MSFS2020 photogrammetry makes building looks melted

[Christopher Low 5,352]

9 hours ago, The Moose said:

Anyone who spends most of their time between 2500ft - 10,000ft should be seeing great looking PG in the vast majority of areas except the UK which has the worst PG in the sim.  If not it must be some kind of streaming issue.

I hate to say it, but.......another reason for me to stick with P3D  On a more serious note, are there any YouTube videos showing comparisons of cities with and without photogrammetry enabled? I am curious to know what they look like with PG off.

Edited June 11, 2022 by Christopher Low

[tup61 1,552]

9 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

I hate to say it, but.......another reason for me to stick with P3D  On a more serious note, are there any YouTube videos showing comparisons of cities with and without photogrammetry enabled? I am curious to know what they look like with PG off.

It's a bit odd to not use a sim because of an option you can turn off... 😉

MSFS autogen is nothing like P3D autogen and the cities look absolutely great and quite convincing with PG off. Don't know about a comparison video. I posted a few comparison screenshot a long time ago but can't find them anymore... 

[Gelrd 30]

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

I hate to say it, but.......another reason for me to stick with P3D  On a more serious note, are there any YouTube videos showing comparisons of cities with and without photogrammetry enabled? I am curious to know what they look like with PG off.

How much money have you spent into P3D? 

[ha5mvo 251]

1 hour ago, tup61 said:

It's a bit odd to not use a sim because of an option you can turn off... 😉

 

Not the only shortcoming of MSFS... just saying.

There are still many features and things that are broken. Especially when it comes to physics and controls. 

The good news is that it's very much a WIP. Bad news is that it still has a long way to go till it transitions from "Flight" into "Simulator".....

[Ianrivaldosmith 5,317]

18 hours ago, Ixoye said:

fenomen

I hope you don't think I am rude as I too speak two languages, and I am always getting pulled up about my mistakes, it makes us better right? Try phenomenon 🙂 

Also, I find PG hammers the main thread, and i have 1gbp internet and still see melted post apocalyptic buildings. So I just turn PG off. Don't even notice the difference to be honest most of the time. 

[Wildblue 245]

19 hours ago, Pivot said:

Almost Post Apocalyptic.. ☠️

Hope it's not coincidentally some ominous harbinger to what's coming to Earth.

[Reader 2,021]

3 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

 are there any YouTube videos showing comparisons of cities with and without photogrammetry enabled? 

(5) Microsoft Flight Simulator - Photogrammetry On or Off? - YouTube

(5) FS2020 - Photogrammetry London - ON vs OFF - YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHdESD-D9o8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiheOmRCuig

Another way to find out would be to buy a copy of the simulator, instead of commenting on something that you do not have.

 

Edited June 11, 2022 by Reader

[Cpt_Piett 4,630]

15 hours ago, The Moose said:

On the contrary PG is mostly very good.  A small amount of it is really poor.  A small amount is excellent. 

Agreed. E.g. Seville looks spectacular. 

15 hours ago, The Moose said:

 except the UK which has the worst PG in the sim.  If not it must be some kind of streaming issue.

London PG has always looked bad for me. I don’t think it’s a streaming issue. 

[The Moose 1,177]

8 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

London PG has always looked bad for me. I don’t think it’s a streaming issue. 

Indeed, I think I may have been misunderstood...  I think it's a streaming issues if you're seeing terrible PG everywhere OUTSIDE of the UK.     I know there's nothing that will save the UK PG.  it's very poor by default, the only thing that will make it better it a complete re-do from a new source 

Edited June 11, 2022 by The Moose

[Cpt_Piett 4,630]

11 minutes ago, The Moose said:

Indeed, I think I may have been misunderstood...  I think it's a streaming issues if you're seeing terrible PG everywhere OUTSIDE of the UK.     I know there's nothing that will save the UK PG.  it's very poor by default, the only thing that will make it better it a complete re-do from a new source 

Got it.

[lwt1971 7,348]

4 hours ago, ha5mvo said:

Not the only shortcoming of MSFS... just saying.

There are still many features and things that are broken. Especially when it comes to physics and controls. 

The good news is that it's very much a WIP. Bad news is that it still has a long way to go till it transitions from "Flight" into "Simulator".....

Actually the good news for many of us is that it's very much a WIP *and* a stellar flight simulator already just two years since being released, especially when combined with high fidelity add-on aircrafts.

That said, apart from the ground physics that's slated to be improved >=SU10, what other physics areas do you feel is broken and how exactly?

