6 minutes ago, Tailwinds said:

. Because Like I mentioned above, how is it that some cities with PG work fine on a Users PC and look great but other PG cities on the same machine have the melted building look?

 

My personal theory is they are cached at whatever quality you downloaded when you first flew there.

If that is correct (I have not really tested it) then flying London at a time when the MS servers were overloaded means you will always get melted buildings until you delete your rolling cache.

Note this is ONLY a theory and I have done no in game testing of it.

 

Edited March 3, 20215 yr by Glenn Fitzpatrick

1 minute ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

My personal theory is they are cached at whatever quality you downloaded when you first flew there.

Well that one has been debunked because, I have deleted and disabled the Rolling Cache. I've read of many others also clearing their cache but makes no difference.

14 minutes ago, Tailwinds said:

Well people with internet speeds in the hundreds are getting the apocalyptic melted buildings look in some (not all), PG cities and also getting the message about turning PG off and I am suffering the same. For example, Tokyo PG is marvellous for me but my home capital, London, is downright awful so again, I don't think internet speed has anything to do with it on the Users end and is probably due to some other issue on the Microsoft Servers.

I agree, London looks pretty bad while Tokyo looks much better indeed.

My connection (100 MBit/s) was only once exhausted, as I was informed by the sim, thus I don't think it's the connection. I also doubt  it's the server - why should it work worse for London than for Tokyo?

I also made a test: I flew three times the very same route over London: (i) rolling cache off, (ii) rolling cache on, (iii) rolling cache still on. You would expect (iii) to look better because of the cached date, but I couldn't tell any difference between the three.

I am afraid it's just that London (and some others) either is badly optimized or the raw data are just worse. Besides the two, I notice quite differing quality between the other PG cities, too.

Kind regards, Michael

 

Well I thought I had a pretty solid internet connection.

MSFS is showing me otherwise with this photogrammetry. 

Today Miami looked like someone dropped an A Bomb on it.

Compared to the video I posted pages back.

Seems like good days and bad days depending on internet connection...in which I find extremely problematic with this particular scenery method.

Very inconsistent!

 

Edited March 3, 20215 yr by blueshark747

1 hour ago, blueshark747 said:

 

Well I thought I had a pretty solid internet connection.

MSFS is showing me otherwise with this photogrammetry. 

Today Miami looked like someone dropped an A Bomb on it.

Compared to the video I posted pages back.

Seems like good days and bad days depending on internet connection...in which I find extremely problematic with this particular scenery method.

Very inconsistent!

 

yeah , though some areas like the QLD Gold Coast are consistently good and others like London are generally bad.

I am upping my internet from 100Mb to 250Mb, be interesting to see if it helps.  I have a hunch it will make zero difference.

 

5 hours ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

yeah , though some areas like the QLD Gold Coast are consistently good and others like London are generally bad.

I am upping my internet from 100Mb to 250Mb, be interesting to see if it helps.  I have a hunch it will make zero difference.

 

I upgraded from 100 to 250 MBytes some weeks ago: No visible difference.

8 hours ago, pmb said:

I agree, London looks pretty bad while Tokyo looks much better indeed.

My connection (100 MBit/s) was only once exhausted, as I was informed by the sim, thus I don't think it's the connection. I also doubt  it's the server - why should it work worse for London than for Tokyo?

I also made a test: I flew three times the very same route over London: (i) rolling cache off, (ii) rolling cache on, (iii) rolling cache still on. You would expect (iii) to look better because of the cached date, but I couldn't tell any difference between the three.

I am afraid it's just that London (and some others) either is badly optimized or the raw data are just worse. Besides the two, I notice quite differing quality between the other PG cities, too.

Kind regards, Michael

I can confirm that this has nothing to do with your connection.
I am 850 Mbit/s and I confirm that I have the same problem London and worse than Tokyo. 

Do ya' all also see a ton of alien looking "cranes" all over London City? I can't figure out what these are supposed to be (other than cranes) but they are everywhere.

I'm on a 50MB fibre line (very stable) and London does not look very nice. Tokyo looks great. Not tried London with PG off though. I do not use the sim Cache's - they are switched off as I am doubtful they actually work as intended and just suck up GB's of SSD space.

8 hours ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

 

My personal theory is they are cached at whatever quality you downloaded when you first flew there.

If that is correct (I have not really tested it) then flying London at a time when the MS servers were overloaded means you will always get melted buildings until you delete your rolling cache.

Note this is ONLY a theory and I have done no in game testing of it.

 

My understanding is that photogrammetry is not Rolling Cacheable or Manual. So what you get is based on Server and current bandwidth, etc.

I wish it was because I'd grab the whole of Southampton and Portsmouth in one huge Manual Cache file.

1 hour ago, RaptyrOne said:

Do ya' all also see a ton of alien looking "cranes" all over London City? I can't figure out what these are supposed to be (other than cranes) but they are everywhere.

OMG,..those cranes in London,..they look like twigs in the London photogrammetry. Absolutely horrible to look at.

These “Alien cranes” , do they look like tripods by any chance?🤔

 

What's the point of adding photogrammetry of a city if it looks word not allowed? Surely the beta testers noticed the flaws and alien cranes? Oh, wait.....

5 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

What's the point of adding photogrammetry of a city if it looks word not allowed? Surely the beta testers noticed the flaws and alien cranes? Oh, wait.....

Agreed those poor photogrammetry renderings are unacceptable....I don't care at what altitude they are designed for.

We shouldn't be seeing that even at eye/ground level. As a dev I would hate seeing my sim being showcased with those horrible melted textures.

On 3/3/2021 at 10:24 AM, edpatino said:

Very nice video. Isn't Miami just beautiful?.

Cheers, Ed