10 minutes ago, aleex said:

That’s what people (even me) said about those sims with the MSFS release, and now we are talking about “in a year” or so. 

 

Strange then that I remember you for your negative posts about MSFS prior to release.

10 minutes ago, ShawnG said:

This is the pic you show me to showcase the hatefulness of the MSFS Ortho?  Ok...  My own screenshots showed worse.

It was just the first one I grabbed, but yah it looks bad. Compare it to something like this...

You are excusing it just because the trees and buildings (and in some cases the water) looks a lot better, but overall the ground textures have a lot of it issues. It's not even a step forward, at best it's a step sideways, and often a step backwards. And to compare it with the other Flight Sims default scenery isn't fair at all since this is 15 years in advance, other than Xplane which is run by a tiny company relatively speaking.

I agree if you don't own a lot of third party scenery than some of the MSFS stuff looks ok, but i have 20 TB of scenery files and own almost every Orbx product + have complete states I made myself that look far better than much of this.

 

Edited August 23, 20205 yr by SceneryFX

This is all pretty simple: X-Plane isn't going anywhere. Austin was doing this for years when it had literally hundreds playing it. It's going to be around for years to come because it's Austin's baby. What is likely to change over time is the size of Laminar Research IF Asobo manages to deliver on the promise over the next decade.

Laminar grew leaps and bounds once MS jumped out. Now that they're back, it's inevitable that there will be some retraction, likely some uncomfortable retraction. Word from several people I know is that sales fell off a cliff over the last few months for virtually anything in the hobby other than peripherals as people geared up for Flight Simulator. 

What I've been telling LR at every chance, and people in general, is that they really long ago should have knocked down every barrier to find a way to do a deal with Google to get Earth data. It's still not the same as Azure, but LR claims they have some ideas on what to do to improve autogen so put that on top of Google Earth data. Everyone wants ortho, but Austin seems blind to that. He doesn't seem to grasp that 99% of his X-Plane world is devoid of detail, and I'm a fan. Then again, they've never really cared that much about the size of their audience or truly catering to them. It's much more about providing the product they want to provide and if the customer likes it, great. Meanwhile most people couldn't tell you what real flight models feel like so most don't even care. As long as they get IMMERSION and it SEEMS real enough, that's all that matters. It's great if it is as real as it can be, but it doesn't have to be, is the point. 

Lockheed.... well, frankly they've been acting like they have no interest in selling to consumers with P3D all along. This will likely prove just how true that is. If this product truly matures, P3D will be the product that takes the biggest hit -- well, along with FSX. The one thing that might be interesting is if Lockheed does a deal to get satellite data into the program. If that happens then we've got a real horse race. Otherwise things will pretty much revert to the way it was back in 2010.

It's about mismatched tiles and the fact that they didn't have enough resources to produce the Ortho, they are a relatively small company. This Ortho stuff is a major task, even Asobo couldn't fix much of it, there are still issues everywhere, and given people using Xplane were often downloading 60cm or higher, it wasn't going to be a lot of benefit for Xplane to provide 1.2m NAIP. 

Google isn't going to do a deal with them, it's not in the interest of either party, there isn't enough money involved and two companies doing business together (especially when one is a giant monster) is always a risk for lawsuits and complications in a contract. 

Why are they going to provide the Ortho when there is Ortho4XP?

The problem isn't the Ortho, it's the trees and the clouds mainly, and some of the autogen. Though I think Xplane 11's airports are very good, not as good as the high-detailed ones in MSFS, but often better than some of the MSFS generics.

7 minutes ago, SceneryFX said:

You are excusing it just because the trees and buildings (and in some cases the water) looks a lot better

I think you're missing the point of flight sim scenery. It's not to stare at the ground textures. It's the entire package and MSFS obliterates the competition. Even high res ortho looks like a video game in X-Plane because of everything else that's missing. MSFS looks more like real life.

 

8 minutes ago, SceneryFX said:

but i have 20 TB of scenery files and own almost every Orbx product + have complete states I made myself that look far better than much of this

Maybe you should sell your wares to Asobo.

