Word of warning: Dont buy London landmarks (orbx)!

[Andreas Stangenes 1,628]

 

[Kilo60 660]

Ouch... My Eyes!!!!

[maniamcool 75]

People are truly getting taken for a ride with these releases 

[Carts85 1,203]

He didn’t show off the atrocious night lighting aswel. Orbx have clearly not taken advantage of the technology available to them, favouring a quick buck instead, shameful to do that with there loyal customer base. I’m a big fan of Orbx but this is actually embarrassing somebody should of pulled this before it got out there.

This topic should be pinned under the MFS Tips!!

Edited August 19, 2020 by Carts85

[troyboy66 66]

WOW!

 

[ChaoticBeauty 6,692]

For real? Do Orbx think they can get away with this? This is a disgrace and it should be pulled off the marketplace immediately.

If we see more of this then we should hope that Bing and the AI will catch up so that we'll just not need scenery add-ons anymore.

[Lotharen 287]

Wow, talk about taken a step down. Orbx is going to smear there name really bad here.

[Carts85 1,203]

1 minute ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

For real? Do Orbx think they can get away with this? This is a disgrace and it should be pulled off the marketplace immediately.

If we see more of this then we should hope that Bing and the AI will catch up so that we'll just not need scenery add-ons anymore.

Unfortunately I think they will get away with it an make a lot of money on the way, I think it’s been released early to catch the newcomers that perhaps aren’t looking at the detail and have been lured in by the fancy screenshots. From a distance the overall impression is fine (If you can live with the night lighting) but get up close an the holes appear. 

[DPSimulation 235]

I notice there has been a little bit of discussion about it on their forum. Basically they don't anticipate people getting so close to the points of interest and they don't want to compromise performance.

So that beg's the question from a newbie like me, why not just leave out models that clearly didn't need replacing?

[RudyB24 296]

Come on people ... you've all set your expectations too high ... these are default buildings... can't expect high fidelity.

(Sorry ... couldn't help myself ... )

[EmaRacing 302]

This should be made a sticky

[d25bev 47]

On top of the issue's he mentions are the lighting that looks both bad & has a different on/off timing to the default...

& HMS Belfast pointing the wrong way (how do you even mess that up) with hideous Christmas night lighting that makes it look like a kids bath toy...

[captain420 3,099]

That's what happens when the default scenery is so good that 3rd parties are so used to designing in mind for last gen flight sims such as X-Plane, P3D, FSX. Asobo/MS has raised the bar really high. It's time that the 3rd party developers raise theirs as well.

[Carts85 1,203]

5 minutes ago, DPSimulation said:

I notice there has been a little bit of discussion about it on their forum. Basically they don't anticipate people getting so close to the points of interest and they don't want to compromise performance.

So that beg's the question from a newbie like me, why not just leave out models that clearly didn't need replacing?

I think that’s a massive cop out to blame performance, if they took more time with the SDK waiting for further features etc we wouldn’t have such a mediocre product.

[Shack95 2,658]

It‘s a miracle to me how Orbx could release this product (although we know the answer of course $$$). I knew that it was going to be of terrible quality compared to Asobo‘s work, but I bought it nonetheless😂🙈. I thought to heck with it, I like flying over London and for the price of a pint it‘s kind of okay. It doesn‘t look that bad from above 1000ft. Still an improvement over the default scenery overall.  But I still hope we get an alternative soon. Also, I hope there‘s a way to replace Orbx buildings with the existing ones from Asobo. I‘ll have to take a closer look at the SDK I guess.

Edited August 19, 2020 by Shack95