Number of 3D cities in MS2020? - use Earth View 3D to see them!

[Paraffin 2,197]

10 minutes ago, ckyliu said:

It is though, because the data does exist and has for a long time, there's loads of European photogrammetry coverage on Google Map; even my town of just 100,000 people is 3D on Google. Google's aerial photography (it's really not satellite at these higher resolutions) is more up to date and more detailed.

That's why I said the only bias is in the data sets.

As far as I know, Google doesn't own and operate the aerial surveys that generate images in Google Maps. They're buying data from commercial companies or using government info where it's available.

If Google has better photogrammetry data for UK/Europe than Microsoft, it's because they're prioritizing and paying more for source data than MS is for their Bing maps. That doesn't mean MS won't continue to source better data in Bing, we might just have to wait a while for it to show up in the app and in the sim.

[bonchie 2,305]

Given what we have now, I find it hard to complain about "only" having 400 photogrammetry cities and AI tech that can build others cities well enough to fly VFR.

It won't be perfect, but there's going to be enough there to keep most us busy for years before worrying about new areas getting added.

[yanfeng12342000 132]

Yeh how many photogrammetry cities are there in other sims? None.

[Baber20 1,438]

1 hour ago, yanfeng12342000 said:

Yeh how many photogrammetry cities are there in other sims? None.

Thats not the point. When you market something with a specific feature set, you better deliver on it. We didn't ask them for photogrammetric cities. It was their decision to market their sim as such and are liable to criticism if they fail upon it. But still its far too early to judge anything. Lets atleast wait for the sim to enter the beta phase.

[Dominique_K 10,150]

1 hour ago, Baber20 said:

Thats not the point. When you market something with a specific feature set, you better deliver on it. We didn't ask them for photogrammetric cities. It was their decision to market their sim as such and are liable to criticism if they fail upon it. But still its far too early to judge anything. Lets atleast wait for the sim to enter the beta phase.

One must be careful not let the (often self-fueled) hype overwhelm common sense. It is a tendency we all have and we’d better keep in check. As thee movie says, the harder they fall.

I have never understood from the teasers that all cities would be photogrammetric. And I must add that the photogrammetry trees I’ve seen so far underwhelm me.

[highflyer2020 607]

2 hours ago, domkle said:

One must be careful not let the (often self-fueled) hype overwhelm common sense. It is a tendency we all have and we’d better keep in check. As thee movie says, the harder they fall.

I have never understood from the teasers that all cities would be photogrammetric. And I must add that the photogrammetry trees I’ve seen so far underwhelm me.

 

There's nothing in common sense that tells you to expect some small town US city no one has ever heard is 3D mapped while a major European city is not. This is a perfectly reasonable criticism of the 3D mapping data based on what we have seen so far.

 

7 hours ago, bonchie said:

Given what we have now, I find it hard to complain about "only" having 400 photogrammetry cities and AI tech that can build others cities well enough to fly VFR.

It won't be perfect, but there's going to be enough there to keep most us busy for years before worrying about new areas getting added.

 

You wouldn't be saying if those 400 cities were outside of the US and that's really the problem here. No one is saying "i'm not going to buy the new sim because my city isn't mapped". We're just pointing out it's a bit surprising at what cities have been mapped vs which have not.

 

5 hours ago, yanfeng12342000 said:

Yeh how many photogrammetry cities are there in other sims? None.

 

A really insightful comment - thanks for the contribution to this thread.

 

Edited December 27, 2019 by highflyer2020

[Dominique_K 10,150]

22 minutes ago, highflyer2020 said:

 

There's nothing in common sense that tells you to expect some small town US city no one has ever heard is 3D mapped while a major European city is not. This is a perfectly reasonable criticism of the 3D mapping data based on what we have seen so far.

 

The common sense I was speaking of is not to expect the whole world in PG, if I am not mistaken they never promised that anyway, and make generalization about what they should or shouldn't do without knowing how MS makes the choice of towns and cities. 

May I add that overflying a city like Paris is forbidden (and this interdiction is strictly enforced within minutes) so I don't care if the center is not exactly recreated. 

[FDEdev 955]

25 minutes ago, domkle said:

May I add that overflying a city like Paris is forbidden (and this interdiction is strictly enforced within minutes) so I don't care if the center is not exactly recreated. 

This may only apply to VFR traffic. Never counted how often I flew directly overhead the city.

Furthermore that's one of the advantages of a sim, being able to fly anywhere without the RW consequences, e.g. like flying through the arc de triomphe.

Edited December 27, 2019 by FDEdev

[Ray Proudfoot 8,980]

16 minutes ago, domkle said:

May I add that overflying a city like Paris is forbidden (and this interdiction is strictly enforced within minutes) so I don't care if the center is not exactly recreated. 

That may be the case for Paris but it certainly doesn’t apply to London. Inbounds to Heathrow using 27L and 27R fly right over the city plus aircraft using EGLC.

Plenty of press helicopters too during events such as Prime Minister travelling from Downing St to Buckingham Palace. Absolutely no reason whatsoever for London to be excluded from same treatment as San Francisco.

There is every reason to expect all major world cities ( exceptions such as Chinese ones are reasonable) to get the same treatment as US ones. Not to do so sends confusing messages about how good this new sim is going to be.

[Dominique_K 10,150]

9 minutes ago, FDEdev said:

This may only apply to VFR traffic. Never counted how often I flew directly overhead the city.

It is authorized above 2 000 meters for commercial airliners and military aircraft. For the former, the average observed altitude is 3000 meters.

If you fly below in a GA aircraft , you'll soon have a Gendarmerie helicopter with a sniper aboard to stop you. 

 

[FDEdev 955]

1 minute ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

That may be the case for Paris but it certainly doesn’t apply to London. Inbounds to Heathrow using 27L and 27R fly right over the city plus aircraft using EGLC.

I seriously doubt that VFR traffic is allowed to fly over London.

[Dominique_K 10,150]

2 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

 

 . Not to do so sends confusing messages about how good this new sim is going to be.

I need more to be confused, sorry 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,980]

Just now, FDEdev said:

I seriously doubt that VFR traffic is allowed to fly over London.

What is a helicopter if not VFR. They will be strictly controlled. Yes, I probably couldn’t fly a private plane over the city but are you saying that’s allowed in major US cities including SAN Francisco?

[FDEdev 955]

7 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

What is a helicopter if not VFR. 

https://www.nats.aero/environment/consultations/london-ctr-reclassification/

[Ray Proudfoot 8,980]

8 minutes ago, FDEdev said:

https://www.nats.aero/environment/consultations/london-ctr-reclassification/

That area only extends eastwards to Chelsea. What about central London?