56 minutes ago, rjfry said:

I have TE Netherlands but have no interest in scenery without seasons my sim is set to my PC date and time I don't see the point in flying in winter from a European airport and landing in the UK in summer.

Also have both German ORBX scenery regions. 

It’s a trade-off. Do you want fake summer, winter, spring and autumn, or real summer? I’m with Gerard here, I try and avoid landclass scenery whenever possible. Road running through houses/shops/golf courses? No thanks.

Landclass was a necessary evil from a time when PCs were much simpler and storage was expensive. The future for flight simulation is ortho with high-quality overlays.

45 minutes ago, F737NG said:

You do wonder if people bother reading posts from earlier in a thread any more...

So what did the earlier post say? 😃

It will be interesting to see how MSFS handles seasonal scenery in a non-landclass world. Most of the color change in spring and fall has to do with modeled vegetation and not the ground imagery (which can be image processed to change the shade). And winter can be simulated with bare vegetation and a realistic snow cover submodel. Will MS do all that? Will the seasonal images be processed locally or stored in the cloud? Stay tuned.

Edited September 2, 20196 yr by jabloomf1230

Will wait until version 4 is made more user friendly and reliable.  Til then, I'm not purchasing ORBX products.

Stan

I'm quite happy with ORBX.  Without this company my FSX scenery would be poor indeed.

Despite the MSFS announcement, ORBX has committed to releasing the last openLC scenery to cover the rest of the world, i.e. Africa and Asia, an announcement which really surprised me in a good way.

I still don't understand why some folks feel the need to announce to everyone their preference for photoreal scenery vs landclass scenery.  This is a completely subjective and personal preference, and just because you like something doesn't mean that everyone else agrees with you.

Dave

I find it helpful to hear the reasons for different preferences. No reason we can't exchange opinions and remain friends. I'm a ORBX land class man myself and that after spending hundreds on Photo MSE scenery. Looks more realistic to me. Isn't the sim itself kind of a fantasy world anyway?

21 hours ago, Skywolf said:

I am beyond surprised that Flightbeam does not go install outside the sim, there is a script but effects/textures are still in the root sim - freakin annoying.  LatinVFR guys are going to look into - so I am happy with their response (lets wait and see).  Slightly disappointed in Flightbeam approach to this.

😑

We're already in the process of an update that would allow installation outside the sim.

5 minutes ago, Mir // Flightbeam said:

😑

We're already in the process of an update that would allow installation outside the sim.

Wow - That is amazing Mir.  Looking forward to the update

6 minutes ago, PATCO LCH said:

I find it helpful to hear the reasons for different preferences. No reason we can't exchange opinions and remain friends. I'm a ORBX land class man myself and that after spending hundreds on Photo MSE scenery. Looks more realistic to me. Isn't the sim itself kind of a fantasy world anyway?

I agree that engaging in reasoned discussion, i.e. discussing and even debating the pros and cons of things, is helpful.  What I don't find at all useful are statements like "photoreal is so much better than landclass", or "landclass is so unrealistic".

Dave

2 hours ago, lownslo said:

ORBX's real problem is the ORBX Central fiasco.  Using their new Central means customers are required to enter the SLTZ (Scenery Layer Twilight Zone).  It seems ORBX Central was almost as well thought out as their contests.

I've had my share of frustration with Orbx over the years, but I have to say they're getting a lot of undeserved flak these days, especially as regards Orbx Central and scenery layering.

The problem is that LM have been pushing for the "add-on.xml" method, but at the same time, they have failed to ensure that a mixed environment (i.e. one with scenery products added using both add-on.xml files and scenery.cfg) would work without issues in the "transition period".

I have converted all my older scenery add-ons (including things like Tongass Fjords X, OZx addons, RTMM and so on) to the "add-on.xml" method and have zero layering issues, but the moment I start mixing the two approaches, problems do crop up.

I'm afraid this is going to continue until LM simply make the "add-on.xml" method mandatory AND enable users to move blocks of scenery instead of locking them...

Cheers,

Tym

Edited September 2, 20196 yr by tymk

6 minutes ago, tymk said:

I've had my share of frustration with Orbx over the years, but I have to say they're getting a lot of undeserved flak these days, especially as regards Orbx Central and scenery layering.

