32 minutes ago, tweekz said:

What I realized is, that MSFS2020 doesn't really rely so much on Bing. The core is more about the AI placing the fitting autogen in position. That's why most of the time, the sim looks better than the Bing Imagery in those comparison shots.

I agree, it's incredible what their AI can do. Not only autogen also colour correction is quite impressive. Moreover, weather and atmospheric effects contribute massively to the great overall result.

32 minutes ago, tweekz said:

Only real downside related to Bing is the bad mesh resolution and the lack of photogrammetry coverage compared to Google.

Plus poorer imagery quality in general. It remains to be seen if this really is such a problem given their procedural grass, trees etc. From what we’ve seen so far I am very optimistic in that respect. The quality of the Bing imagery in that Corsica shot for instance is terrible, but thanks to their AI it still looks pretty amazing in the sim.

13 minutes ago, Noodle said:

I mean, you're not wrong to point out that in some places mesh resolution could be better. But the expectation that every single feature on Earth is going to be perfectly represented out-of-the-box seems a little unreasonable.

I am absolutely in favor of minimizing the amount of addons I have to buy in order to gain immersion or functionality. But if we have time to complain that some small karst islands off the shore of Thailand aren't quite right, then we must be talking about one heck of a product.

It's not invalid feedback, but it is kinda like, meh.

Mesh is the first addon I ever bought long ago (FSGenesis for FS2k2 !) and is indeed important to me.  So mesh are not meh 😀 for me ! And dont start me on karstic peaks, I am among those who look forward flying in Guilin and the Halong Bay in FS20  and be amazed ! 

If small operators like FranceVFR or Pilot's can put on the market highly sharp meshes, we can expect the same with Asobo. There will be places not as well covered but the progress of GIS data the last decades is rather stunning.  

1 hour ago, Shack95 said:

Plus poorer imagery quality in general. It remains to be seen if this really is such a problem given their procedural grass, trees etc. From what we’ve seen so far I am very optimistic in that respect. The quality of the Bing imagery in that Corsica shot for instance is terrible, but thanks to their AI it still looks pretty amazing in the sim.

That's basically what I meant, yeah. I worded it poorly with "autogen". It was refering to everything that the sim generates out of the visual data. So fields with a bad resolution don't really matter, as they are rendered with a visually appealing in-game representation of a fitting field.

5 hours ago, domkle said:

FranceVFR or Pilot's can put on the market highly sharp meshes, we can expect the same with Asobo. There will be places not as well covered but the progress of GIS data the last decades is rather stunning.  

I agree that GIS is the key enabler to making this new sim. And although we've seen many examples of very high fidelity down to the local level, I still think there needs to be some allowance for the fact that Asobo is creating both the engine plus global content, vice an addon developer providing a single slice (mesh) for a single locale or region.

That being said, there are many many details I want Asobo to get right, particularly with airports, and I dont want people telling me "dont worry, you can pay 3rd parties for that later". So I appreciate your sentiment.

I just happen to think that mesh is one of those GIS-sourced capabilities that will almost certainly improve over time as the base data is updated and ingested into MSFS.

Aix-les-Bains, France

So there is an example of custom mesh I think... 

14 minutes ago, aleex said:

So there is an example of custom mesh I think...

I don't know, it's hard to tell – too hazy and shady. It’s a pity the view isn’t clearer, otherwise we could also see how Azure deals with messy imagery as in Bing Maps the mountain ridge in the centre-right background is slightly different in tone and partly covered with clouds and snow.

55 minutes ago, Shack95 said:

I don't know, it's hard to tell – too hazy and shady. It’s a pity the view isn’t clearer, otherwise we could also see how Azure deals with messy imagery as in Bing Maps the mountain ridge in the centre-right background is slightly different in tone and partly covered with clouds and snow.

Well, I mean comparing Bing maps with Sim mesh, which are different. It’s hard to tell comparing to the real image yes. But seems more accurate than Bing. 

35 minutes ago, aleex said:

Well, I mean comparing Bing maps with Sim mesh, which are different. It’s hard to tell comparing to the real image yes. But seems more accurate than Bing. 

Yes, I know what you meant but I still can’t tell whether there really is a difference regarding mesh. It could also be because of the low detail level in Bing when looking at the mountains from a great distance. I hope you’re right but can’t say for sure.

@Shack95 You're doing yeoman's work finding these places for comparison. Good work, man.

Mont Blanc, France/Italy

St. Barts, French overseas collectivity

 

Edited January 23, 20206 yr by Shack95

This is awesome shots looks way better in the sim! O gosh!

Shack95, thanks for the awesome comparison job, keep going! 

On the Mont Blanc shot, what impresses me is that even with already detailed data, MSFS goes even further by adding extra, credible texture details. Wow! 

The St Barth shot is unbelievable. How did they manage such a transform. The end result is really close to the real deal! 

Brussels, Belgium