Gaya released LOWW version 2 not long ago, anyone tested v2 already?

Are textures really as blurry as in their screenshots?

 

And what about performance? Every now and then I've heard about very bad FPS in Gayas MSFS sceneries and these comments match with the only Gaya scenery I've ever had: LGKO for P3D.
This was by far the worst scenery in terms of FPS I had back in P3D (even Flightbeams SFO or DEN had double the FPS than Gayas LGKO scenery!).

 

Thoughts?

P.S.: have I missed any FlyTampa news about LOWW in the last months and years?
I'd rather spend 25EUR on a FT scenery I know it is outstanding w/o even looking for a single screenshot in advance than 15EUR on a scenery from a dev I have read things that won't make me happy and had bad experiences in the past.

And one more thing... 😂
I've noted on version 1 that taxiway signage is partially wrong and intermediate holding points are missing.
Sill the same in V2?

Edited December 2, 20223 yr by Konterhalbe

30 minutes ago, Konterhalbe said:

P.S.: have I missed any FlyTampa news about LOWW in the last months and years?
I'd rather spend 25EUR on a FT scenery I know it is outstanding w/o even looking for a single screenshot in advance than 15EUR on a scenery from a dev I have read things that won't make me happy and had bad experiences in the past.

 

Same here, I'd rather wait for FT.... but alas, no news.

Textures look blurry because the way MSFS renders objects as you get further away.  It's quite annoying actually.

1 minute ago, ryanbatc said:

Textures look blurry because the way MSFS renders objects as you get further away.  It's quite annoying actually.

I've actually never had textures as blurry as they are in these screenshots in MSFS. 👀

2 minutes ago, Konterhalbe said:

I've actually never had textures as blurry as they are in these screenshots in MSFS. 👀

Have you ever moved the drone camera far away from the runway?  Or just flown away and looked back and zoomed in?  It's really bad even with ultra settings.  I'll try to give you an example in a few mins

Just now, ryanbatc said:

Have you ever moved the drone camera far away from the runway?  Or just flown away and looked back and zoomed in?  It's really bad even with ultra settings.  I'll try to give you an example in a few mins

Will try it when I have landed in about an hour or so 👍
At least I haven't noticed and significant blurryness yet in MSFS.

5 minutes ago, Konterhalbe said:

Will try it when I have landed in about an hour or so 👍
At least I haven't noticed and significant blurryness yet in MSFS.

Here's what you don't notice it (and you especially won't if you never use the drone.  That LOWW pic above was taken in drone view and zoomed in).

Wide angle or what you might see when flying (and this the why the external default camera is sooo wide - so you don't notice blurry scenery or photogrammetry)

bosrwyzoomwide by Ryan Butterworth, on Flickr

Same position except zoomed in using drone

bosrwyzoomin by Ryan Butterworth, on Flickr

 

45 minutes ago, Konterhalbe said:

I'd rather spend 25EUR on a FT scenery

13 minutes ago, phmcr said:

I'd rather wait for FT.... but alas, no news.

Standard FlyTampa, really.
You wait a looooooooooong time without any news, then without any warning a quality airport scenery is available.

CYUL, EHAM, KBUF, KMDW, OMDB, TNCM, VHHX, as well as LOWW, all eagerly awaited. EHAM next on the list to be released, apparently.

 

6 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

Here's what you don't notice it (and you especially won't if you never use the drone.  That LOWW pic above was taken in drone view and zoomed in).

Wide angle or what you might see when flying (and this the why the external default camera is sooo wide - so you don't notice blurry scenery or photogrammetry)

*sharp textures*

Same position except zoomed in using drone

*blurry textures*

 

Wow Ryan, that's a huge difference 😮😮
Didn't knew this before, thanks for clarifying! You're the man!

Edited December 2, 20223 yr by Konterhalbe

1 minute ago, Konterhalbe said:

 

Wow Ryan, that's a huge difference 😮😮
Didn't knew this before, thanks for clarifying! You're the man!

I would not be worried when you get LOWW v2 - it will be sharp when you're taxiing around and flying in and out.

I could never understand the use of that programetry cities, look that ugly city behind that runway,  ( pic 2 ) that is realy "word not allowed" bad - puuh..

Better nothing than that, holy smoke 🤪

cheers 😉

Edited December 2, 20223 yr by pmplayer

3 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

Standard FlyTampa, really.
You wait a looooooooooong time without any news, then without any warning a quality airport scenery is available.

CYUL, EHAM, KBUF, KMDW, OMDB, TNCM, VHHX, as well as LOWW, all eagerly awaited. EHAM next on the list to be released, apparently.

 

 

Can't agree more on this!

2 minutes ago, pmplayer said:

I could never understand the use of that programetry cities, look that ugly city behind that runway,  ( pic 2 ) that is realy "word not allowed" bad - puuh..

Better nothing than that, holy smoke 🤪

cheers 😉

This is why the default camera views are so extremely wide angle.  You won't notice the mess from so far away.  PG can look wonderful if you're flying right over it.  But generally from afar, not so good.  They probably do this as a performance tradeoff.  

With Gaya occupying the market for LOWW during the last two years and btw with a new version, I doubt that FT will release a new LOWW.

If so, it might probably not be their top priority.

FT is still top notch but I was quite unimpressed by Boston. It's quite nice outside but the terminals interiors are really unimpressive. 

People will tell me that they didn't care about terminals interiors but others developpers prooved that you can have a top notch airport with nice interiors too (like EBBR Brussels for exemple).

 

Lots of mud? or weird textures on the taxiways.