It is a random image with real weather unprepared, maybe for a fighter simulator is not the size but I think the graphics are very correct for a flight simulator and the scenery is free ortho4xp Alicante area in Spain. 

 

I don't agree...

I can't glimpse the turrones ? Where are they ?  🤪

Edited May 5, 20251 yr by jcomm

I havnt spent any money on scenery ir airports, cannot justify it.

even better than ortho4xp and its also free xp-map-enhancement

1 hour ago, YukonPete said:

Incluso mejor que  ortho4xp y también es  una mejora gratuita del mapa xp.

I use it in the areas where I don't have ortho4xp downloads, it works very well.

If one is content with flying freeware aircraft, there is zero need to spend any money on X-Plane beyond the initial purchase. I mean there's lots of nice to have payware add-ons out there, but none I'd consider absolutely essential to deliver an adequate experience (such as DX10Enhancer for FSX back in the day).

nice pic, but X-Plane starts too look really ugly compared to MSFS as you get closer to the ground

I don't think Austin has any intention of going in such a direction, but when MSFS was first released, it struck me that it was genuinely "next gen" compared to P3D then, and still XP now

it's possible using current tech to render full grass, bushes, trees, ground clutter etc for a sensible (altitude appropriate) distance around the aircraft

it makes any aircraft/field/river whatever look true to life, whereas XPlane just looks flat and lifeless on or near to the ground

of course, I would understand why this would be low priority, but it REALLY adds to the immersion in MSFS

MSFS seems to get more realistic looking buildings by default as well, and of course photogrammetry is another world entirely

I hope XP embraces this direction eventually, it does look really good in *some* 3rd party enhanced environments

49 minutes ago, EGLD said:

of course, I would understand why this would be low priority, but it REALLY adds to the immersion in MSFS

I agree it would if it didn't fade in/pop in right in front of the aircraft. Such an awful LOD system they use. 

1 hour ago, EGLD said:

I don't think Austin has any intention of going in such a direction

Yes they have. They're working on a next-gen scenery which will apparently be raster based instead of vector based.

This doesn't mean that it will necessarily be equal to MSFS scenery, but it will likely be significantly improved.

We're probably talking still a long time though. Likely not during the v12 release.

1 hour ago, EGLD said:

Bonita foto, pero X-Plane empieza a verse realmente feo en comparación con MSFS a medida que te acercas al suelo.

No creo que Austin tenga intención de ir en esa dirección, pero cuando se lanzó MSFS por primera vez, me di cuenta de que era realmente "de próxima generación" en comparación con P3D en ese entonces, y todavía XP ahora.

Es posible usar la tecnología actual para reproducir pasto, arbustos, árboles, desorden del suelo, etc., a una distancia razonable (apropiada para la altitud) alrededor de la aeronave.

Hace que cualquier aeronave, campo o río parezca real, mientras que XPlane simplemente parece plano y sin vida en el suelo o cerca de él.

Por supuesto, entendería por qué esto sería de baja prioridad, pero REALMENTE aumenta la inmersión en MSFS.

MSFS también parece obtener edificios con un aspecto más realista de forma predeterminada y, por supuesto, la fotogrametría es un mundo completamente diferente.

Espero que XP adopte esta dirección en el futuro, se ve muy bien en *algunos* entornos mejorados de terceros.

Photogrammetry is a very immature technology and orthos are not a good long term solution. In the end it looks very good or very bad depending on the area you fly.

For example the area of Alicante in Spain, which is the one I know in real life, looks horrible in 2024 because of the colour changes of the Bing orthos and because Photogrammetry turns the greenhouses into small Arabian baxarares and the low bushes into trees to the point that instead of seeing a semi-desert area you see a real jungle. Trees also overhang 11-storey buildings in the capital and most of the buildings look like burnt buildings is a good scenary for Fallout 5.

In X-Plane it doesn't look perfect either but with ortho4xp and Global forest 2 my eyes don't burn every time I land or take off from LEMU.

Edited May 12, 20251 yr by Aglos77

6 hours ago, EGLD said:

nice pic, but X-Plane starts too look really ugly compared to MSFS as you get closer to the ground

I am new to XP as of a few weeks ago and mostly flying the HS Challenger.  I started using the XP Enhancement map with the Bing maps along with SimHeaven.  I am finding that XP is a superior 'high-flyer' sim.  It does looks amazing up at altitude with new atmospherics and clouds and is a much more believable sight over what I see in MSFS.  I find on approach once you start getting below 5-6000 it starts getting less great (except at night it looks awesome down at lower altitudes and road traffic is great)).  Once on the ground I then find it superior once again for the most part even at default airports.  I really dislike the PG tree blobs in MSFS which are still very evident on default airport grounds and even around the perimeters of payware airports.  I just finished a freeware airport for MSFS 2024 and made sure to eliminate any of those blobs that were visible from the airport grounds.

Edited May 12, 20251 yr by Flic1

agreed, night lighting in XP is stunning and miles ahead of MSFS - it has been since XP11

I must be in the minority, but for me, even slightly melted PG is superior to any generic scenery

I'm normally flying past at fairly high speed and it just looks more realistic if you don't stop to ponder too much

the PG now in places like London when it's fully loaded is mindblowing

and for me, having accurate PG is a bit like having lovely orthos but overcast clouds so you can't see anything - it improves the immersion just *knowing* it's down there, I feel like I'm actually travelling somewhere

Edited May 14, 20251 yr by EGLD

In the end it's all about personal taste and preferences, I fly in 2024 too, in the end all simulators have compromises, the important thing is to enjoy what you like.

why do people always feel the need to make that point 😆

As a recent newcomer to XPlane i completely agree i have been truly blown away by how awesome the sim looks out of the box.  I still fly FSX/P3D but i can definitely see myself spending more time in this awesome sim. The community seems awesome too!