17 minutes ago, ShawnG said:

"comically exaggerated" is the term used, I believe.  Which might indeed describe the tree sizes, but definitely describes the outrage over the tree sizes.  Matthew, your point has been completely and thoroughly heard.  If it weren't constantly accompanied by little passive aggressive digs at anybody who dares question you, I might even have more sympathy for your point.  It will be fixed, or it won't.  Raising the issue in the first place makes it more likely to be taken seriously,  harping on it without end generally has the opposite effect.

After having put up with the comically exaggerated scale of autogen buildings and trees in FSX/P3D for the last 10 years, I'm not about to go quiet now, 10 days before release of FS2020. 🤷‍♂️

It's a worry that many seem to question the "truth" that certain tree types too big, ie conifers and "rainforest" (see the Sydney video).  Possibly they just take an opposing stance for the sake of argument but in many cases I suspect their perceptive powers are sorely lacking. 🤦‍♂️

It's certainly a concern that Asobo has not addressed the issue at this late stage, at least I've not seen any evidence of it in any video or screenshot so far.

"Harping on" about the issue is preciously the action that needs to be taken, lest Asobo think people no longer care and that mediocrity is acceptable. 🤔

Edited August 8, 20205 yr by MatthewS

The size of trees or buildings has never detracted from the FSX/P3D experience. It's everything else that has including the general ugliness of the sim. This is very much a non issue even if its never "fixed". And if you're going to tell me that you fly in real life by tree height, I will tell you to retake your pilots license exam.

Matthew, one person constantly banging a drum for a specific issue pales in comparison to several hundred people banging on drums while chanting about the same specific issue.

Your's is the lonely voice of a lone wolf, as compared to a roaring crowd,...

1 minute ago, n4gix said:

Matthew, one person constantly banging a drum for a specific issue pales in comparison to several hundred people banging on drums.

Your's is the lonely voice of a lone wolf, as compared to a roaring crowd,...

To be fair, this alone doesn't necessarily mean he is incorrect.

32 minutes ago, Hyperfocal said:

.A piece of software of this scope and complexity has dependencies, especially when AI is involved, where the adjustment of one parameter can cause an enormous amount of downstream impact.

Hence my tongue in cheek concern of coming home to a sapling earlier. 

 

I am hopeful that what Asobo provides is a fantastic engine and framework, both of which allow straightforward 3rd party paid and freeware creation tools. Maybe even offer the opportunity to submit anything, and have it incorporated as part of the world map we all use.

Modifying a global scale attribute requires ensuring that even though you fix something broke, you don't inadvertently break something working. 😁 But if the engine is solid, the solution will be implemented. Asobo's tree comment convinced me it's on the burner. 

 

Never got an invite 

 

2 minutes ago, Chock said:

To be fair, this alone doesn't necessarily mean he is incorrect.

It's almost irrelevant at this point. As Asobo said, see the forest for the trees. A very apt idiom. 

Edited August 8, 20205 yr by Slides

9 minutes ago, Chock said:

To be fair, this alone doesn't necessarily mean he is incorrect.

To be entirely fair, you are of course correct. But, that was not my point...

What will gain more "traction" a single voice crying in the wilderness or an entire village of folks with pitchforks and flaming torches? 😉

I'll just leave this here...

Just now, MatthewS said:

After having put up with the comically exaggerated scale of autogen buildings and trees in FSX/P3D for the last 10 years, I'm not about to go quiet now, 10 days before release of FS2020. 🤷‍♂️

It's a worry that many seem to question the "truth" that certain tree types too big, ie conifers and "rainforest" (see the Sydney video).  Possibly they just take an opposing stance for the sake of argument but in many cases I suspect their perceptive powers are sorely lacking. 🤦‍♂️

It's certainly a concern that Asobo has not addressed the issue at this late stage, at least I've not seen any evidence of it in any video or screenshot so far.