The problem is that LM have been pushing for the "add-on.xml" method, but at the same time, they have failed to ensure that a mixed environment (i.e. one with scenery products added using both add-on.xml files and scenery.cfg) would work without issues in the "transition period".

I have converted all my older scenery add-ons (including things like Tongass Fjords X, OZx addons, RTMM and so on) to the "add-on.xml" method and have zero layering issues, but the moment I start mixing the two approaches, problems do crop up.

I'm afraid this is going to continue until LM simply make the "add-on.xml" method mandatory AND enable users to move blocks of scenery instead of locking them...

Cheers,

Tym

Are you able to layer all of your addons ( also non-Orbx ) by country .... ?

 

LC maps are not a fantasy world 😀 ! The data come from the USGS and its counterparts over the world.  These are scientific data. They represent the land use  with a somewhat limited classification. They are used  in many real world applications.

When first introduced long ago by FSgenesis, they were a tremendous addition to our sim. Still are. They are not as precise as orthos, because they are a different animal,  but a fat region  allows dead reckoning without any problem. You know where you are and you feel that you are there. They are not a fantasy  world but a reasonably faithful approximation of thecreal world.

Edited September 2, 20196 yr by domkle

I have lost faith with orbx now and own loads of there products . TEGB has been the killer . Lack of support being told it was my system that was poor upgraded no difference spent close to a £1000 on hardware was going to do it anyway but trying to get TE working well was the motivator  . Then it didn't still didn't  work,wait for patch that was no use to anyone. Wait for LM to fix it still bad . All the time from JV it works on my system . I hear there is a new patch so London City may work on TE in the works . They advertised EGLC with TE I pointed out it would be a nightmare.

So to  get it running well my guess is I needed 32gig of ram not  of  and the rtx2080 TI to get the extra 4gig vram instead of the RTX 2080 I purchased . I have a I7 9700    so cant see it being CPU limited. Getting an answer out of Orbx what hardware is required to run there scenary is like getting blood out of a stone .

TE on both London, Southampton still judders TE Netherlands judders over Rotterdam . VR which is what I want to use for VFR flying is a nightmare. So at the moment all 3dm files disabled in TE GB disabled and just get it work some of time if clouds don't form . Which never happens in UK .

Last year there customer service to P3D has been a joke mixed with some statements which are close to lies. 

17 minutes ago, GSalden said:

Are you able to layer all of your addons ( also non-Orbx ) by country .... ? 

I've never had any need to do that, but that's really an advanced scenario that requires a third-party tool in any case, doesn't it? I suppose it can be done by writing a separate add-on.xml for each country (and layering airports above base scenery within that file), then disabling/enabling such addons as needed (within P3D or via Lorby's Addon Organizer). Of course, the problem is that with Orbx scenery, that would get overwritten/duplicated by Central. But wouldn't it be the same when using the old approach (scenery.cfg)?

At any rate, to me the real problem is the inability to move (i.e. manually layer) the sceneries added using the new method within the sim, and that really isn't an issue limited to Orbx Central...

EDIT: I absolutely get your point about not being able to layer scenery the way you want, I'm just not sure how Orbx Central plays into that (which is the complaint made in this Orbx-specific thread).

Edited September 2, 20196 yr by tymk
Comment added to clarify my agreement with Gerard on the fundamental issue ;-)

6 minutes ago, cannow said:

TE on both London, Southampton still judders TE Netherlands judders over Rotterdam . VR which is what I want to use for VFR flying is a nightmare. So at the moment all 3dm files disabled in TE GB disabled and just get it work some of time if clouds don't form . Which never happens in UK .

I fully agree that TE GBS is a performance nightmare in terms of scenery loading and building shadows (there must be some issue in that area because I get negligible performance hit with autogen building shadows even in the middle of places like Portland or LA, but they absolutely murder my GPU even in smaller towns in TE GB). According to JV, the new lead developer for P3D versions of TE is going to:

Quote

Optimise TE GB South for P3D massively, Port the rest of TE GB to P3D ASAP

So maybe there's still hope...

6 minutes ago, cannow said:

Last year there customer service to P3D has been a joke mixed with some statements which are close to lies. 

The problem is that the size of their portfolio has way outgrown their original (forum-based) support approach. I mean, Nick Cooper is a great guy who tries to help whenever he can, but he can't really be expected do all support on his own...