who said scenery add-ons would become obsolete?

[767lover 285]

I can remember talk prior to MSFS release dooming companies like ORBX because there would no longer be a market for scenery add-ons.

it seems that such add-ons are even more important now. The great default scenery of MSFS makes you crave for even more perfection. Besides, the recent photogrammetry releases in word updates have been so disappointing (in my view), the glaring exception being Japan, i prefer AI-generated cities with hand-made landmarks and custom-made lighting integrated within it. Or would the best solution be photogrammetry with such custom-made landmarks overlaid, as is currently being done by Asobo to some degree. 

Wonder what you think. 

Thanks!

 

[Pastaiolo 1,686]

A static environment is always bad. No matter if it's about the graphics, the flight model, the scenery or the planes offered.

Anybody who doesn't innovate is left behind soon or later.

 

Scenery wise you have to consider that nothing changed in between Asobo offering a generic (as detailed as that can be) scenery and third parties or even individuals doing a specific, geographically limited, scenery. There will be always more details in the latter, but what matters is that Asobo gave the instruments to put those additional details into the sceneries 🙂

Edited April 20, 2021 by Pastaiolo

[Ricardo41 5,936]

I spent thousands of $$$$$ on various scenery addons for FS9, FSX, and P3D.

I've spent exactly $0 on scenery in MSFS 2020, with the exception of Zinertek's airport ground textures. 

IMHO, companies like ORBX don't have much of a future

[styckx 1,870]

The problem with scenery addons; mostly those derived from Google Earth are they skip all the steps to make them efficient for the simulator. They just do a simple conversion and it ends being a lead weight for performance because they didn't take the steps to properly optimize it. Which can be done. There are actual tools for it now but most neglect to use them.

[Chock 17,769]

Personally, I'd strongly suspected the people ringing the death knell for scenery TPDs in the run up to the release of MSFS were being overly-optimistic as a result of the marketing. But having said that, I think the ease with which scenery design and construction has been built into the sim has certainly not done payware scenery developers any favours, with many freeware developers putting in more effort than some established companies.

So it's not helped by the fact that quite a few payware MSFS sceneries have been little more than port-overs, which would be okay, so long as they were priced with this in mind, but that's frequently not been the case. Thus instead of getting a modest tenner off me to acknowledge and reward the considerably less work involved in banging something like that out, they'll get bugger-all off me.

 I don't object to paying for scenery, but it's going to have to impress me before I fork out for it, and especially if I'm being asked to do it twice with no real evidence of any concerted effort on the developer's part. That doesn't necessarily mean every product has to be visually super-impressive, it could be, but it might equally be innovative, different or impressive in some other way, or it might try something new, or be particularly accurate or up to the minute or some such.

All the companies feeding their old 3D models into Blender once more, outputting them with the MSFS plug-in instead of the ESP one, then expecting us to throw more money at them can get stuffed. To be honest, that's been the majority of the scenery which has been released for MSFS that I've seen; just reheated ESP products. Sorry. Not good enough. No sale.

The worst offenders however, are all those cack MSFS add-on lights products plastered all over Simmarket which, with the possible exception of all that Perfect Flight garbage, are the nadir of carpet-bagging rubbish, being that it takes about ten minutes to make something like that with the sim's Developer Mode. Moreover, if you did so yourself for your local town, at least you would probably put some lights in the correct places instead of just lobbing a load of fairy lights over the town as those products do. Carrying these products in their catalogue, more than anything else are responsible for Simmarket going down in my estimation massively.

Edited April 20, 2021 by Chock

[Ricardo41 5,936]

The big difference between P3D and MSFS 2020 is that in MSFS 2020 even the default airstrips look great. In P3D every default airport was a complete eye sore, and you had to spend the money just so the sim wouldn't look so word not allowed ugly. IMHO, P3D loaded up with addon scenery still looks uglier than default MSFS.

So what are bringing scenery developers for MSFS 2020 bringing to the table? Not much, except some pretty buildings, or modeling stuff that probably nobody really cares about like the inside of terminals. 

[jfri 42]

2 hours ago, 767lover said:

I can remember talk prior to MSFS release dooming companies like ORBX because there would no longer be a market for scenery add-ons.

Wonder what you think. 

Thanks!

 

I say so. Well there might be a market for Orbx scenery but I don't really think there is a need for it (unlike P3D). For me MSFS default scenery is clearly better than Orbx Global+Vector+LC (P3D5) and at least as good as Orbx regions. I need an addon airport in a region with surrounding area to get it better than default MSFS

[Farlis 2,277]

1 hour ago, Ricardo41 said:

I spent thousands of $$$$$ on various scenery addons for FS9, FSX, and P3D.

I've spent exactly $0 on scenery in MSFS 2020, with the exception of Zinertek's airport ground textures. 

