

I think that it was Jason Waskey who mentioned that land class has not changed from FS 9 to FS X - something about a computer blowing up or something?Anyway, land class is supremely easy to change and make better. Please see Simple_Instructions_for_Modifying_Land_Class.zip in the Avsim library for help.Best regards.Luis

Yes, there are several programs to fix landclass. I use Jim Kier's LWMVIEWER2. You can get "improved" landclass from FSGenesis. Even this has problems since the database itself is not accurate and requires "hand" modification (USA only).Unless Microsoft has commissioned some new land study I am afraid that we are doomed to some degree of inaccuracy. With the increased resolution and design of synthetic textures the interest in landclass will increase. Perhaps this will inspire a sharing of improved landclass which must be done tile by tile. Of course, the number of tiles may be increasing given the better resolution (smaller tiles). If Microsoft does not have an up-to-date source then issues will occur.Dick near 5G8

<Yes. And???

Well I guess the question is if this is indicative of the quality of the landclass that ships with the end product?

Not everywhere. MS has to pull their landclass from a variety of sources. If the data for hi-res landclass isn't available, or is extremely expensive, then MS has to work with what they can get.

I would expect the landclasses will be good enough that we will enjoy them unless: a) It's an area we live in in which case it'll probably still be pretty good looking compared to memory (that park is 30m out of place! oh noohs!):( Something we purposely look up on google earth, which might take the fun out of the game, cause obviously its not perfect (no insult to the thread opener intended). Maybe I'll take a flight in Nauru island in the pacific in the final just for laughs and see if they have the phosphate mines landclassed properly hehe. I'll try and stop after that before I ruin it for myselfI wouldnt worry. It'll look good, even if it's not perfect.

>Well I guess the question is if this is indicative of the>quality of the landclass that ships with the end product?The other posts have already answered. We must ship the planet. We get data from all over. Yes, it's not accurate everyone. No, you probably won't notice unless you want to. Net result? Stay off Google Earth and just enjoy the product. ;)

><>>Yes. And???The question is if this is a demo issue or will make it in the final product?I thought that FSX utilizes a more detailed and sophisticated landclass source data. Maybe not for all the world.Anyway the new features(roads, coastlines, water etc)seem excellent.Keep up the good work.

>>Well I guess the question is if this is indicative of the>>quality of the landclass that ships with the end product?>>The other posts have already answered. We must ship the>planet. We get data from all over. Yes, it's not accurate>everyone. No, you probably won't notice unless you want to.>Net result? Stay off Google Earth and just enjoy the product.>;)TD,I sense your frustration with this thread and I share it. For whatever reason there seem to be any number of people that are poised to punch as many holes in FS-X as possible. People, it's a PRERELEASE DEMO with a teeny dataset (terrain, etc.) coming with it - why must those people assume (and rant that) this is what will be in the final version?I was pretty much stunned (there is no better word) when I saw that MS would be releasing a *demo* of FS-X - this has never happened with any previous version (to my knowledge anyway) and is the "proof in the pudding" that the FS team truly wants to hear *constructive* feedback from its audience... As a result of the demo, I now know how hard it is to drop flour bombs from an ultralight with any degree of accuracy 8^) .Anyone who downloads it should treat it for what it is - a sneak peek at a work in progress that will certainly be much more refined in its final release. Critics, please have some faith in the ACES team, and save the ranting until you've played the final release product.Dave Blevins

I'm not really sure that's the point.If you are making a game like Crysis, where you have a single island and you are jamming it with as much detail as humanly possibly, that's one thing. ACES models the entire world. It's just awe-inspiring to say it.I can't imagine what kind of person is going to really have an anuerism because a part of a tiny island somewhere in the middle of the ocean is a bit off on one end. I can practice the River Visual Approach down the Potomac in a DC-3 or cruise a sailplane over Africa if I want. The brilliance of the simulation is there. Not in pixel perfection, but in the massive scale of the undertaking.

Thanks for all your answers Tdragger. I know I sometimes might sound annoying or nitpicking but there is just a thirst for information about FS-X. Nothing personal and I will give ACES time to get the end product out.Regarding Landclass. The only time accuracy counts is when you are flying over an area you know. In FS9 when I fly over my home town (EHRD, Rotterdam) I notice the imperfections. Accurate roads and rivers (AROE or UT Europe or the new NAVTEC in FS-X) make it more noticable. You now get all the roads of a town but if the underlying landclass is a forrest it wil look silly. Is the European Landclass in FS-X updated and could you tell us the datasource for this?The reason I ask is that I've been playing with the idea to do some landclass myself using Corine land cover data http://dataservice.eea.europa.eu/atlas/vie...wpub.asp?id=816 I put this on hold to see first if the landclass system and/or data accuracy will be changed in FS-X (doing a lot of work and then see that it will be available anyway or will be useless in a few months is a waste of time). I know from your earlier answers that the Landclass system still uses the FS9 format (a LOD8 and thus a resolution of ~ 1.2 km ?) Nothing wrong with that in my opinion but what source data is used in FS-X.

Thanks for the very good hint.But Nobody has reflected on the Waterclass yet.It's not so realistic to show lage areas of light blue Coral reef Waterclass around an island that is not grown from these kind of Reef but grown on an volcanic structure.I think this also did not depend on the cost for a comercial landclass set but more on basic geological knowledge.But as Taildragger and others also stated. It's a Demo and not the Product and I realy enjoy it first time in more than 20 Jears of onwn FS-experience and continously hunger on every next upcoming Version. Hopefully we all post here with a little hope to improve the next (or overnext) Product by our suggestions. Otherwise we'll hope that Addon-Designers may be able with FSK SDK (or other adapted external Tools) to compensate many of the not so perfect "holes" in the FS(x) world.Regards Heinz-Werner Arens - Germany