1 hour ago, SpiritFlyer said:

Yes Sir. Exactly that.

Exactly what?

I'm not missing any points, I'm missing your point of how you do things. I already acknowledged there are some things better, but I don't agree the entire package is better scenery wise. I have much better scenery for SLC area for instance, much much better.

Just because some areas are pretty good (the flatlands between Seattle and Portland probably being the best), there are so many areas that are not good as well. That's why it's a step sideways at best.

Edited August 23, 20205 yr by SceneryFX

Just now, SceneryFX said:

It was just the first one I grabbed, but yah it looks bad. Compare it to something like this...

You are excusing it just because the trees and buildings (and in some cases the water) looks a lot better, but overall the ground textures have a lot of it issues. It's not even a step forward, at best it's a step sideways. And to compare it with the other Flight Sims default scenery isn't fair at all since this is 15 years in advance, other than Xplane which is run by a tiny company relatively speaking.

 

1.  That pic didn't look bad.

2.  If the point of this is to compare default MSFS to expensive payware that is not available for the other 95 percent of the planet, you lose.  I love ORBX.  They commissioned their own aerial photography, hand matched and hand placed the objects, and put a load of manual work into the TE regions they have, and it looks lovely.  I never bought TE for p3d after the Netherlands area I bought was a slideshow, and ORBX would be the first to tell you that is not a viable strategy for covering the planet, and also they would tell you this week, that they released a small part of that scenery in MSFS and it was found to be lacking.

3.  When I said that Asobo had corrected most of the issues I had with photoscenery, they have.  It looks good, it's not flat and uninspiring, I don't have to load it on my hard drive, I don't get memory errors on either system RAM or VRAM when I fly over it, etc...  the matching is livable but not perfect, there are spots where the coverage is gone, and we still don't have seasons.  I'll take it, especially since I believe they will address some of those remaining things.  especially since, at current rates, if ORBX did the planet it would cost well into the tens of thousands.

10 minutes ago, SceneryFX said:

And to compare it with the other Flight Sims default scenery isn't fair at all since this is 15 years in advance, other than Xplane which is run by a tiny company relatively speaking.

I had to re-read that a few times to make sure I hadn't missed something. What are you talking about? Of course it's fair to compare them. X-Plane and P3D are THE major players in the market as of 8/17. Both are in continual development and both, out of the box, have entirely inferior scenery compared to this v1 of Flight Simulator. It doesn't matter if Laminar Research is 1,000 people are half of one person. The consumer doesn't give a squat. The end product is what they care about -- not how many people are involved. "Oh, I don't mind the graphics because it's only 25 people behind it." Those are words that have never been uttered in this industry, ever. 

And sure, you can get some nice looking third-party scenery that will cost you literally THOUSANDS of dollars to try to mimic what we're seeing in this product and then you'd still only be a fraction of the way there. Are all the ground textures perfect? Hell no, but they can improve with an update. New satellite data happens all the time. For Laminar to match this they're going to have to change their entire product offering. Vulkan is not going to get them there. Plus, as I said above, and as you heard in the interview posted about (if you listened to it), Austin doesn't even seem to get ortho or the need for it. He's got ideas on how to improve autogen. That reminds me of the time, back in 1989, when I called Martin Prevel -- the head of AdLib (then the #1 audio card on the market) to tell him about this new product I'd just been invited to check out that went on to become the Sound Blaster. He said, "Oh, no one cares about digital audio. We're going to give the consumer what they really want and change our headphone jack from 1/4" to 1/8"." I wrote a column later that day saying they were doomed. This is Austin's Ad-Lib moment and it's one I think he's getting very wrong. 

I don't even know where to start in all this, but to each their own is all I can say.

My point is I don't see Microsoft opening up the 60cm or higher channels, and I don't see myself ever being happy with the way stuff looks right now around most of the areas I fly. I know I'm not being that picky when there are 5 different color zones in a 2 mile area, and the mountains are all blocky looking with black blotches and weird almost neon colors in places.