IMHO, companies like ORBX don't have much of a future

But you were the guy who thinks that the Flybywire is on par with Flightsimlabs. 
So we already know your standards are weird. 😉

[FAZZ3 815]

1 hour ago, Ricardo41 said:

IMHO, companies like ORBX don't have much of a future

Maybe you're right in terms of their B2C sales, but the fact that they've partnered with Asobo to help develop default scenery may keep them afloat for a long time to come. 

Those who haven't will find it harder to justify their products though.

[CFIJose 5,485]

The add-on community for MSFS (both freeware & payware) are thriving and doing well. Thank you.

It all depends on what's important to you (the simmer.) For me, it's all very important and I'm willing to pay for those add-ons that make my sim as realistic as possible. Here are some areas to consider:

1) Scenery: We are blessed to have a new sim that offers photo sceneries and overlays (AG) of the entire world. This alone is worth the price of admission. They even included a winter season. How nice of ASOBO. There will be many users who will demand that their City is developed and they are willing to pay for it. Tampa Bay is a beautiful City that can certainly use a little love from a talented develper.

2) Airports: I need a decent KTPA. Please! You get the point.

3) AI Traffic & FSDT GS. We want realistic liveries, and properly working ground services, and I'm willing to pay for these essential add-on.

4) ATC: Eventually we will see a complete ATC add-on that will be good for both VFR & IFR flights.

5) Weather: The live feature is getting better. All we need now is consistency, or for Hi-Fi to release a version of their Active Sky.

6) Airplanes: I want a few TAA with fully working avionics and even some old fashion goodies with RXP GNS & GTN support. If we ever get XPRealistic or an Accufeel for MSFS, this will add to the immersion.

I'm sure that there many more add-ons that simmers want for MSFS. Whether you are interested in one or none, there's definitely room for improvement. As long as MSFS remains stable, customers like me will be demanding and buying more add-ons.

Edited April 20, 2021 by DJJose

[Alpine Scenery 1,609]

2 hours ago, 767lover said:

I can remember talk prior to MSFS release dooming companies like ORBX because there would no longer be a market for scenery add-ons.

it seems that such add-ons are even more important now.

It is great to have choices. I do see some pump and dump in the payware, but some companies have released some amazing products too. Fly Tampa's Las Vegas is pretty cool, Northern Sky Studios and DC Scenery designs have been doing some good work. Some of the other more established players have been dissapointing though, they may release 1-2 really good airports and the rest are 'yawn'. As far as freeware airports go, 10% of it is good to great, the rest is so-so at best excluding photogrammetry which is ok sometimes, but major performance hit.

What is really good are the G1000 mods, A32NX, and the CJ 4 by Working Title. As far as default stuff goes, really liking the DA-62 with the G1000 mod, had a perfect ILS approach (who needs VNAV, it is kinda cool, but really just hit the APPR button is just as good).

I'm not as thrilled or happy with the payware planes as others, it needs to get better, the payware planes aren't worth it unless you just see a plane that has a special meaning to you, because most of the payware planes fly poorly.

Edited April 20, 2021 by Alpine Scenery

[Ricardo41 5,936]

25 minutes ago, Alpine Scenery said:

What is really good are the G1000 mods, A32NX, and the CJ 4 by Working Title. As far as default stuff goes, really liking the DA-62 with the G1000 mod, had a perfect ILS approach (who needs VNAV, it is kinda cool, but really just hit the APPR button is just as good).

And this is all stuff that addon developers would have charged you an arm and a leg for in P3D. 

Also, let's not forget all the stuff that comes default that we used to pay for, like synthetic vision from Carenado. Or the great default visual aircraft models. 

Let's take the CJ4 by WT - companies like Milviz, Flight1, or Aerosoft would be asking for at least 69.99 for a plane of this caliber. 

If you put a price tag to every addon that you can add to the sim, you quickly realize that a sim that cost you $130 is giving you at least 3-4 times that in value. 

Edited April 20, 2021 by Ricardo41

[Alpine Scenery 1,609]

I think they have done an amazing job on improving the clouds, either that or my now faster CPU might be helping. The clouds are amazing now, rarely pixelated. 

 

 

Edited April 20, 2021 by Alpine Scenery

[Glenn Fitzpatrick 3,798]

If you are into flying IFR/ILS airliner stuff the default scenery is probably fine.

However, flying VFR which this game excels at, addon scenery makes a massive difference.

Some examples:

 

 

 

 

Edited April 20, 2021 by Glenn Fitzpatrick

[Gazzareth 808]

Not looked at buying scenery so far, but it would be great if ASOBO could add in missing airports and fix the ones they messed up due to dodgy satellite imagery!!...

 

Not convinced it's the end of paid scenery just yet...

 

G