7 minutes ago, scotchegg said:

But the trees are undeniably better in the release version...

Really?

Those "rain forest" types are still everywhere and look ridiculous... Look at my photo above of Cresent Head... Not a "rain-forest" monstrosity in sight... But in-game they everywhere and look comical.

4 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

Really? OMG I hope Asobo didn't do this.... what a "jump the 🦈" effort if you're right.

No I don't think they did this, how is everything supposed to align with the satellite data then.

Maybe for trees, as I said, every sim in the past did it.

Really?

We have seen this before...!!!

NEAR... far 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9IuXEwpU7U

Kind regards,

Spirit Flyer

Stephen

Edited August 19, 20205 yr by SpiritFlyer

2 minutes ago, Colonel X said:

No I don't think they did this, how is everything supposed to align with the satellite data then.

The buildings still align, approximately...

It's a shame there's no "avatar" in-game where you can actually stand your 6' tall avatar on a bowling green or next to a building door to check the scale.

9 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

Really?

Those "rain forest" types are still everywhere and look ridiculous... Look at my photo above of Cresent Head... Not a "rain-forest" monstrosity in sight... But in-game they everywhere and look comical.

I havent seen a tree till now that I thought looked too big. They look much better than the ones in the preview build. 

1 minute ago, Andreas Stangenes said:

I havent seen a tree till now that I thought looked too big. They look much better than the ones in the preview build

Maybe, it's probably a case now of wrong variety.

Asobo seems to think the world is covered in humongous "rain-forest", it's not Asobo, it's not. 🤦‍♂️

To actually be way more serious than I thought I would be in one of Matthew’s inevitable scale OCD threads,  I think that it is possible that Some objects might actually be scaled too small.

for example, I live in a non photogrammetry area, and the home that sits upon the footprint of my house is a larger type of home than I own.  So in the same space that my modest split level home occupies in meat space is occupied in sim by a 5/8 scale model of what would be a massive two story colonial.  Taking the scale of the satellite image as gospel, would have the people who would use the doors and windows of my sim home be Hobbits, not humans.  Which actually calls into question the original assumptions on tree size, since they were based on story size...

But as always, if this word not allowed is what we are talking about, must be a good sim.

Edited August 19, 20205 yr by ShawnG

2 minutes ago, ShawnG said:

I live in a non photogrammetry area

Interesting, and yes I'm not talking about photogrammetry areas either, where the scale of photogrammetry buildings, trees and vehicle "blobs" compared to the satellite imagery is perfect.    

However, compare a AI car model to a photogrammetry car "blob" and you see it looks a little too large.  Which fits my notion that in-game models are a little too large.

You can also see the AI car models are a little too large compared to cars that are part of the satellite imagery.

Can confirm objects are ridiculously over scaled. Unacceptable.

Ok, I must be crazy after all 🤪

Scale seems fine...   The Cub Crafters XCub has a wingspan of 10.46m.   The bowling green (long edge) has a length of 40m.   So 4 cubs (42m total wingspan) should just overlap the bowling green by 1m on each side.

Looks ok, my bad, carry on. 🤦‍♂️

https://ibb.co/zQMGJNK

https://ibb.co/dQvcwQx