8 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

12 hours ago, mrueedi said:

The MSFS AI extracts a lot of information from the aerial images and applies it to the generated houses, such as footprint, building height, roof type and shape, roof color. The result is much closer to reality than just a 100% invented building as within the other sims.

You are actually incorrect 🙂

I only just discovered that MS data pertaining to buildings as displayed in MSFS  is now in the public domain. I just downloaded X-America for XPlane and all buildings in MSFS are now displayed in XPlane!!

Still, you are also not telling the full picture. 😉

From the 5 properties, I listed, MS only released the building footprints to public domain. The rest (building height, roof type and shape, roof color) will not be there in XPlane, even when they copy from MSFS data. So, the replication of the buildings in MSFS still is superior.

6 hours ago, blueshark747 said:

You 100% disagree but you have count on and throw in PMDG and Fenix, to feel confident in that 100%🙃

"Storm is coming" for what exactly?

Some of us are still going to love XP11's aerodynamics while loving MSFS's for sweet visuals.

You could wish upon a star for PMDG and Fenix until you're blue in the face maybe XP11's aerodynamics are just uniquely great in their own lane.

Sorry I don't want to confuse and throw off the hamster wheel here with such logic..🤣

 

I feel already confident to be honest. Sorry possibly i am not a professional "Keyboard" Study level pilot to understand Aerodynamics even that i am an ex X-plane user which bought almost all Aircrafts and addons ( since X-Plane 9) 

Lets respect the main topic of this post , which is MSFS Photogrammetry.

 

8 hours ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

Whilst I agree to some extent., in areas you are familiar with the autogen differs a lot more than "somewhat" - in our local town my single story semi detached apartment is part of a three story soviet style apartment block, my friend up the roads car port is a little cottage and our local hospital has turned into an office building.

Autogen is fantastic for areas you do not know personally flying in some remote random part of the world. For areas you know well, the shape of the roof may be right but as often as not the rest of it is not quite there.

Agreed (about the autogen). As long as you don't know the area autogen is totally awesome but whenever you do know the area it often falls short. Which is why I seldom fly over my own country. 😉 The BIGGEST problem I have with the autogen is the lack of terrace buildings (or whatever the Englisch name is: see screenshot below for typical Dutch 'rijtjeshuizen'). In my home country entire neighbourhoods consist of terrace buildings only but MSFS shows them all as seperate buildings... and due to this entire cities look NOTHING like the real deal. It doesn't even come close imho. Which is a real shame and which makes my home country look even worse.

Concerning photogrammetry... After reading this topic I decided to give Amsterdam en Utrecht another try with photogrammetry on (which I usually have off). My goodness. Horrific. Terrible. Not a single house looked as it should. All melted and morphed buildings. I suppose "when it is working properly is fantastic and spot on almost down to street level" may be true for some specific PG cities (tell me which!) but so far I've not seen them. Absolutely awful. So I turned PG off again. It also hurts performance terribly on my PC. And I also don't like how the light does NOT play on those PG buildings like it does on autogen. I prefer autogen a thousand times right now.

23 minutes ago, mrueedi said:

The rest (building height, roof type and shape, roof color) will not be there in XPlane, even when they copy from MSFS data. So, the replication of the buildings in MSFS still is superior.

Then why:

https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/20/21376978/microsoft-flight-simulator-glitches-maps-bugs

https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/21/21395084/microsoft-flight-simulator-melbourne-obelish-openstreetmap-bing-maps-data-glitch

 

Edited February 1, 20224 yr by mtaxp

29 minutes ago, mrueedi said:

Still, you are also not telling the full picture. 😉

From the 5 properties, I listed, MS only released the building footprints to public domain. The rest (building height, roof type and shape, roof color) will not be there in XPlane, even when they copy from MSFS data. So, the replication of the buildings in MSFS still is superior.

I am not interested in which is best.  My point is if there is a building in MSFS, it will be in XPlane - much better than default.

8 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

Then why:

https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/20/21376978/microsoft-flight-simulator-glitches-maps-bugs

https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/21/21395084/microsoft-flight-simulator-melbourne-obelish-openstreetmap-bing-maps-data-glitch

 

At least those are considered bugs and glitches.

This here is considered functioning as expected:

Have a nice day 😉

 

15 minutes ago, Seth2021 said:

I feel already confident to be honest. Sorry possibly i am not a professional "Keyboard" Study level pilot to understand Aerodynamics even that i am an ex X-plane user which bought almost all Aircrafts and addons ( since X-Plane 9) 

Lets respect the main topic of this post , which is MSFS Photogrammetry.