"Harping on" about the issue is preciously the action that needs to be taken, lest Asobo think people no longer care and that mediocrity is acceptable. 🤔

autogen in fsx p3d was exaggerated because if it had been at the correct scale and density to look realistic it would have melted everybody's cpu.  xplane seems to go with the "sparse, but sized correctly" route,  guess which method I prefer.  

The main problem for you in your method of never letting it go, while talking down to everybody, is that you will end up demotivating even the people who agree with you, let alone, the people you need to fix it for you.  (or people like me, who think you have a point, but don't care about this issue very much, comparatively speaking)   

 

4 minutes ago, Chock said:

I'll just leave this here...

 

From the public videos I have seen, I'm afraid You will need something like this:

9 minutes ago, Chock said:

I'll just leave this here...

I think if PMDG makes some trees 🌲 we may not use this so much 😂

Edited August 8, 20205 yr by rtodepart

1 minute ago, rtodepart said:

I think if PMDG makes some trees 🌲 we may not use this so much 😂

This would mean people would be arguing that 'PMDG trees are the best' even though iFly trees were essentially identical and half the price, but whilst this argument was occurring, FSL would make some which were better than both put together, but at the last second, Majestic would knock some out just as good which were a quarter of the price of any of the others.

3 minutes ago, Chock said:

I'll just leave this here...

Orbx was never able to fix the scaling issue in P3D/FSX, their autogen buildings and trees just have nicer textures than default, this has been discussed many times in other posts. 🙄

 

9 minutes ago, n4gix said:

To be entirely fair, you are of course correct. But, that was not my point...

What will gain more "traction" a single voice crying in the wilderness or an entire village of folks with pitchforks and flaming torches?

So what is that village protesting about, if not tree scale, then what? 🤷‍♂️

 

18 minutes ago, Slides said:

It's almost irrelevant at hits point. As Asobo said, see the forest for the trees. A very apt idiom. 

Could mean anything, Asobo should make a definitive statement not speak in riddles.... It's just a way to deflect blame if they don't deliver, like "no, we never said we would fix tree scale, we meant we'd clear trees from the end of runways" 🤦‍♂️

 

6 minutes ago, ShawnG said:

autogen in fsx p3d was exaggerated because if it had been at the correct scale and density to look realistic it would have melted everybody's cpu.  xplane seems to go with the "sparse, but sized correctly" route,  guess which method I prefer.  

The main problem for you in your method of never letting it go, while talking down to everybody, is that you will end up demotivating even the people who agree with you, let alone, the people you need to fix it for you.  (or people like me, who think you have a point, but don't care about this issue very much, comparatively speaking)   

Some here have actually suggested have big trees for performance reasons 🤦‍♂️

Yes, it's a forum...  Asobo actually visits? But do they post, I don't have access to the alpha/beta forums, so I have no idea if what they say, apart from their "see the forest for the trees" riddles.  Also the development update says nothing about tree scale.

I very much doubt debate in some 3rd party forum is a discouragement for Asobo.

 

3 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

Orbx was never able to fix the scaling issue in P3D/FSX, their autogen buildings and trees just have nicer textures than default, this has been discussed many times in other posts. 🙄

 

Which would be relevant if A, it wasn't just a bit of fun with a picture I knocked up in Photoshop, and B, this was FSX/P3D we were actually discussing. 🤣

5 minutes ago, Chock said:

Which would be relevant if A, it wasn't just a bit of fun with a picture I knocked up in Photoshop, and B, this was FSX/P3D we were actually discussing. 

Ah I see, if only could read your mind. 🤷‍♂️

Well one interpretation of your art is that you think Orbx can make an add-on that takes a "chainsaw" to the FS2020 exaggerated tree scale and fixes it. 

I very much doubt Orbx or any 3rd party can fix the issue of tree scale and in any case Asobo should aim to get it right (or at least customisable, ie .ini file configurable) for release day.

Edited August 8, 20205 yr by MatthewS