3 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

but it still doesn't look close to Vancouver, the buildings are all wrong for downtown Vancouver

Almost 1 Billion building footprints from MSFS are in XP-12, so I find it hard to believe those buildings aren't there.  

2 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Almost 1 Billion building footprints from MSFS are in XP-12, so I find it hard to believe those buildings aren't there.  

I live in Vancouver. All the building are the wrong shape and colors in XP12. This is the issue with any autogen. You get generic random buildi g. Yes simheaven helps with fixing what LR didn't do but it feels very dated. The object are using non pbr texture and they just look flat and out of place. As good as  the lighting has improved., the scenery is not matching the quality level.  It is still beta so I will give them a chance to fix thus.

BTW,  night lighting is still the same as XP11. Also a letdown. I am guessing they will fix later

1 hour ago, scotchegg said:

When done well, photogrammetry is excellent. Definitely seen too many examples of it not being done well, however.

Yep, this is my favourite video looking at photogrammetry amongst other stuff.  I'm a big fan of both MSFS and XP-12 and found this video very funny.  There is plenty right in MSFS so nothing wrong in admitting its flaws - although some of this video is tongue in cheek!

37 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

I live in Vancouver. All the building are the wrong shape and colors in XP12. This is the issue with any autogen. You get generic random buildi g. Yes simheaven helps with fixing what LR didn't do but it feels very dated. The object are using non pbr texture and they just look flat and out of place. As good as  the lighting has improved., the scenery is not matching the quality level.  It is still beta so I will give them a chance to fix thus.

BTW,  night lighting is still the same as XP11. Also a letdown. I am guessing they will fix later

@MrBitstFlyer, what @fogboundturtle said.  Have you lived in Vancouver @MrBitstFlyer?  Take it from me and @fogboundturtle, who have lived in Vancouver.  The buildings in the top left of that photo look nothing like what downtown Vancouver looks like.  And Canada Place isn't even close in the top left photo.

1 hour ago, fogboundturtle said:

5800x3d / 3080Ti / 3440x1440p / max graphic settings on all screenshot

It is sad that it is still very raw at this stage of development. I am not asking for MSFS level of graphic but at least give me frame. Also none of the building have any shadow. We are far from  2022 standard. I was label a hater for showing my finding. All I want is a bit better perf and some more building in metro area. This is not asking for too much.

Ahh, thanks for the info!  So all 3 tests were in 1440p.  Ok, that's useful information, thank you!

6 hours ago, mSparks said:

LR is actually (finally) looking to hire some marketting peeps

Why? To be more like MS? 😛

I do agree that Xplane 12 really needs PBR material for all it's autogen. The buildings lack depth and look very unrealistic. Also a proper shadow system for the autogen is a must going forward. I find it quite surprising that such basic stuff was left out.

8 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

EDIT: Meanwhile, I did bump into a thread mentioning that a place called xplane.to apparently now exists: https://flightsim.to/choice

Excellent, I was waiting for https://x-plane.to/ to become available, hopefully it will trigger more developers to create addons for X-Plane.
 

45 minutes ago, peroni said:

Excellent, I was waiting for https://x-plane.to/ to become available, hopefully it will trigger more developers to create addons for X-Plane.
 

This is probably the single best thing happened to Xplane 12 after simheaven. This was much needed just like flightsim.to which is for msfs.

6 hours ago, Murmur said:

Reading that rant was hilarious. 😆 I actually HOPE for him to be paid by the competition, because if he's not, it means he shelled the money for a product he hates, just to write a negative review, mere minutes after release. One could even argue that the latter is the less rational explanation between the two... But after all, we people are often irrational!

Anyway, the style and content of that guy closely reminds me a specific user (or maybe two) that lingers around in one of the avsim forums...

Exactly!

And now following scenario: I (or somebody else) would rate MSFS after 15 mins of use in such a manner, what would one think? It has to be considered as well, that alone writing such a "review" takes longer than the "test".

9 hours ago, jcomm said:

I see.... Maybe I have to follow that track too one of these days... But Orthos take a word not allowed time to generate 😕

You can download a lot of orthos at Zonephoto (no need to generate them yourself).

3 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

 

If the few trees on the street weren't there, it could be a real world photo.

3 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Almost 1 Billion building footprints from MSFS are in XP-12, so I find it hard to believe those buildings aren't there.  

So ... abrams_tank implicitly says that the building footprints from MS (mind you! Microsoft!) are wrong?? Hilarious 😄

3 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Yep, this is my favourite video looking at photogrammetry amongst other stuff.  I'm a big fan of both MSFS and XP-12 and found this video very funny.  There is plenty right in MSFS so nothing wrong in admitting its flaws - although some of this video is tongue in cheek!

Mind you: the guy who produced that video is an MSFS guy if you look at his videos. And the conclusion at the end of the video: "X-Plane 12 won".

I love how the X-Plane forum on Avsim is rarely talking about X-Plane itself, it's always just 1) something with MSFS or 2) PAID SHILLS