 

If you don't understand then no need to debate what other's find better in XP11.

Your "storm is coming" BS doesn't have anything to do with the main topic either, so take your own advice there Nostradamus! 🙃

 

  

13 hours ago, mrueedi said:

The result is much closer to reality than just a 100% invented building as within the other sims.

Not that it's not even remotely true, but "other sims" (in this case, x-plane), has a dedicated art asset that can take the footprints & height & colors of a building. 

The remaining problem however is the scale of all this data globally, but it does not matter since MSFS fails in so much other aspects regarding scenery (you can check my previous comment), can it do powerlines? can it do antennas? can it do street lights? benches? 

I reallyyyy do not want to this to turn into another "sim war" (although the thread was already going in that direction), but there are many aspects where autogen is just..better. And both approaches get as good as the data.

Where I live, MSFS fails pretty much in the most important parts, even have the same exact fails and glitches as x-plane, because both use OSM mostly.

Edited February 1, 20224 yr by mtaxp

5 minutes ago, rka said:

At least those are considered bugs and glitches.

This here is considered functioning as expected:

Have a nice day 😉

 

See how you always try to make it a sim war? I didn't even any other sim in the comment you quoted, why do you always feel so threatened?

How does it prove me wrong that MSFS takes height data, just like others, from OSM? otherwise, why a change to it will make a glitch in MSFS?

Edited February 1, 20224 yr by mtaxp

Yep, this was the game changer for me and the reason I could never go back to the previous generation of simulators. 

11 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

34 minutes ago, mrueedi said:

The rest (building height, roof type and shape, roof color) will not be there in XPlane, even when they copy from MSFS data. So, the replication of the buildings in MSFS still is superior.

Then why:

https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/20/21376978/microsoft-flight-simulator-glitches-maps-bugs

https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/21/21395084/microsoft-flight-simulator-melbourne-obelish-openstreetmap-bing-maps-data-glitch

Because AI is not a 100% technology. It extracts the data right in maybe 99% of all cases. So a tiny number of issues like the ones you posted remain. These can easily be fixed manually anyway. Also, these particular glitches came from wrong OSM data. Not related to the AI technology. XPlane, which relies only on other data sources like OSM is affected more from those (unless fixed manually too).

 

7 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I am not interested in which is best.

Strange.

Just now, mtaxp said:

See how you always try to make it a sim war?

How does it prove me wrong that MSFS takes height data, just like others, from OSM? otherwise, why a change to it will make a glitch in MSFS?

You were trying to turn the discussion by picking the few bugs in MSFS to try and discredit the (obviously for most) better solution.

I was just trying to (maybe a bit preemptively, but correctly, as it seems) show what your line of reasoning

5 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

but there are many aspects where autogen is just..better.

looks like when "done".

1 minute ago, mrueedi said:

Because AI is not a 100% technology. It extracts the data right in maybe 99% of all cases. So a tiny number of issues like the ones you posted remain. These can easily be fixed manually anyway. Also, these particular glitches came from wrong OSM data. Not related to the AI technology. XPlane, which relies only on other data sources like OSM is affected more from those (unless fixed manually too).

 

Tiny number? I'm yet to see a chimney, an antenna, a street light, a powerline using default MSFS AI system. Where I live, it is CRUCIAL for VFR. 

Read the article again, the height bugs are OSM related = MSFS takes height data from MSFS, regardless of all the hype and promotions. Another related question why does the trees look 2X larger if it's all super duper AI driven?

7 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

13 hours ago, mrueedi said:

The result is much closer to reality than just a 100% invented building as within the other sims.

Not that it's not even remotely true, but "other sims" (in this case, x-plane), has a dedicated art asset that can take the footprints & height & colors of a building. 

My statement is true, because as you say in other sims assets "can" take the properties. It is of no use, if an asset can take height & color information, if that data is not fed automatically from real world into the sim's database (why automatically? Because all manual approaches alway create only small nice island, global coverage is out of reach for non automatic approaches).

In MSFS, it is not "they can" but "they do". Globally. Even where OSM data coverage is not  given.

6 minutes ago, rka said:

You were trying to turn the discussion by picking the few bugs in MSFS to try and discredit the (obviously for most) better solution.

 

Yes, but how is it specific to x-plane? is x-plane the only other solution for a global scenery?

You immediate urge to jump with the x-plane comparison is a result of your own twisted thinking.