Edited June 11, 2022 by lwt1971

[ha5mvo 251]

2 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

That said, apart from the ground physics that's slated to be improved >=SU10, what other physics areas do you feel is broken and how exactly?

Easy. There's not a single tubeliner that will even remotely fly "by the numbers". That includes products by reputable developers such as Leonardo or PMDG ( the latter just flies like a pig).

Fenix had virtually thrown the towel on MSFS' physics and is seeking to develop a module of its own to run outside the platform - no easy feat with but a single precedent, namely, that by the Majestic dash 8.

If that's not a testimony for the broken physics engine, then I don't know what else I can say to convince otherwise.

A glaring example would be the excessive yaw that runs throughout the models in MSFS, be it default airplanes or more sophisticated addons and no sensitivity adjustment can mitigate that. Try to run that very same FENIX, the current pinnacle of MSFS development , in a variable "gale" wind of 3-5 knots and it will shake about like a nutshell in white waters.

Now, I'm well aware that for some a plane may fly like an F-15 from an 80s arcade, as long as the pretty views and the fancy photogrammetry keeps coming. Heck - one can even buzz over ones neighbors' house...

Being a work in progress, there's still a chance that in one point in time Asobo and co may get it right. Until then, it's up to the developers to find a creative workaround if they wish their products flight characteristic would resemble those of the real world counterpart. 

[Christopher Low 5,352]

4 hours ago, Reader said:

(5) Microsoft Flight Simulator - Photogrammetry On or Off? - YouTube

(5) FS2020 - Photogrammetry London - ON vs OFF - YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHdESD-D9o8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiheOmRCuig

Another way to find out would be to buy a copy of the simulator, instead of commenting on something that you do not have.

I will comment on what I like, whether I have the product or not. The department of smart a** comments does not need to get involved.

Edited June 11, 2022 by Christopher Low

[lwt1971 7,348]

36 minutes ago, ha5mvo said:

Easy. There's not a single tubeliner that will even remotely fly "by the numbers". That includes products by reputable developers such as Leonardo or PMDG ( the latter just flies like a pig).

Sorry that's a blanket statement that is very exaggerated. So you're saying that the PMDG 737, Leonardo MD80, Fenix A320, Bae 146 don't "even remotely" fly by the numbers? The PMDG 737 "flies like a pig"? Ok then :)
 

36 minutes ago, ha5mvo said:

Fenix had virtually thrown the towel on MSFS' physics and is seeking to develop a module of its own to run outside the platform - no easy feat with but a single precedent, namely, that by the Majestic dash 8.

If that's not a testimony for the broken physics engine, then I don't know what else I can say to convince otherwise.

A glaring example would be the excessive yaw that runs throughout the models in MSFS, be it default airplanes or more sophisticated addons and no sensitivity adjustment can mitigate that. Try to run that very same FENIX, the current pinnacle of MSFS development , in a variable "gale" wind of 3-5 knots and it will shake about like a nutshell in white waters.

Let's be more specific, the Fenix did all they could with the *engine* physics/modelling and now are seeking to do an external engine model as already articulated well by @Aamir on another thread (https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/620353-fenix-a320-growing-on-me/?do=findComment&comment=4793628). With the current solution using the default engine physics they're able to get to within 6% of performance numbers. The Fenix still uses the MSFS core physics and aerodynamics engine for its flight model and dynamics, that is not external, nor is it even possible/practical to run the core flight dynamics entirely outside the sim. So those are various loaded and exaggerated statements (i.e. the Fenix "shakes about like a nutshell in white waters", riiiight). 
 

36 minutes ago, ha5mvo said:

Being a work in progress, there's still a chance that in one point in time Asobo and co may get it right. Until then, it's up to the developers to find a creative workaround if they wish their products flight characteristic would resemble those of the real world counterpart. 

Oh it's very clear to many of us, including various veteran simmers/reviewers and IRL pilots, that the likes of the Fenix A320, PMDG 737, Milviz C310, Leonardo MD80, Bae 146, etc etc are very good and beyond reasonable representations of their real world counterparts in terms of flight characteristics by implementing specific flight models using the core MSFS aerodynamics/physics engine properly (unlike the default birds save for the C172)... various small areas of improvements still possible obviously, but nowhere near as large the discrepancies you seem to be trying to convey and convince us of.
 

Edited June 11, 2022 by lwt1971

[Reader 2,021]

52 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

I will comment on what I like, whether I have the product or not. The department of smart a** comments does not need to get involved.

Thanks. I hope that you found the links informative and that they will enable you to comment even more often.
You're welcome.