I like the fade to Captain Piett at the end. I almost felt like saluting

5 hours ago, Lange_666 said:

oticed how good the photogrammetry looked in this video compared to mine.

You either have low bandwidth or your TLOD is not high enough.  I love photogrammetry, I think it looks super realistic, though it is not perfect. 

Suggestions:

- Test your internet speed.

- Turn off photogrammentry and save the change.

- Turn on photogrammetry and save the change.

- Finally, ensure your TLOD is high enough (at least 180?) to enjoy the good looking buildings.

Happy flying!

1 hour ago, Lange_666 said:

They look the same as mine do.

Hmmm

 

deleted

 

 

 

 

Edited December 28, 20241 yr by Huascar
delete

Kinda what phtogrammetry should look like.

Some people are against photogrammetry but I find it very realistic and good looking.

 

 

6 hours ago, Bigmack said:

Also I don't think that Samscence has been updated for 2024 yet.

I've tried it in 2024, and it integrates nicely into the base scenery.. no visual problems that I saw.. 🙂

I don't quite understand these discussions about photogrammetry, this is not the first and most likely not the last. Why is it being expected that photogrammetry looks like manually placed scenery? If you are so bothered by PG, why not disable it and have the "old world", in which buildings all looked the same - eg. Autogen?

Compared how Manhattan looked in non-PG world (say P3D or FSX, prior to MSFS2020), even with all the possible addons back then, it looks much better now. From some usual altitude of couple of thousand feet, Manhattan looks really stunning. As do most of areas that use the new Bing-Generated-World. So you want more, you want real buildings, use Addons.

Is it perfect? No, it's generated... so, of course not. Neither was Autogen. Is it better than Autogen - most definitely, in my humble opinion.

Edited December 28, 20241 yr by Simon_C

38 minutes ago, Simon_C said:

Is it perfect? No, it's generated... so, of course not. Neither was Autogen. Is it better than Autogen - most definitely, in my humble opinion.

These are some demanding folks, for sure. I think PG is as close to the real thing as it gets. I am stunned by the beauty and realism of PG. You are correct, all it takes is one click and it’ll go away. 

NYC in general has good PG, but the best PG is still the Tokyo region. For whatever reason, it's some of the best performing PG in both 2020 and 2024. I believe the reason why Tokyo is so good is that Asobo used different providers for the PG data, and the Tokyo PG was a one off.

In general, PG is hit or miss. Some days it looks amazing; other days it looks like a melted apocalypse wasteland.

1 minute ago, usernamerequired said:

NYC in general has good PG, but the best PG is still the Tokyo region. For whatever reason, it's some of the best performing PG in both 2020 and 2024. I believe the reason why Tokyo is so good is that Asobo used different providers for the PG data, and the Tokyo PG was a one off.

In general, PG is hit or miss. Some days it looks amazing; other days it looks like a melted apocalypse wasteland.

That pretty much sums it up.

I totally agree that PG can look very realistic from a safe distance. Unfortunately, the realism drops dramatically if you get close to the buildings. A good case in point would be EGLC London City. Since you have to get close to the ground when arriving and departing from this airport, the quality of the 3D models and textures around it needs to be high. That is why I use ORBx London VFR Landmarks in this location. High resolution building textures are required here.

For the record, I have been flying in MSFS 2020 for over a year without PG. The autogen buildings in cities look pretty good in all of my use cases to date, and I have over 90 addon airports at various locations throughout Europe.

PG can look good, even on the ground but I guess it's a trade off between performance vs detail.
The quality indeed depends on the data provider. I remember the first iteration of London PG being a different provider.
Next LOD and internet speed come at play. But yes, all of this is already discussed many times. 🙂

5 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

That is why I use ORBx London VFR Landmarks in this location. High resolution building textures are required here.

Me too, I live nearby and occasionally try to plane spot there without getting an smg waved at me! 

Of course if you've seen buildings irl up real close it's very difficult to find anything in a sim that convinces you. Same as if I fly over Berlin as long as I see the Brandenberg Gate I'm convinced, or the Arc de Triomphe and Eifel Tower in Paris. 

For some reason PG in Washington DC looks fantastic.  I believe Miami also looks great.