FSDT Chicago O'hare V2 Released.

[virtuali 4,421]

A quick note about this, something that is explained in the manual ( Page 7 ), but being in the Design notes, many might skip it.

While the official minimum requirement for the scenery is P3D 4.4, there are still some bugs left in it, which you can't see in any other scenery, because this is the first scenery that uses the very latest features in the V4 SDK ( a scenery made for FSX too couldn't possibly do that, without some major reworking ), and the thing here is the usage of the 2nd UV channel to reduce the polygon count required to do pre-baked Ambient Occlusion.

While this feature technically works in P34.4, it's a bit bugged, resulting in some visual artifacts over building, and this issue was fixed in 4.5:

https://prepar3d.com/news/2019/04/115244/

Quote

Fixed batching issues with objects using two UV channels.

We were a bit torn between *prohibiting* the installation with 4.4, so users won't think it was a bug of the scenery, or allowing it. In the end, we decided to allow it, assuming that everybody will eventually update to 4.5 sooner or later.

So, if you see something weird, and you are still on 4.4, that's why.

 

[micstatic 4,319]

That would confirm why I don't see anything on 4.5.  Also ridiculous to hear people complaining about the price of this basically totally new scenery.  Like they were going to work for free?  I'm more than happy to pay for quality products in a computer software area that is a pretty small world.  

[CFIJose 5,485]

I'll pass on this one due to poor fps and shimmering objects all over the place. Too bad for me because I was really looking forward to this updated KORD.

[SP2472 2,295]

30 minutes ago, threegreen said:

I know there are some instances where developers charge a bit much for updated/ported versions of their products. But more often than not the size of the discount, upgrade price or the like really is reasonable. There are products that required substantial investment to upgrade/port over which a lot of times are close to actually being a new product which totally warrants the fee that flight simmers are so often complaining about.

Literally the only thing this scenery has in common with the old version is that it's the same airport which is modeled. This is a completely new scenery which took just as long, well, from what it seems like actually longer than the old one to develop. 20% in this case is absolutely acceptable.

It still at the highest tier-pricing in the FS community, the discount brings the price down to normal levels. I still don't think it's up to FlyTampa/Flightbeam standards which is really a shame since FSDT used to be on top.

[Boeing or not going 578]

39 minutes ago, DJJose said:

I'll pass on this one due to poor fps and shimmering objects all over the place. Too bad for me because I was really looking forward to this updated KORD.

Everybody above gets good fps it sounds like a problem on your end

[virtuali 4,421]

43 minutes ago, DJJose said:

I'll pass on this one due to poor fps and shimmering objects all over the place. Too bad for me because I was really looking forward to this updated KORD.

There's no "poor fps", of course. In fact, KORD V2 has an exceptionally good fps, considering how much more detailed is compared to the old one. Here's proof, we took these two screenshots using a saved situation, under exactly the same settings, to compare the old KORD to the new one:

This is the OLD FSDT KORD, a scenery originally made in 2008, which is about 4-5 times LESS detailed:

 

This is the NEW FSDT KORD V2:

 

The resolution it's 4K, the viewing angle is the worse possible, with the whole airport in sight and the Chicago downtown in the background, and every other setting is EXACTLY the same, AI is UT Live at 50%, which still is a lot of planes, and it's a setting that gives you a chance to find some free parking spots, and nothing else is changed, just the scenery. 

In one of my previous post, I even made a mistake, and said the new KORD is 2 fps slower than the old one. I mixed the two and, in fact, I now realized the new KORD is FASTER than the old one and this, considering the old one was made taking into account the PC of 2008, it's really incredible the new one is not only not slower, but it can even outperform it.

And, it really hurts when you KNOW your performances are so good, seeing somebody commenting about supposedly "poor", being so quick putting the blame on the scenery, without even trying to understand why or what is really causing it.

 

Edited August 22, 2019 by virtuali

[micstatic 4,319]

I'm on record of saying I'm a fan.  But if you want constructive criticism, I'd say I prefer the taxiways in the old one.  Especially after seeing the picture.  

[F737MAX 5,579]

Like-for-like comparison between the two products, I lose just 2 FPS using FSDT's KORD v2.
The lowest I get is 24 FPS (I'm locked at 30).



I have to admit there is some very noticeable shimmering on Terminal 1 and Hilton hotel buildings.

As @Farlis mentions below, the runway designation markings before the stop bars on the taxiways are missing.

