Hi, I briefly checked London and Oxford using the drone camera, but even when waiting for minutes for the scenery to load, the buildings have either that melted look or just look very blurry. I do not have this issues with the Japan photogrammetry. So could this be just a quality issue? 

I do get the message occasionally that my bandwidth is too low for photogrammetry, but not this time when loading the London and Oxford scenery.

Any ideas? I would be relieved if these quality issues are due to low bandwidth and not because the photogrammetry is of low quality. On speed tests, I get 25 to 50 Mbits per s.

thsi is just how it is, wanna see great cities photogrammetry try the it italian ones, venice is stunning.

but i dont care too much about that, i love the wild places like the sahara, just awesome there.

I can't work out if it's the servers failing to keep up and serving reduced quality (lower LOD) which is then cached by clients, or the actual quality is sub par. Asobo said this is a new photogrammetry source for them so it's possible the raw data just isn't that great. This is the first time I've heard anyone complain about anywhere other than London in regards to quality, until now I was leaning towards it being poor source data.

Edited February 19, 20215 yr by ckyliu

11 hours ago, 767lover said:

Hi, I briefly checked London and Oxford using the drone camera, but even when waiting for minutes for the scenery to load, the buildings have either that melted look or just look very blurry. I do not have this issues with the Japan photogrammetry. So could this be just a quality issue? 

I do get the message occasionally that my bandwidth is too low for photogrammetry, but not this time when loading the London and Oxford scenery.

Any ideas? I would be relieved if these quality issues are due to low bandwidth and not because the photogrammetry is of low quality. On speed tests, I get 25 to 50 Mbits per s.

Same here. My Internet speed is 47Mbs but was told that is plenty enough for photogrammetry. Some people with far higher speeds in the hundreds have reported the melted buildings. I have the melted buildings issue over the London City area but Liverpool and Manchester were fine so I just don't get it. Some areas in the US that have PG also give me the melted building look too. How can this be so sporadic where sometimes it works well in some cities and other cities it's just terrible?

I don't have Rolling Cache enabled, in fact I deleted the folder and keep it disabled so I can rule out any issues that the Cache might be causing.

I think its server side issues, yesterday I checked out London (first time) - half the buildings just "weren't there" only 2D flat images and had some weird flickering artifacts to be honest it looked terrible.  Tonight I loaded in and different view out the window altogether!

MS introduce a few half finished dodgy looking cities into the sim and somehow manage to lose veey well implimented Southampton and Portsmouth in the process.  You have to questiin the effort that went into this update and the qualiry control.  An update fix is now required fairly quickly if they are going to retain any credibility I'm afraid.

And whilst they are at it, for heaven's sake return the runway markers to the correct size rather than the ridiculous billboards we now have.

Edited February 19, 20215 yr by cianpars

1 minute ago, cianpars said:

You have to questiin the effort that went into this update and the qualiry control.

Oh the irony in that sentence.

I’m sorry I couldn’t help it haha 

1 minute ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

Oh the irony in that sentence.

I’m sorry I couldn’t help it haha 

Oops 🙂

Edited February 19, 20215 yr by cianpars

Let's not forget that the WU3 was also delayed by a few more days so maybe it was rushed out and really needed more time.

I am now in a predicament of whether to disable photogrammetry and start purchasing landmark packs because I'm beginning to think this this PG isn't all that it's cracked up to be. Not yet at least.

19 hours ago, Tailwinds said:

Same here. My Internet speed is 47Mbs but was told that is plenty enough for photogrammetry. Some people with far higher speeds in the hundreds have reported the melted buildings. I have the melted buildings issue over the London City area but Liverpool and Manchester were fine so I just don't get it. Some areas in the US that have PG also give me the melted building look too. How can this be so sporadic where sometimes it works well in some cities and other cities it's just terrible?

I don't have Rolling Cache enabled, in fact I deleted the folder and keep it disabled so I can rule out any issues that the Cache might be causing.

 

On 2/19/2021 at 6:28 AM, ckyliu said:

I can't work out if it's the servers failing to keep up and serving reduced quality (lower LOD) which is then cached by clients, or the actual quality is sub par. Asobo said this is a new photogrammetry source for them so it's possible the raw data just isn't that great. This is the first time I've heard anyone complain about anywhere other than London in regards to quality, until now I was leaning towards it being poor source data.

There are some pretty long threads over at the MSFS site reporting the "melted buildings" look. It is not entirely clear what the issue is, but it definitely exists in certain parts of the world and has nothing to do with internet speed or connection - I see the melted buildings/trees periodically in Las Vegas and Palm Springs, for example, and I have a nearly 500MBps connection at my computer.

I don't think the PG technology, as groundbreaking as it is, is fully perfected yet. Something is going on with either the source data or how it is translated into what is rendered, and perhaps the way LOD ties in with that. The issue has been around for awhile.

You can turn off PG if you don't like the "melted buildings" but then you only get the generic autogen.

Edited February 20, 20215 yr by PurdueKev