WU IX - Italy/Malta due today 17MAY22

[Bobsk8]

46 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

I spent some time doing before/after screenshots, focusing on both the photogrammetry quality and the overload of trees in Rome. The screenshots are from 1) before WU9 2) after WU9 3) after the excellent trees fix which can be found here: https://flightsim.to/file/33115/wu9-trees-fix-italy-cities-only The fix is an evolving project, which at the moment deals with the following cities: 

Milan, Turin, Venice, Naples, Rome, Pavia, Palermo, Perugia, Bologna, Florence, Padua, Parma, Ancona, Bari, Cittadella, Paestum

And the following airports: LIME, LIMJ, LIMJ

On to the screenshots. IMO the tree problem was pretty bad also before WU9. But the photogrammetry seems perhaps a bit better. I'll keep using WU9 for now - but of course with the trees fix.  

So a third party can fix this in two days, wonder how long we would have to wait for Asobo to put out a fix? 

[Farlis]

Just now, Bobsk8 said:

So a third party can fix this in two days, wonder how long we would have to wait for Asobo to put out a fix? 

Again, people, please learn NOT to quote screenshots.

[Simple B]

5 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

So a third party can fix this in two days, wonder how long we would have to wait for Asobo to put out a fix? 

Come on Asobo, get the scenery gateway up and running ...

[CFIJose]

15 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

So a third party can fix this in two days, wonder how long we would have to wait for Asobo to put out a fix? 

Or you can do what I did and simply delete the package. I know Italy, and ASOBO did a injustice by releasing the half-word not allowed package.

[CFIJose]

1 hour ago, RaptyrOne said:

Has anyone tested the new Asobo Bolzano LIPB compared to the freeware one on flightsim.to by BMW Alex? I am guessing the freeware one is superior?

Bolzano Airport [LIPB] » Microsoft Flight Simulator

I prefer the BMW version. I have the payware membership version.

[Cpt_Piett]

10 minutes ago, DJJose said:

Or you can do what I did and simply delete the package.

It doesn’t fix the trees everywhere issue unfortunately.

[CFIJose]

17 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

It doesn’t fix the trees everywhere issue unfortunately.

I read that it also affects NYC. I did not bother to check.

BTW, even Japan performed excellent on a 10 year old CPU. This was a stuttery mess.

I appreciate their persistence, but they need to take a break until after the summer.

ASOBO, please take a long vacation. Leave my sim alone. Thank you. 😀

[Fielder]

I am still pondering the job offer received after I answered the help wanted add through the Dev Mode screen popup invitation. They told me I would be removing by hand all improperly placed trees in Europe, one by one.

If and when I completed this introductory task satisfactorily, then I would be part of the team and from then on would start to earn a minimum wage salary as specified under French law.

 

[cj-ibbotson]

1 hour ago, Cpt_Piett said:

I spent some time doing before/after screenshots, focusing on both the photogrammetry quality and the overload of trees in Rome. The screenshots are from 1) before WU9 2) after WU9 3) after the excellent trees fix which can be found here: https://flightsim.to/file/33115/wu9-trees-fix-italy-cities-only The fix is an evolving project, which at the moment deals with the following cities: 

Milan, Turin, Venice, Naples, Rome, Pavia, Palermo, Perugia, Bologna, Florence, Padua, Parma, Ancona, Bari, Cittadella, Paestum

And the following airports: LIME, LIMJ, LIMJ

On to the screenshots. IMO the tree problem was pretty bad also before WU9. But the photogrammetry seems perhaps a bit better. I'll keep using WU9 for now - but of course with the trees fix.  

I just tried the Italy tree fix mod from flightsim.to and sadly the trees like like melted blobs.  I also see many of the buildings etc look so poor so I am guessing Asobo over did the trees to mask out issues with the buildings.  I switched Bing off then on again but it didnt help.  Not tried the Bing off/on with default trees as suggested before.

[Farlis]

Of course the trees look like this. This is photogrammetry. You are not supposed to fly that low.

[cj-ibbotson]

8 minutes ago, Farlis said:

Of course the trees look like this. This is photogrammetry. You are not supposed to fly that low.

The default trees look fine that low, albeit are too tall.  This is when using the tree scaling mod

[Bobsk8]

1 minute ago, cj-ibbotson said:

The default trees look fine that low, albeit are too tall.  This is when using the tree scaling mod

Trees look good to me, but I am using Bijans add on. 

[Fielder]

Trees used to be less tall. Then people complained the trees were disappearing in the far distance. One of Asobo's LOD algorithm was based on: the taller the tree, the farther it could be seen in the distance. And so Asobo increased tree height in order to make them remain in view farther away. This was covered in Q&A sessions past.

[Cpt_Piett]

16 minutes ago, cj-ibbotson said:

I just tried the Italy tree fix mod from flightsim.to and sadly the trees like like melted blobs.

I guess it’s a choice between the lesser of two evils. 

[Fielder]

2 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

I spent some time doing before/after screenshots, focusing on both the photogrammetry quality and the overload of trees in Rome. The screenshots are from 1) before WU9 2) after WU9 3) after the excellent trees fix

On to the screenshots.

Robin Hood voted for 'Before', the Sheriff preferred 'Trees Fix'...