I can find much worse pics than that, I grabbed that in 30 seconds.

I don't care about access to the entire world, as much of the Ortho stuff is much higher quality in other parts of the world and doesn't even need color corrected. Why do you think TE Great Britain looked so good, not because Orbx color corrected it to death, but because the Ortho was superior in the first place.

There is plenty more where that came from, and in multiple countries. Actually the US has some of the worst Ortho other than the third-world countries.

 

 

Edited August 23, 20205 yr by SceneryFX

9 minutes ago, SceneryFX said:

Google isn't going to do a deal with them, it's not in the interest of either party, there isn't enough money involved and two companies doing business together (especially when one is a giant monster) is always a risk for lawsuits and complications in a contract. 

Why are they going to provide the Ortho when there is Ortho4XP?

The problem isn't the Ortho, it's the trees and the clouds mainly, and some of the autogen. Though I think Xplane 11's airports are very good, not as good as the high-detailed ones in MSFS, but often better than some of the MSFS generics.

First, it's not in the interest of either party? WHAT?!?!? Google has, in your view, no interest in beating out Microsoft? Have you tried Gmail? Have you tried Google Suite, Docs? Sheets? They live, eat and breathe beating Microsoft and nothing would draw more attention than Google crushing one of Microsoft's most legendary products. Have you seen Stadia? Sure, it stinks, but if you don't think that was in large part aimed at Microsoft then you're not paying attention. It's certainly also SHOULD be in LR's interest, but may not be because Austin doesn't really care one bit about what the customer actually wants. He was happy selling X-Plane to dozens of people a month. He'll be happy doing that again. 

Ortho4XP is a neat little product, but it's not something any normal user is going to take the time to deal with. I wouldn't fly in XP without it, and Oscar's great, but to suggest that this is good enough for the masses is just plain wrong. 

The biggest issue people have mentioned with the trees is their height. That can easily be addressed. And we're comparing the trees in FS to the 2D trees in XP? <shaking head> WOW. I've also read pages after pages of compliments on the wonder people have for the clouds in this product including glowing praise from the TOP youtube channel hosts who've been covering P3D, FSX and XP for YEARS. And sure, SOME of the autogen has issues. Add them all up and then compare that to the complete LACK of ANY autogen in 95% of the X-Plane world. The Autogen that's there is also often just as issue-laden. 

I'm left to wonder if we exist in the same universe....

31 minutes ago, Agrajag said:

... Austin seems blind to that.... He doesn't seem to grasp ... they've never really cared that much ... or truly catering to them. It's much more about providing the product they want to provide ... that's all that matters...

Lockheed... have no interest...

Exactly, exactly, exactly, exactly, exactly and, um, exactly.

Edited August 23, 20205 yr by RustyFlyer

I don't care about the masses, as I am only concerned about my own use. Why are you worried about what everyone else does?

Per the Google debate vs. Microsoft, we just have a completely different way of viewing business. I already stated the reasons it's not in the interest of either party, Google does NOT make the flight sim, there isn't revenue for Xplane to pass onto Google for Google to get involved, since Google does NOT make the flight sim. Guess what, Google doesn't make Xplane?

 

20 minutes ago, SceneryFX said:

but I don't agree the entire package is better scenery wise.

Alrighty then.... 🤷‍♂️

Edited August 23, 20205 yr by Slides

4 minutes ago, SceneryFX said:

My point is I don't see Microsoft opening up the 60cm or higher channels, and I don't see myself ever being happy with the way stuff looks right now around most of the areas I fly. I know I'm not being that picky when there are 5 different color zones in a 2 mile area, and the mountains are all blocky looking with black blotches and weird almost neon colors in places.

Do you not see the irony in this???? Do you fly in X-Plane with default graphics? It sounds like the answer is no. There's every reason to believe that you won't need to do so here either. Third party players have already talked about being able to upgrade what we're seeing and you'll likely be able to do so just as you do in X-Plane. We're literally less than a week in with this product and you're already declaring it brain dead.