Flight Simulator Memory Lane and RL Landing Comparisons

[The Flight Level 2,113]

In my neck of the woods!

 

[Mike S KPDX 597]

very cool, thank you for posting.  I was struck by the difference with the runway textures, the MSFS ones seem quite 'flat' now that you see them.  Thanks

[Ricardo41 5,949]

The video is nicely edited, but, no matter, how you cut it: the REAL THING always wins. With MSFS looking quite bad in comparison. But that's to be expected.

[MrBitstFlyer 3,873]

Nice Video and editing, but boy the colours in those MSFS shots is often jarring!  Make the video again with the high LOD option in the Google Map Mod (Google or Bing map option) to sharpen up those ground textures to stop it looking so flat.  Use a weather preset to limit the visibility and improve the lighting, as well as get away from a sky full of just cumulus.

To echo the posts above, the video shows not only how far we have come, but how far there is to go!

 

 

[Malaromane 421]

I guess I'm just an unsophisticated user because I thought everything looked pretty good. Sure the colours were off at times but not to the point that it bothered me. I certainly wouldn't have characterized the MSFS graphics as looking "...quite bad..." But I'm not a real-world pilot so I concede that my opinion on how things look is less than worthless.   

The thing that struck me the most in the video was the difference in stability during the landings between the sim and the real thing. Constant roll and pitch adjustments all the way in to the runway in the real life videos whereas the sim landings appeared to be on rails. That, more than the graphics, is what bothered me. But I still really liked the video. Especially since all of the airports were in my neck of the woods.

Edited July 22, 2022 by Malaromane

[The Flight Level 2,113]

@Mike S KPDX Yes, the runways need some wear and tear artifacts to bring them to life! This would definitely help out on the realism!

@Ricardo41 Yes, real life wins but the sim has come a long way. Perhaps another 26 years and we won’t be able to tell?

@MrBitstFlyer Thanks! I will check out that LOD map option and the sky options. How many more years to bring the sim a major leap forward in scenery visuals to where it is actually hard to tell the difference with real life?

[Noel 4,501]

Thanks Laurie that was great to see!  Of note:  the MSFS video are considerably less crisp than what I see on my PC screen, presumably because of capture and compression it's not quite as good.  Here's an example of crisp but this is a screenshot not a video:

[The Flight Level 2,113]

@Malaromane Yes, definitely not bad compared to FS95! I should point out that in the cockpit of the sim, there is more movement similar to the real thing. When I go to the external drone camera things are smoothed out which is great for a comparison video, but makes it look like on rails. Having both views shifting around makes comparisons more difficult when putting the video together.. Also, the camera on the plane is on the wing tip and the corrections especially in roll sometimes look a bit exaggerated. The GoPro also has image stabilization to the smooth out the recordings from vibrations and sudden movements.

[kenny584 77]

Wait what?? Those real life colours are way too vivid and the turbulence is too much baked in. Where are the puffy clouds in the real world? Man, those real life runways look terrible. Too many cracks and all that grass, no way. Flightsim 2020 is way better than real life. Just my opinion of course...LOL

[The Flight Level 2,113]

@Noel Yes, absolutely. Glad you reminded me. I run the sim at 4K on a 5K monitor and the sim textures on my monitor are sharp as your photo shows. My LOD setting is high. By the time my screen capture program grabs the recording, then Final Cut Pro renders and then YouTube compresses, the clarity and sharpness takes a hit.

[The Flight Level 2,113]

@kenny584 Nice one! It is all a matter of where you set your expectations!

[VFXSimmer 1,310]

Great video.  Very impressive to see the incredible likeness of the sim to the real locations, in stock airports I presume?

And equally entertaining is to hear from the glass is half full of p..s crowd.  I'm sure someday when we achieve near photorealism they will continue to complain that the bug splats are not species appropriate for the locale of the airport in question, and thus the sim is still garbage.  Such a hobby we have huh folks 😉 

[Noel 4,501]

3 minutes ago, Doering said:

@Noel Yes, absolutely. Glad you reminded me. I run the sim at 4K on a 5K monitor and the sim textures on my monitor are sharp as your photo shows. My LOD setting is high. By the time my screen capture program grabs the recording, then Final Cut Pro renders and then YouTube compresses, the clarity and sharpness takes a hit.

My Terrain LOD averages about 160, depending on complexity/load, so ranges from 110 to 400.  Object LOD always at 200.  This is a low-light video I made.  What do you think of this video for quality--view it at 4K only:

 

[The Flight Level 2,113]

@VFXSimmer Yes completely stock! $60 right out of the box with no mods or addons. Totally agree that the similarity in the land vegetation and details of the building placements is exceptionally accurate. Some of this is to be expected given the Bing Maps, but still, for VFR flights pretty remarkable. 

[Todd2 2,097]

Great Video.  MSFS is the best sim available by far.