The PBR is very good and I'm a big fan of the information panels at the gates.

Nighttime feels a bit dark, though there is no significant performance loss (maybe 1 FPS).

The airport vehicles wait for the user aircraft and the animation of them is excellent.
The slight issue is that they can back-up into one another and then travel around the airfield as a blob of overlapping vehicles.

To save on page loading, I've attached links instead of embedding pics.
Take a look at these, hopefully they will be of some use to someone.
https://i.imgur.com/CuVnGye.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/nun4H8Q.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/AHQgbe7.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/DTmRkqI.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/bUtSBTs.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/Z2F9gnu.jpg

Overall, I really recommend this scenery.
 

Edited August 22, 2019 by F737NG
Noted missing textures

[virtuali 4,421]

1 minute ago, micstatic said:

I'm on record of saying I'm a fan.  But if you want constructive criticism, I'd say I prefer the taxiways in the old one.  Especially after seeing the picture.  

Old taxiways look greenish and very flat, and you can see repeating patterns not very well oriented, which is not a problem in the new one.

Also, with PBR you simply cannot judge from screenshot, because the colors change *SO MUCH* depending on weather (no clouds, few clouds, rain, etc.), time of the day and viewing angle. You must really try it live, under different light conditions.

[Farlis 2,281]

4 minutes ago, micstatic said:

I'm on record of saying I'm a fan.  But if you want constructive criticism, I'd say I prefer the taxiways in the old one.  Especially after seeing the picture.  

I'm actually not sure if Umberto accidently picked a beta stage screenshot where some layers on the taxiways are missing. Because the picture lacks a significant number of markings which are there in real life and which are all there in the old version.

[virtuali 4,421]

4 minutes ago, Farlis said:

I'm actually not sure if Umberto accidently picked a beta stage screenshot where some layers on the taxiways are missing. Because the picture lacks a significant number of markings which are there in real life and which are all there in the old version.

The picture was taken today, just before release. I'll have to check out, maybe the LOD are being set too aggressively.

[CFIJose 5,485]

42 minutes ago, virtuali said:

And, it really hurts when you KNOW your performances are so good, seeing somebody commenting about supposedly "poor", being so quick putting the blame on the scenery, without even trying to understand why or what is really causing it.

 

Don't take it personally. It's probably my system or maybe I don't know what the heck I'm talking about.

I also prefer the way v1 blends with ORBX FTXG & LC:

v2

v1

[downscc 1,327]

I for one am very happy with KORDv2.  I just spent some time this afternoon revisiting the half dozen parking spaces I had already configured for GSX 2.06, remembering to remove the exceptions file used by previous version.  I love it now that we have a complete South Cargo area with West, Central and East ramps.  Now I have places where my GTI and CLX B748Fs feel at home.

There is nothing in the old version that I like better than what is provided in KORDv2.  It's hard to believe we used to accept those low resolution textures on the cargo buildings... so glad to see the upgrades.

 

[cavaricooper 2,614]

I'm happy to have ORD in the rotation- looks quite good IMHO-

I purposely landed on 10C and took the long way 'round to NE cargo for CLX....quite nice to actually follow taxiways on the Navigraph Chart.  No performance issues noted- all in all very pleased. I shall visit the windy city often :).

C

Edited August 22, 2019 by cavaricooper

[edpatino 1,964]

2 hours ago, virtuali said:

A quick note about this, something that is explained in the manual ( Page 7 ), but being in the Design notes, many might skip it.

While the official minimum requirement for the scenery is P3D 4.4, there are still some bugs left in it, which you can't see in any other scenery, because this is the first scenery that uses the very latest features in the V4 SDK ( a scenery made for FSX too couldn't possibly do that, without some major reworking ), and the thing here is the usage of the 2nd UV channel to reduce the polygon count required to do pre-baked Ambient Occlusion.

While this feature technically works in P34.4, it's a bit bugged, resulting in some visual artifacts over building, and this issue was fixed in 4.5:

https://prepar3d.com/news/2019/04/115244/

We were a bit torn between *prohibiting* the installation with 4.4, so users won't think it was a bug of the scenery, or allowing it. In the end, we decided to allow it, assuming that everybody will eventually update to 4.5 sooner or later.

So, if you see something weird, and you are still on 4.4, that's why.

 

This is valid for Client-only upgrades to P3Dv4.5-hf1, or it's needed to update the Content too?.

Cheers, Ed